Германістика

1. Classification of Germanic languages. Their origin and modern state.

2. Historical sources of Germanic tribes and dialects.

The bulk of evidence about Germanic tribes is provided by non-Germanic historiographers. The earliest written sources give evidence about tribal names and places of settlement of ancient Germans.

The 1^st mention of the Germanic tribes was on 4^th c. BC by Pitheas.

Other historians who mentioned Germanic tribes in their works including the following ones:

1. Plutach drew our attention to such Germanic tribes as the Teutones and the Cimbrians who endangered the safety of the Roman Empire.

2. J. Caeser who described military attacks of Germanic tribes on the Roman Empire in his “Commentaries on Gaelic wars”

3. Strabo in his book “Strabo’s Geographica” which was devoted to Germania.

4. Pliny the Elder is famous for the "Historia Naturalis" which contains the classification of Germanic tribes.

5. Tacitus who gave a profound description of Gernanic tribes and their way of life in his book “Germania”

6. Gregory of Tours who describes the history of Franks in his “Historia Francorum”.

7. Cassiodorus who noted the history of Goths.

The most concise classification of Germanic tribes was developed by Pliny the Elder who divides them into 6 groups:

1. the Vindili (the Vandals): they inhabited the eastern part of Germanic territory. They spoke the dialects which gave rise to the east Germanic languages.

2. the Ingaevones (Ingveonic) inhabited the north-western part of Germanic territory, the shores of the North Sea, including what is now the Netherlands. English is the descendant of the tribes that originally belonged to this group;

3. the Istaevones (Istveonic) inhabited the western part of Germanic territory, among them the Franks who eventually conquered Gaul. ( Dutch originated from the dialect of this group)

4. the Hermiones (Hermioni) inhabited the southern part of Germanic territory, what is now southern Germany. German comes from this group;

5. the Helleviones (Hellevioni) inhabited Scandinavia; the dialects of this group gave rise to north Germanic languages.

6. the Peucini and Bastarnae who lived close to the Dacians and the reference to Germanic tribes is doubted by some scholars.

3. Specific features of old Germanic consonant and vocalic systems.

Specific Germanic consonant system was formed as a result of the changes that took place on the level of consonants after they were inhabited from PIE and one of the most important was the first process which affected all germanic languages was called the first consonant shift.

The term "shift" is applied in historical linguistics to a series of parallel or similar changes taking place at approximately the same time and affecting the whole patterns and system.

a) the first consonant shift is also called Grimm's law because it was formulated systematically by Jacob Grimm, although the first scholar who noticed the regularities of sound change in Germanic languages was Rasmus Rusk. The first consonant shift took place between the 2^nd millennium DC and the 3^rd century AD. It affected PIE consonants of three acts:

1) PIE voiceless plosives [p, t, k] were changed (and does correspond to) to PG voiceless fricatives [f, θ, h]. Examples: Russian три = Germ (English) three. Lat. pes = English foot.

2) PIE voiced plosives [b, d, g] were changed and correspond to PG voiceless plosives [p, t, k]. Examples: Rus. болото = Engl. pool. Lat. duo = Germ (Engl.) two

3) PIE voiced aspirated plosives (звонкие с придыханием) [bh, dh, gh] were changed and correspond to Germ. plosives without aspiration [b, d, g]. Examples: Sanskrit bhratar = Engl. brother.

There were also several exceptions in Grimm’s law:

1. PG [p, t, k] didn't change after a fricative and [s], so, for example, sound clusters [sp,st, sk] remained unchanged.

2. In a cluster of two plosives the preceding consonant turns into a fricative while the following one remains a plosive.

3. After Gmc [f, θ, h + s] IE plosives underwent no change.

4. Varner’s Law, according to which a voiced fricative appears where Grimm’s law predicts a voiceless fricatives. According to Varner’s Law PG sounds [f, θ, h + s] in intervocal position (between two vovels) where the first one is unstressed, are changed into voiced fricatives [v, ð, g* + z]. E.g. PIE mater – OE mother

The 1st consonant shift took place in all Germanic languages and led to the formation of specific features ofGermanic consonants system after it’s disintegration out of Proto Indo-European.

b) 2d consonant shift

It took place between the 5th and the 9th c. AD and was characterised of Old High German only.

According to the 2nd consonant shift the following changes took place:

1) PG voiceless plosives [p, t, k] between vovels, between vowel and consonant or when final after vovel are shifted and correspond to German double spirants - G [ff, zz, hh]. E.g. Eng ship – Ger. Schiff

2) PG sounds [p, t, k] become affricates in the following positions: at the beginning of the word, when doubled, and after sonorants [l, r, m, n] - correspond into German [pt, tz, kch]. E.g. Eng. Apple - G Apfel, Eng. eat - G. Katze, Eng. sit - Sitzen.

3) PG voiced plosives [b, d, g] correspond to German [p, t, k]. E.g. Eng. Day – G. Tag

c) 3d consonant shift

It started in the 12th c. and going on in our days. It took place in only Danish and differentiated the consonant shift of Danish from other Scandinavian languages.

So, common Gmc [p, t, k] are shifted in Danish, first or all, to voiced plosives [b, d, g] and after that to voiced fricatives [v, ð, g*]. E.g. Icelandic skip – Dan. Skib.

