II. The main factors influencing the reproduction of phraseological expressions.

The semantics of phraseological expressions is a complex unity having both denotative-logical and stylistic-connotative components. The most important of them are the following:

1. Transferred or image-bearing component of a phraseologism meaning;

2. Direct or referential component of meaning forming the basis of the image;

3. Emotional/evaluative component (evaluation: positive, negative, neutral);

4. Functional-stylistic component;

5. National component.

It can be illustrated with the help of the expression “Їхати до Тули з власним самоваром”. The direct meaning of the phrase (component 2) presupposes the knowledge of the fact that Tula is the center of producing samovars which forms the basis of the figurative meaning (1) “to bring smth that is readily available locally”. The phraseologism conveys a negative attitude (3) to the denoted situation (it is not good to act like that). It is literary-colloquial by its nature (4) and has an obvious national colouring (Тула and самовар) (5).

These components are not equal from the point of view of their rendering in the TL. The most important are components 1, 3 and partly 4. Thus the equivalent should convey the figurative meaning of a translated phraseologism, render the same emotional attitude and possess a similar functional-stylistic colouring. Preservation of the direct meaning of phraseologism is not important in itself but insofar it preserves (conveys) the image. Reproduction of the national component helps to render the national colouring of the original but it may hinder the faithfulness of translation and blear the transferred meaning of the phrase due to the Receptor’s ignorance of the important background information (like the connection between Tula and samovars). Besides the translator must bear in mind that nationally charged phraseological expressions can introduce alien cultural elements into the target text making, for example, an Englishman speak about such specific Russian notions as Tula and samovar which sounds unnatural and ridiculous.

There are other factors that may influence the choice of the equivalent in the TL.

Not inrequently the choice of the way of reproduction may be predetermined by the number of lexical (contextual) equivalents for the given idiom, proverb or saying in the target language.

Thus, in the example below each phraseological unit can be translated into Ukrainian either with the help of a single unit or with the help of a standardized cliche:

to make a secrifice – жертвувати (приносити в жертву);

to render an account – звітувати (складати звіт);

to give one a start – налякати (викликати переляк);

the weaker vessel (facet) – жінка (слабша половина людства).

It goes without saying that employment of each of the variants is predetermined by the text, which can be literary, literary colloquial, low colloquial etc. Besides, the text may have a humorous, satirical, scornful or any other pragmatic toning.

That’s why the selection of a variant greatly depends upon the stylistic character of the text (i.e. speech style) in which the phraseological unit (or its equivalent) is to be used.

When in the TL there exist two or more variants for a phraseological expression of the SL one has to select the unit which is the most fitting for the given text not only lexically but also from the point of view of the picturesqueness and expressiveness.

Taking into account the afore-mentioned factors, several ways of faithful reproduction of phraseological expressions are to be distinguished.