10.2. Classification of transformations in translation

The term “transformations” was first used by Zellig Sabbetai Harris (1909-1992) in his paper “Co-occurrence and transformations in linguistic structure” [Harris 1957], which put formal syntax on an entirely new, generative basis.

So far there exists no universal approach to the typology of transformations in translation. Thus, L.S. Barkhudarov [Бархударов 1975] believed that all transformations in translation may be confined to four types: transpositions, replacements, additions and omissions. Ya. I. Retsker [Рецкер 2004: 45-129] distinguished between two broad types of transformations – lexical and grammatical ones. V.N. Komissarov [1990] singled out lexical, grammatical and “lexico-grammatical” transformations. A.D. Shveitser considered translation transformations primarily at the “referential level of semantic equivalence” [Швейцер 1988 :123-144]. L.K. Latyshev [1981: 131-137] subdivides all translation transformations into morphological, syntactic, stylistic, semantic and mixed (“lexico-semantic”, syntactic and morphological).

Translation transformations should be separated from translation deformations, which concern, first of all, the form of text and presume that there occur certain losses in translation, however certain semantic deformations cannot be excluded [Гарбовский 2004: 507]. Obvious translation mistakes caused by the lack of linguistic and cultural competence of a translator should be also considered separately [Гарбовский 2004: 514-536].

Translation transformations are analytical changes of the textual items and are performed by translators in the process of translation (not at the pre-translation stage).

The overview of the traditional approach to the basic types of translation transformations [Селіванова 2011: 545] is given below.

10.3. Lexical transformations in translation.

Lexical transformations are divided into formal and lexical and semantic ones.

10.3.1. Formal lexical transformations provide for changing the form of the source language unit by using devices of the target language. Here belong transformations at the phonetic and graphic levels (sometimes called “transcoding”) such as:

1. Practical transcription – reproduction of the SL lexical item phonemes by the TL graphemes (letters), e.g., file – файл; interface – інтерфейс; Jack – Джек; Russel – Рассел, etc.

2. Transliteration – reproduction of the letters of the SL lexical item by the TL graphemes (letters), e.g., broker – брокер; London – Лондон; Disney – Дисней, etc.

3. Traditional phonetic and graphical reproduction, e.g., Texas – Техас; Walter – Вальтер, etc.

4. Combination of the three ways of reproduction described above, e.g. Shakespeare – Шекспір; Москва – Moscow, etc.

5. Loan translation (калькування), e.g., skyscraper – хмарочос; Merry Monarch – Веселий Король (nickname of Charles II), Верховний Суд – Supreme Court; вотум недовіри – non-confidence vote, etc

10.3.2. Lexical and semantic transformations:

1. Generalization of meaning, which is substitution of the SL words (phrases) of a narrow meaning by the TL words (phrases) of a general (broader) meaning. E.g.: My baby is 18 months – Моїй дитині півтора року; This car costs seventeen hundred pounds – Ця машина коштує тисячу сімсот фунтів; The soldiers walked in the ankle-deep dust – Солдати йшли по коліно у пилюці; wrist watch – наручний годинник, etc.

2. Differentiation of meaning, which is caused by the fact that many English words with broad meaning do not have direct equivalents in Ukrainian. In such cases dictionaries give a number of meanings that only partially cover the meaning of the SL word and translators have to choose one of the options, which suits the context best of all. Thus affection may be rendered as щиросердя but not obligatory as любов, прихильність, симпатія; challenge – as проблема, нагальне завдання (питання) but not only as виклик; sustainable – as безперервний, непохитний, придатний, обґрунтований, остаточно визначений but not only as сталий, усталений, стійкий, etc.

3. Substantiation of meaning is substitution of the source language words (phrases) with a generic meaning by the target language words (phrases) with a more specific (narrow) meaning. Substantiation is often combined with differentiation. E.g.: Run for the presidency – Змагання за посаду президента. Have you had your meal? – Ви вже поснідали? Networking – спілкування. Student – not only студент but also учень, слухач (depending upon the context).

4. Modulation (also called sense or logical development) is replacement of the SL word of phrase by TL item, which is logically connected with the original item, e.g., Then this girl gets killed, because she’s always speeding – А потім ця дівчина гине, оскільки постійно порушує правила дорожнього руху.

It’s worth mentioning that modulation provides for various metaphoric and metonymic changes performed on the basis of the notion of intersection, i.e. when a part of the content of one notion is included into the content of another notion and vice versa. In conveying the same sense by means of another language there is often no difference what forms of the word express this content. Thus the object may be replaced by its feature, the process – by the object, the feature – by the object or a process, etc. Ya.I. Retsker [Рецкер 2004: 52] gives the following example of modulation (logical development): The Liverpool by-election was an acid test for the Labour candidate which can be hardly translated as Довибори у Ліверпулі були випробуванням на кислотність для кандидата від лейбористів. Evidently it is necessary to substitute the process by its nominal equivalent – були лакмусовим папірцем. This presumes substitution of the process by the object and occurs within the framework of intersection because лакмусовий папірець is only a part of випробування на кислотність.

When modulation is applied to translation of verb combinations there can be established clear interrelationships between processes (actions or states), causes and effects (consequences). Thus the theory of permutations allows singling out six possible variants of modulation (logical development) [see ibid.]: a) substitution of the process by its cause, b) substitution of the process by its effect, c) substitution of the cause by the process, d) substitution of the cause by its effect, e) substitution of the effect be its cause, f) substitution of the effect by the process.

As an illustration, Ya.I. Retsker [Рецкер 2004: 53] gives quite a straightforward example from A.Christie’s book: “I don’t think she’s living here at the moment. Her bed wasn’t slept in”. It is quite appropriate in translation to substitute the process by its effect: instead of вона не спала у своєму ліжку to use її ліжко не зім’яте.