The sounds which were not affected by germanic consonant shift are sonorants - l, m, n, r, w, j, t + s.

d) Other consonant changes

1. The first process is rhotacism that is the conversion of a consonant [s (z), d, l, n] into sound [r]. E.g. was-were.

2. Gemination - lanthering or doubling of consonants.

3. Lost of consonant - it usually happens with nasal consonants which are regularly lost before fricative consonants. E.g. Eng. Five - G. funf.

4. Holzmann's law which describes the process of doubling of PIE [j] and [w] which were further changed to sound clusters and in several germanic languages to diphthongs.

The system of vowels of all germanic languages

The system of PG was formed as a result of the transformation of the inherited vowel system from the PIE.

The system of vowels of all germanic languages has two types of changes: independent changes and assimilative changes.

Independent changes took place without any depends on the position of vowels in a word.

PG system of vowels included short and long vowels to which belonged [a, o, u, e, i] which were both short and long and the additional sound reduced [ə] was a called schwa indogermanikum.

The emergence short and long vowels took place in PG as a result of the influence of a fixed dynamic word stress which was absent in PIE as well as differentiation of vowels into long and short ones.

The transformation of vowels concerns most of all of the following sound:

1. PIE a – PG a: | PIE o – PG a:

2. PIE a: - PG o: | PIE o: - PG o:

3. PIE [u, e, i] in most cases were transformed without any changes – PG [u, e, i].

4. The most complicated word of the development of PIE [e] which was transformed to PG [æ], but in West and North germanic languages was transform to [a], in Gothic [e].

Speaking about assimilative changes, we should speak about umlaut or mutation. Umlaut or mutation is a process of regressive assimilation of a vowel by a vowel of the following syllable.

Umlaut is a term by Jacob Grimm that means "um" - around, or the other way, "laut" - sound.

The process of umlaut can be observed (found) in all germanic languages except Gothic.

There are two main types of mutation in germanic languages.

1. Palatal mutation (i-umlaut)

2. Velar mutation (u-umlaut)

i-umlaut is the change of back vowels when they presed the syllable containing i (i, j). According to this process the baack vowels [a, o, u] become fronted (передние) and by the influence of the vowel i (j), they turned into [æ, oe, y]. Example: foot – feet; mise – mouse.

u-umlaut is another type of mutation which took place in Faroese and Icelandic where [a] changed into [æ] in Faroese, [o] - [oe] in Icelandic when presided by [u] which produced a narrowing influence.

4. The main features of old germanic lexicon and morphology, their evolution.

Old germanic vocabulary had two main lawyers according to their origin:

1) native words

2) borrowings or loans

Native words comprise 97 % and only not more from 3 % of borrowings.

Nowadays there are 85 % of borrowings in English.

Etymological lawyers of Native words:

1) Common IE – most ancient, have cognates in the languages of IE family. Here belong such semantic categories as

• Terms of kingship: mother, brother

• Part of human body: nose, ear, eye

• Natural phenomena: snow, water

• Plants and animals: tree, wolf, cow

• Basic qualities: cold, red

• Basic numerals: from 1 to 10

• Personal pronouns: I, my

• Basic activities: sit, eat, be

2) Common Germanic - it's the second according to the chronology that appears in Old germanic vocabulary. This lawyer is formed in PG period and the words have cognates with other Germanic languages, but not outside the group. Almost the same semantic categories: abstract notions – development of mental activity.

3) Specific or proper words - these words are introduced after splitting of germanic languages into separate one. So, the cognates can not be found in any other language: Lord, lady, husband, bird, and a number of other words which are the results of world building process such as bridegroom.

There were two main sources of borrowing in Old germanic languages: Celtic and Latin.

The number of Celtic words was not big: iron, cross.

In English the number of Celtic borrowing was everything connected with trade, building, religious terms, medicine and deceases, plants and animals.

Semantic categories include:

• trade and object of trade: wine, butter, oil, cheese, cherry, peach

• Plants and animals: elephant, tiger, rose.

• Medical term: fever, plaster

• Religious terms: angel, demon, candle

Morphology. 3 main parts of speech – noun, adjective, verb.

Noun. A noun is a word that functions as the name of some specific thing or set of things, such as living creatures, objects, places, actions, qualities, states of existence, or ideas

Originally, PG noun had an obligatory 3 – morpheme structure, which was inherited from Proto IE. It consisted of the root, the stem suffix and the grammatical ending. The structure was preserved to the 4^th-5^th c. and simplifying changes started after the change of word stress and the stem suffix was reduced.

Most nouns had stem-forming suffixes, according to which they divided into corresponding groups: a-stems, o-stems, e-stems, u-stems, n (nd)–stems and root-stems. On this division the formation of different declensions (склонения) of nouns was based. There are 3 types of declensions:

1. strong (vocalic) – a, o, u, i-stems

2. weak – n-stems;

3. minor declension – r-stem, nd-stem, root-stems.

Germanic nouns had 3 grammatical categories:

1. The category of number

2. Case

3. Gender

In all Germanic languages all those 3 categories were expressed with the help of synthetic means, by the same grammatical marker.

The category of number was represented by the opposition, which consisted in 3 members: singular, dual, plural. Dual was lost. As for the means of expressing number, there were ending –s in Old English, -en (n) in other RG languages, -er for German and so on.

The category of case was represented by 4 case system. It consisted of Nominative (it’s the subject of a sentence); Genitive (used in nouns, which function attributively to other nouns); Dative (nouns of prepositions); Accusative (the nouns that indicated a relationship to a verb, adverb and so on). In the coarse of evolution the grammatical category of case has the following results:

1. It is the preservation of the 4 case system (it’s peculiar for German and other.)

2. The transformation to 2 case system (peculiar for Dutch, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian).

3. Lost of category of case (Africans).

The category of gender. In all Germanic languages nouns were differentiated into masculine, feminine, and neuter. This division is still preserved in Germ, Icelandic, New Norwegian. Not all languages preserved the gender division (English did not preserved).

Adjective. Adjectives are words we use to describe other words

All Germanic adjectives had the following grammatical categories:

1. Number (singular, plural, dual)

2. Gender

3. Case

4. Declension (strong, weak)

5. Degrees of comparison.

Adjectives have 2 types of declension: strong is also called pronominal and weak declension usually coincides with a weal declension of nouns in concern of the endings. Adjectives could be declined according to strong or weak declension and this choice depend on the position of the adjective in the sentence.

The degrees of comparison. Comparative degree was formed with a help of productive in Pld Germanic language suffix – is, which was transformed into -iz according to the Varner’s Law; -ir in Scandinavian. The superlative degree was formed with a help of combination of 2 suffixes – is + to; - isto.

Verb. A verb is a word (part of speech) that in syntax conveys an action (bring, read, walk, run, learn), an occurrence (happen, become), or a state of being (be, exist, stand)

Morphological classification of Vs. In Old Germanic languages Vs were differtiated into the following groups:

1. strong

2. weak

3. preterit-presents Vs

4. suppletive

5. anomalous

The division of Old Germanic Vs into the groups was based on the peculiarities of building tha fallowing grammatical forms:

1. the form of the present tense (preset stem)

2. the stem of past tense singular

3. the stem of the past tense plural

4. the stem of Participle II

The group of strong Vs was the most numerous one in Old Germanic l-s. Strong Vs were represented by 7 classes in Gothic and Old English, in the rest Germanic languages being 6 classes. The differentiation into classes was obvious in the types of vowel interchanges in the root of the V and only the 7^th class was based on reduplication.

Weak Vs were considered to be Germanic innovation. They used dental suffix –d (t) to build past tense form and Participle II. According to different stem suffixes weak Vs formed 4 classes in Gothic, in others – 3 classes.

Preterit-presents Vs. The present tense of these Vs structurally coincides with the preterit (past) forms of Vs. Like strong Vs preterit-present Vs have different vowel interchanges (vowel gradation series), in the past tenses singular and plural (to have, know, can, may, shall).

Supplitve Vs require different stems or different grammatical forms.

Anomalous Vs fall out of all categories. Base their forms on vowel gradation.

Grammatical categories:

1. Person

2. Number

3. Tense

4. Mood

5. Voice.

The category of person was realized with the help of personal endings, which expressed the category number and tense as well.

The category of number was initially represented by 3 numbers, including dual which was later simplified to 2 numbers.

The category of tense was represented by the opposition of 2 tenses only: present and past. The present tense was used to denote actions without time indications, to denote the process, which takes place in the moment of speaking and future actions.

The category of mood was presented by 3 forms: the indicative, imperative and subjunctive.

The category of voice. Active voice and medial-passive (медиа-пассив). The medial-passive had synthetic forms of expression, they existed in PG and were developed in Gothic. The medial-passive had the passive meaning but active form. Later on passive meaning strated to be indicated with the help of Vs to be and to become + Participle II of the V.

__________________________________________________________________

4. The word-group theory

There are two approaches to "a phrase definition":

1) a phrase is syntagmatic unity of two or more notional word ( to read a letter, an iron door)

2) a phrase is any grammatically organised group of words ( on the table, from behind (a tree), because of (you).

The word-combination (or phrase) is a naming unit like a separate word though phrases name things and their properties in a more complicated word than a separate word.

The fundamental difference between a phrase and a sentence: phrases remain naming units while sentences are units of communication: because we communicate with each other with the help of sentences: simple or complex.

A syntactic bond is a connection between words or groups of words in a flow of speech.

The main types of syntactic bonds:

- coordination

- subordination

Coordinate phrases are such phrases whose components are equal in their syntactical rank, that is, syntactically independent of each other. They may be syndetical and asyndetical. Syndetical phrases are used with coordinative subjunctive (boys and girls, not only the trees but even the bushes), but asyndetical ones are used without them (went swimming, boy, girl)

Subordinate word-combination consist of a head-word ( the nuclear) and a tail-word ( the adjuct) which is syntactically dependent on the head-word: fresh milk, John's house, a man of property.

Many grammarians (Бархударов) also point out the so-called predictive word-combinations which are based on the predictive type of connection between the components. Such word combinations belong all the predictive constructions (complexes) with so-called secondary predication: the objective - with the infinitive (participle), constructions, the subjective - with infinitive (participle) constructions, the for-phrase, the nominative absolute participle construction. E.g. I saw him run; He stepped aside for me to pass - the parts of such constructions are considered to be independent and equel.

Subordinate phrases may be classified according to the part of speech representing the heard word (or nuclear):

- noun-phrases: a stone wall, Joh's book,a man of property.

- verb-phrases: to read a book, to run quickly.

- adjectival-phrases: very nice, nice of appearance.

- pronominal-phrases: something to eat, nothing of value.

The tail-words of subordinate phrases may be subordinated to their head-words with the help of the following kinds of subordinative connection:

-agreement

-government

-adjoining (juxtaposition)

Agreement is such a means of expressing syntactic dependence when the tail-word takes a grammatical form (of case, number, etc) identical to that of the head-word: this book - these books; that book - girls books (agreement in number).

Жлуктенко said about the cases of agreement in English:

1) demonstrative pronouns agree in number with the noun head-word

2) indefinite articles agree with nouns in number - pan - pans

3) the predicate in some cases agree in number and person with the subject: she goes, she rides.

4) agreement is found in the case of sequenceof tenses: she asked that she heard him

Government is the use of the dependent word in a certain (but not identical) grammatical form required by its head-word. In other words, the form of dependent word doesn't coinside with the form of the head-word itself:we saw him (but not he).This example is an example so-called "prepositionless government". There also exist "prepositional government": to look at her (but not she).

Adjoining is the most widespread means of expressing syntactic relations within a subordinate phrase in modern English.

Adjoining or juxtaposition is such a means of expressing syntactical dependencets within a subordinate phrase when the constituents are joined without any specific change of the form of the dependent word, but only by their mutual position, the dependent grammatical function of the tail word and the meanings of the head-word and the tail-word: a new house, a stone wall, to go quickly, bird cage.

Most syntactical descriptions of a language distinguish different types of work-groups:

In accordance with their structure and complexity phrases may be subdivided into elementary and compound.

Elementary are such phrases in which only one type of syntactic connection is represented: an old house, very old houses, very old wooden houses - in all these phrases only the subordination is observed.

Compound words-groups consist of structurally complicated components: writing and reading letters, to see Mike driving a car. The number of items which can appear as constituents of compound word-groups is theoretically unlimited.

According to semantic unity between the components word-groups may be:

1) syntactically free combinations of words in which the elements don't repeatedly co-occur: to analyse murder, to condemn murder.

2) idiomatically bound word-combinations (idioms) whose meanings don't reflect the meanings of their component part: to scream blue murder (to complain very loudly).

3) fixed non-idiomatically word-combinations (collocations) in which the elements are specifically bond to each other, though the meanings reflect the meaning of the collocation (in contrast to idioms): to commit murder.

Combinability of words in a word-group depends on the lexical and grammatical meanings.

3. The sentence

The sentence is basic unit of syntax. There exist many definitions of the sentences, but none of them is generally accepted. But in the majority of cases speakers actually experience no difficulty in separating one sentence from another in their native language. This is reflected in writing, where the graphic form of each sentence is separated by different marks.

Though a sentence contains words, it is not merely a group of words (or other units), but something integral, a structural unity built in accordance with one of the patterns existing in a given language. All the sounds of a sentence are united by typical intonation.

All the meanings are interlaced according to some patterns to make one communication.

A communication is a directed thought, there exists a system of coordinates to fix the position or direction of a thought in speech. Naturally, only phenomena present as every act of speech can serve as the axis of coordinates. They are:

1) the act of speech;

2) the speaker (the writer);

3) reality (as viewed by the speaker).

These three relations can be summarised as the relation to the situation of speech. The relation of the thought of a sentence to the situation of speech is called predicativity. This is the name of the system of coordinates directing the thought of a sentence and distinguishing a sentence from any group of words. Predicativity is an essential part of the content of the sentence.

The sentence can thus be defined as a communication unit made up of words ( word combinations) in conformity with their combinability, united by predicativity and intonation. - Хаймович

Gurge Curme gives such: A sentence is an expression of a thought or feeling by means of a word or words united in such form and manner as to convey the meaning entended.

The sentence is a communicative unit, therefore, the primary classification of sentences must be based on the communicative principle. According to the purpose of communication three types have been recognized in traditional grammar.

The declarative sentence expresses a statement, either affirmative, or negative, and stands in correlation with the listener’s responding signals of attention, feeling etc.

E.g. He (didn’t) shut the window.

The imperative sentence expresses inducement (стимул), either affirmative or negative. It urges the listener in the form of request or command to perform or not to perform a certain action.

E.g. (Don’t) Shut the window, please. 

The interrogative sentence expresses a question, i.e. a request for information wanted by the speaker from thelistener.

E.g. Did he shut the window?

But some scholars distinguish so-called exclamatory sentence. Exclamatory sentences are marked by specific intonation patterns (represented by an exclamation mark in written speech), word-order and special constructions with functional-auxiliary words, rendering the high emotional intensity of the utterance

E.g. Do come in!

From the point of view of their structure sentences can be divided into: simple sentences and composite sentence

Simple sentences:

Two-membered sentence contains two principle parts — the subject and the predicate. (Fleur had established immediate contact with an architect).

A two-membered sentence can be complete and incomplete. It is complete when it has a subject and a predicate (Young John could not help smiling). It is incomplete when one of the principal parts or both of them are missing, but can be easily understood from the context. Such sentences are called elliptical and they are mostly used in colloquial speech and especially in dialogue (Where were you yesterday? At the cinema).

One-membered sentence have only one principal part (Dusk — of a summer night).

Simple sentences, both two-membered and one-membered can be unextended and extended. A sentence consisting only of the primary or principle parts is called an unextended sentence. She is a student. Birds fly. Winter!

An extended sentence is a sentence consisting of the subject, predicate and one or more secondary parts (objects, attributes, adverbial modifiers).  The two native woman stole furtive glances at Sarie.

Composite sentence is formed by two or more predicative groups. Being a polypredicative construction, it expresses   a complicated thought reflecting two or more elementary situational events.

Each predicative unit in a composite sentence makes up a clause in it that corresponds to a separate sentence as a part  of a contextual sequence.

Composite sentence displays two principal types of the connection of clauses — subordination and coordination.

According to the traditional view, all composite sentences are to be classed into:

compound sentences (coordinating their clauses),

complex (subordinating their clauses).

A compound sentence is a sentence which consists of two or more clauses coordinated with each other. In a compound sentence the clauses may be connected:

1) syndetically, i.e. by means of coordinating conjunctions (and, or, else, but, etc.) or conjunctive adverbs (otherwise, however, nevertheless, yet, still, therefore, etc.)

E.g. The darkness was thinning, but the street was still dimly lighted.

2) asyndetically, i.e. without a conjunction or conjunctive adverb.

E.g.  The rain fell softly, the house was quiet.

The main semantic relations between the clauses connected coordinativety are copulative, adversative, disjunctive, casual, consequental, resultative.

A complex sentence is a polypredicative construction built up on the principle of subordination. Clauses in a complex sentence may be linked in two ways:

1) Syndetically, i.e. by means of subordinating conjunctions or connectives.

E.g.  more and more, she became convinced that some misfortune had overtaken Paul.

2) Asyndetically, i.e. without a conjunction or connective.

E.g.  I wish you had come earlier.

A subordinate clause may follow, interrupt or precede the principal clause.

According to the grammatical function subordinate clauses can be divided into: subject, predicative, object and adverbial (of time, place, purpose, cause, condition, concession, result, manner, comparison).

Перевод

1. Translatology as a branch of philology. Types of translation and their specificity

The notion of "translation": its essence. Translatology: its subject, object, methods and objectives. Branches of translatology: their object and objectives. Translation and other sciences. Genre-and-style and psycholinguistic classifications of the translation types. P. Newmark on the methods of translation. E. Nida on the types of translation.

Translatology is a relatively young science. It appeared in the middle of the last century only. There were two rival groups of scientists dealing with translation studies. The first group was the literature scholars, the second one was linguists. As a result, even today in translatology there are two approaches to translation studies: literature approach and linguistic approach.

There are three basic principles in literature approach: 1) Esteticism of the text dominates; 2) the content dominates the form; 3) the author's conception should be reproduced first in ....?

For linguistic approach, language means are the basic things you have to pay attention to in the process of translation.

But today linguistic and literature conceptions are united in one. And the most perspective way is to analyze the text from both point of view.

Translatology today is considered to be not only interdisciplinary, but also independent science in the frames of philology. And we can prove that. Terminology as well as any science has its subject, object, objectives, methods of investigation, branches and terminology. The subject of translatology is the translation itself. Translation is defined both as a product and as a process. According to Bathudarov: translation is the process of transforming text from one language into a different one without changing its content plane - process. According to Fedorov: translation is the correlation of two texts taking into account the peculiarities of two languages and genre categories - product. And according to Komisarov: translation is a means of interlingual communication (product and process).

The object of translation studies is to assume to be all aspects of interlingual communication including both lingual and extra lingual factors which determining vicariously, the choice of language units in the process of translation.

Also translatology has its own objective. The main objective of translation studies is to provide manifold and complete study of the object of translatology.

Also translatology has the branches, the basic branches are:

1) General theory of translation – to investigate principles and postulates, which are defined while studying texts of various genres, functions and translating from 1 language into another.

2) Special and particular theories of translation – analyze diverse regularities of translation. They are numerous and divided into narrower brunches.

3) Practice of translation - deals with the tr. process to implement practically all the achievements of theoretical studies.

4) Criticism of translation – embraces all parts, to notice timely the deviations from general and concrete principals of translation and above all from standard norms of literary speech.

5) Methods of teaching of translation - to give recommendations how to overcome difficulties and avoid deficiencies.

6) Bibliography of translation – to register all the materials, scientific papers, appearing in all brunches of Translatology.

7) Editing of translation – how to bring the target text into better agreement with a standard norms of the target language, culture, as well as with the tradition in the translation itself.

8) History of translation – development of translation.

Also translatology has its own terminology. There are terms which are typical only for translation studies, but there are a lot of terms which are borrowed from different branches of humanitarian art.

Also there are four basic methods of translatology: comparative, structural, functional, contextual. Comparative method is the main method of investigation, all others are accompanied by it, because in translatology nothing exists without comparison.

Also translatology has its own terminology. There are terms which are typical only for translation studies, but there are a lot of terms which are borrowed from different branches of humanitarian art.

So we can sum up that translation study operates its own terminology, subject, object, has methods and objectives, branches. And we can sat that translation study is the independent part of philology.

Types of translation depends on different criterias.

I. Genre and style classification of the tr. types (Komissarov)

Criteria: based on predominant communicative function of the ST

There are 2 types:

Literary - according to Komissarov, the function is to produce esthetic and emotive impression, to recreate the emotional impression in TT. We can deviate from accuracy legally in this type. (It is also called artistic and creative)

Informative – nonliterary text, used to present a piece of information, to recreate the informational function of text (official papers, public speech).

II. Psycho-linguistic classification (Barhudarov)

Criteria: According to the forms of speech it can either translation or interpretation.

Written-written – the most used type, which is subdivided into:

1) Tr. of newspapers, informative texts;

2) tr. of documents, special scientific texts;

3) tr. of publicistic writings and elocution works (ораторские);

4) tr. of fiction and bell-letters.

Oral-oral: 1) simultaneous interpretation;

2) consecutive – translation in pauses.

Written-oral:

1) interpretation, or translation at sight;

2) tr. with preparation.

Oral-written: dictation - translation.

III. Western scholars

Peter Newmark

The main criteria of what is emphasized – the source or target text.

The source text is emphasized:

Word for word tr – the SL word order is preserved, the words are translated singly out of context by their most common meaning (interlinear – подстрочный).

Literal – the SL grammatical constructions are converted to their nearest TL equivalents, but the lexical words are translated singly, out of context.

Faithful – translation attempts to reproduce the precise contextual meaning of ST within the constrains (в рамках) of the TL grammatical structures. It transfers cultural words and preserves the degree of grammatical and lexical abnormality in translation (dialect, jargon).

Semantic – differs from faithful as far as it takes more account of the aesthetic value of SL. It compromises in meaning.

The target text is emphasized:

Adaptation – mainly is used for translation of plays, comedies and poetry. The themes, characters, plot in the ST are preserved. The SL culture is converted to the TL culture. And the text is rewritten in a new cultural ground.

Free translation – reproduces the content without the form of ST; “the matter without manner.”

Idiomatic – reproduces the message of ST but tends to destroy the nuances of meaning, by preferring colloquialism and idioms, where these do not exist in the ST.

Communicative – attempts to render the exact contextual meaning of the text in such a way that both content and language are readily acceptable and comprehensible to the readership.

2. Translation modelling.

Translation model: its definition. Danotative, transformational, semantic, pragmatic models of translation; model of regular correspondences; model of language meanings; model of the levels of equivalents.

Translation model is a conventional representation of the translating process describing mental operations by which the ST or some part of it may be translated, irrespective of whether these operations are actually performed by the translator. There are several basic translation model. Among them are semantic modal, the transformational model and denotative (or situational) model.

The situational model is based on the identity of the situations described in the original text and in the translation. The process of translating presumably consists in the translator getting beyond the original text to the actual situation described in it. This is the first step of the process, i.e. the break-through to the situation. The second step is for the translator to describe this situation in the target language. Thus the process goes from the text in one language through the extralinguistic situation to the text in another language. The translator first understands what the original is about and then says “the same things” in TL.

E. Nida, using the theory of nuclear structures of Хомского, suggested that the translating process may be described as a series of transformations. The transformational model postulates that in any two languages there is a number of nuclear structures which are fully equivalent to each other. Each language has an area of equivalence in respect to the other language. It is presumed that the translator does the translating in three transformational strokes. First – the stage of analysis – he transforms the original structures into the nuclear structures, i.e. he performs transformation within SL. Second – the stage of translation proper – he replaces the SL nuclear structures with the equivalent nuclear structures in TL. And third – the stage of synthesis – he develops the latter into the terminal structures in the text of translation.

A similar approach can be used to describe the translation of semantic units. The semantic transformational model (L.Barhudarov, Ya.Retsker) postulates the existence of the "deep" semantic categories common to SL and TL. It is presumed that the translator first re­duces the semantic units of the original to these basic semantic categories and then expresses the appropriate notions by the semantic units of TL.

The pragmatic model developed by H.J. Vermeer is based on the belief that translation is ‘transpresentation’ which brings something (relatively) new into the target culture, enlarging it by offering and introducing into it new and hitherto unknown features [Vermeer 1994: 5]. Any translation, no matter whether it is grammatical, altering or mythical translation (in terms of H.Vermeer’s classification), is culture-specific. This is accounted for by the fact that creative value of an artistic production is estimated “according to standards which themselves are relative to a given culture and time and individual” [ibid]. Translation involves an adaptation, i.e. a partial cultural transpresentation changing the form, and meaning and “sense” in the process of bringing a text into another culture. The central notions the scholar works with are the cultural background (or cultural embedding, as K. Raiss calls it) of translations, ‘skopos’, target culture. In his overview of various models of translation H.J. Vermeer conceives the work of historiographer of translation theories in two ways: on the one hand, he tries to interpret the documents at his disposal as carefully as possible and on the other hand, since ‘documents are not just dead and dusty pieces of parchment’, he tries to look upon them as communication partners today and thus make sense of them for our time and situation. In other words, there should be ‘a modern exegesis’ of a text opposed to its “historical interpretation”. Similar considerations apply to a translator’s job since translating is a culture-sensitive process and translation is a cultural product which presupposes going beyond a mere linguistic rendering of a text in another language. Besides this aspect of translation H. Vermeer discusses one more feature which is no less important, it is “the way a translation is ‘received’ in the target culture since this is also culture-specific” [Vermeer 1994]. Thus, this model of translation describes it in the following way: a “sender” (or “transmitter”, e.g. an actor, a businessman) needs a text and procures it from a text producer (e.g. a technical writer) to be used under given circumstances for a given person and a given communication partner. The role of a text in such a model is two-fold. On the object level it serves as a vehicle of transmitting a message encoded in it by one partner (the verbal part is estimated to be no more than 30% of the total message) to be decoded by the recipient. On a meta-level the text serves as one factor among others in achieving an intended aim – skopos. According to this model the translator’s task is two-fold: first, to convey an intended meta-meaning in such a way that the ultimate aim (“skopos”) of the communicative act is achieved; second, to transform the form and meaning of the message on its object level into a target text in such a way as to make this target text fit the intended skopos. The author of the model stresses that the achievement of the skopos is one of the translator’s main social tasks “for he is the expert who knows how to socially bring about transcultural communication and lead it to its intended aim”[ibid]. What is very important in this model of translation is that it takes into account not only the translator’s social responsibility, but also the public, the commissioner and the recipients of a translation.

As a model is a conventional representation of the translating process describing mental operations, theory of language meaning, theory of levels of equivalence and theory of regular correspondences are also models.

Theory of regular correspondences

The basic notion of this theory is integrity of translation and accuracy of translation. Integrity of translation is the unity of form and content of a TT. Accuracy of translation is the identity of information that is reported in different languages.

Accordingly prof Resker noticed that there are elements of the TT which are constantly used when you are dealing with this on that unit of the ST. And he established the regularity and called these units of the TT - correspondences. So, translation correspondence, according to professor Resker, is the unit of the TL which correlates with the source unit semantically. Prof Resker identified three types of the translation correspondence:

1) equivalents;

2) analogue;

3) translation transformations

Equivalent is constant equipollency of correspondence (or equivalent), as a rule, not depending on the context and belonging to the field of a language. Equivalents are also called constant correspondences.

Analogue is a correspondence that is established between the words in the case when there are several words in a TL for the same meaning of a word in a SL. Analogue is also called variant correspondence.

Translation transformations are changes which are made to achieve adequacy in translation in spite of discrepancies in the formal and semantic systems of a SL and a TL. Translation transformations deal with the process of translation. And he spoke about lexical and grammatical transformations. And he said that everything depends on the logical categories and on semantic fields.

Theory of language meanings

According to the theory of language meanings, everything is around a sign and relations in which the sign is included. There are three types of relations:

1) between the sign and the referent; this meaning is called referential meaning;

2) between the sign and the person who uses this sign - pragmatic meaning

3) the relationship between a sign and other signs of the same sign system - interlingual meaning.

So, language meaning is the knowledge of all these types of relations in which the sign is included.

The least reproducible meaning is intralingual meaning and the most reproducible - is referential meaning.

But everything depends on the type of the text, if that is technical text or some informative text referential meaning dominates;if the text is poetic it's very important to reproduce intralingual meaning. Not all the words have referential meaning: particles, articles.

Theory of levels of equivalence

According to Komissarov, equivalence is a measure of semantic similarity between ST and TT. Equivalence may be of two types:

1) ideal equivalence, that is potentially attainable equivalence,- the maximal similarity of the content of two different language texts, assumed by the distinctions of two languages which these texts are created in.

2) real equivalence, that is translation equivalence, - the real semantic closeness of a ST and a TT achieved by a translator in the process of translation.

There are five levels of equivalence. They are equivalence on the level of the porpot of communication, equivalence on the level of identification of the situation, equivalence on the level by which the situation is described, equivalence under level of an utterance and equivalence on the level of language signs.

Each level of equivalence is characterized by the part of information the retention of which distinguishes it from the previous level.

The level of the purport of communication answers the question "what is it said for?", the level of the identification of the situation answers two questions "what is it said for?" "what is it about?"; the level by which the situation is described answers tree questions "what is it said for?" "what is it about?" and "what is said in the text?"; the level of an utterance - "what is it said for?" "what is it about?" "what is said in the text?" and "how is it said?"; and the level of language signs - "what is it said for?" "what is it about?" "what is said in the text?" "how is it said?" and "what words are used to say?".

3. Means of attaining adequacy and equivalency in translation.

Assessment of the TT: equivalence and adequate translation. Translation correspondences: equivalents and analogues. Translation transformation: variability of approaches. Lexical transformations. Grammatical transformations. Stylistic changes in the process of translating.

Today, the most perspective approach is when two terms - adequate and equivalent translation, is differentiated. It’s according prof Komissarov.

Equivalent translation is a TT, which recreates correctly the content-and-stylistic system of the ST, no matter that sometimes different language levels are involved, or even compensation is used.

Adequate translation is TT, which performs the same function in the native culture and literature of a translator, as it does in the source culture and literature.

Criteria of equivalency is a ST, the criteria of the adequacy is a TT.

There is the system of the ways of attaining equivalency and adequacy in the TT. They are translation correspondences and translation transformations.

The basic notion of this theory regular correspondences is integrity of translation and accuracy of translation. Integrity of translation is the unity of form and content of a TT. Accuracy of translation is the identity of information that is reported in different languages.

Accordingly prof Resker noticed that there are elements of the TT which are constantly used when you are dealing with this on that unit of the ST. And he established the regularity and called these units of the TT - correspondences. So, translation correspondence, according to professor Resker, is the unit of the TL which correlates with the source unit semantically.

Types:

1. Constant, complete

Equivalent – is constant, direct, equipollent and contextually independent correspondence. Equivalent is constant equipollency of correspondence (or equivalent), as a rule, not depending on the context and belonging to the field of a language.

2) variant correspondence

Analogue - is the correspondence to one of the lexico-semantic variants of the SUnit, contextually free, connected with the other analogues to the same unit synonymously (soldier –солдат, рядовой, военнослужащий, военный). Analogue is a correspondence that is established between the words in the case when there are several words in a TL for the same meaning of a word in a SL.

Equivalents are belong to the sphere of language, variant and contextual correspondences belong to the sphere of speech.

According to Komissarov: translation transformation – transformation with the help of which it is possible to make a transferring from units of ST to units of TT.

According to Retsker: translation transformation – the method of logical thinking with a help of which we reveal the meaning of the fireign word in the context and find a correspondence to it, which doesn’t coincide with the dictionary.

Barchudarov didnt distinguish between lex and gram transf., Retsker - distinguished between them, Komissarov - lex, gram, lex-gram.

If there is no equivalent or analogue, we should use translation transformation.

Translation transformations are changes which are made to achieve adequacy in translation in spite of discrepancies in the formal and semantic systems of a SL and a TL.

Grammatical transformation consists in transforming of the structure of the sentence in the translation process in accordance with norms of the TL. The transformation can be complete or partial depending on whether the structure of the sentence is changed completely or partially.

According to Komissarov there are exist:

1. Syntactical assimilation - syntactical structure of the ST is transformed into a similar structure of the TL

2. Division of a sentence - syntactical structure of the ST is transformed into 2 or more predicative structures in the TL.

3. Unification of a sentence- syntactical structure of the ST is transformed by means of joining 2 simple sentences into 1 composite sentence.

4. Grammatical substitution - grammatical unit in the ST is transformed into a unit in the TL with a different grammatical meaning.

5. Addition is used to compensate for semantic or grammatical losses and often goes along with transposition and grammatical replacement. E.g.:His wife had been beautiful — Його дружина колись (або у молодості) була красунею.workers of all industries — робітники всіх галузей промисловості.

6. Omission is a transformation opposite to addition and is used with the aim to avoid unnecessary information. E.g.:the right to rest and leisure — право на відпочинок: equality in trade and commerce — рівні права у галузі торгівлі:(...) regardless of age, education, experience or background — незалежно від віку, освіти та досвіду роботи.

Lexical transformations:

1) Transcription and transliteration – the way of translating of lexical unit of the ST by the reproducing it’s sound form with the help of letters of the TL in transcription, and graphic form in transliteration.

- you always transliterate non-pronounced consonants and reduced vowels (Greenwich);

- you reproduce double consonants between vowels and at the end of the word after vowels ( summit);

- you want to preserve the peculiarities in orthography, to make it close to the accepted pattern (Hercules);

- traditional transcription (исключения).

Examples: Greenwich, summit, Hercules

2) Loan translation – the way of translating of lexical units from ST by the substitution of it’s constituents – morphemes or words (in case of set phrases) by it’s lexical correspondences in the TL.

Examples: yellow-faced, full-blooded

3) Semi - loan translation combination of transcription-transliteration with some other lex. transformations within one unit (mini-skirt). Used in TL, but exoticism is appreciated (Supreme Soviet).

Examples: mini-skirt

4) Generalization – lexico-semantic substitution of unit of SL, which has the narrower meaning by the unit of the TL with the wider meaning. (England – рідна країна). The semantic field should be the same.

Examples: England – рідна країна

5) Specification – lexico-semantic change of the unit of the SL, which has the wider meaning, by the unit of the TL with a narrower meaning. Semantic field should be the same (child – сын).

6) Extension of meaning – the unit of the SL coincides partially with a unit in the TL. The second part is borrowed from a neighboring semantic field. Semantic fielf is crossed, is not the same. Metonymy is based on the pars pro toto (часть вместо целого). Cause-effect substitution – cause – process – effect (возможно 6 трансформаций). Are you alone (effect) – Там же нікого немає (cause).

7) Total re-structuring of an utterance - way of translation when the ST inner form is completely in no touch with the TT - only the situation is reproduced. Different semantic fields (How do you do – здравствуй). 3 types: neutral substitution; expressive; idiomatic. The function must be the same; context - common.

8) Antonymous translation - substitution of the opposite notion in theTT for this\that notion of the ST (He didn’t say anything – Він промовчав).

9) Compensation – the element of the ST is not translated instead you use the TT elements very far in it’s meaning from that of the ST and then you try to restore the menaing lost, using different ways of translation. 2 types: semantic (used mainly when the word of the ST has no correspondences in the TL because the referent is absent in the T culture) and stylistic - the element of the ST is substituted in accordance with the demands of style (thy fingers –твои персты; small piggish eyes – крошечные свиные глазки).

_____________________________________________________________

Антична література