Учебное пособие 1802

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 3 (14), 2016

“Trois sonorités, trois modes, trois rythmes, trois musiques superposées” [1*, p. II].

("Three harmonies, three frets, three rhythm, imposing three different kinds of music")

V.S. Vinogradova also mentions that the role of such a comment can be realized through the sheet music graphics, where the laYers of texture are linked with an element, named in the author’s texts” [8].

d) musical forms of some parts:

“C`est une fugue” [1*, p. II]. ("It's Fugue")

e) designation of musical genres:

Oriental dance (“danse orientale”), lullaby:

“thème de Dieu en berceuse” [1*, p. II-III]. ("Lullaby theme of God")

V.S. Vinogradova also mentions the author’s notes about timbre [8]: bell-ringing imitation (“tam-tam et hautbois”) or of a bird song:

“rossignol, merle, fauvette, pinson, chardonneret, bouscarle, cini et surtout l`alouette” [1*, p. II-III]. ("Nightingale, thrush, warbler, chaffinch, goldfinch, warbler, European Serin, and in particular a lark.")

Among the author’s sheet music remarks the researcher distinguishes comments dealing with the methods of a performance piece [8]:

a) tonal characteristics:

“mystérieux, avec amour” [1*, p. 1] ("Mysteriously, with love"), “tendre et naïf” [1*, p.

12] ("Gently and naive");

b) differentiated pedal signatures (along with traditional “Ped”, О. Messiaen introduces

“très brouillé de pédale”, “pédale rythmique” ("Very confusing pedal", "rhythmic pedal"), etc., (that is not usual for the performer) [1*, p. 29, p. 34].

In addition, V.S. Vinogradova writes that in the comments of the French composer there is a combination of different methods used, and “the technical instructions are inseparable from the imaginative structure, the performance program” (for instance, the reference to the part structure is found next to specifications about timbre, rhythm, and registers [8].

The language means used by O. Messiaen in the introduction to the piano cycle sheet music were first of all addressed to performers. However, they acquire new meaning in the professional music critic’s mind. The latter, being an expert in the French composer’s creative work, knows the author’s comments and can understand whether the pianist playing the cycle follows them.

One of the contemporary researchers and popularizers of Messiaen’s work, who publishes his articles in famous British magazine, BBC Music Magazine, devoted to classical music, is a professor at Birmingham Conservatoire, Christopher Dingle. In the texts of his reviews of the discs “Vingt regards sur l'enfant-Jésus” the critic metaphorically compares the cycle with Everest: “pianistic Everest”, “an Everest of the piano repertoire”) [2*, 3*, 4*]. He also notes that the performance of the French composer’s masterpiece requires spiritual, emotional, and even physi-

104

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 3 (14), 2016

cal power: “the spiritual, emotional, and physical stamina required for a successful interpretation of the complete cycle” [2*]. The critic mentions O. Messiaen’s basic approach to his works: “There is power and energy, but also space and stillness” [3*]. The reviewer compares the performance of many pianists, evaluates their manner, and interprets it according to the vision of the composer: “It requires not only sublime musicianship but also the confidence and ability to give a free rein to the heady excesses of Messiaen’s intoxicating religious emotionalism” [4*]. The music critic, in his reviews, does not directly share the composer’s remarks, which helps the performer to create in the addressee a certain perception of the music, but rather takes the remarks into consideration, comparing the author’s original interpretation with the one that the musician manages to create with his/her piano playing.

Thus, O. Messiaen, using the above mentioned language means in extramusical metatext comments, did not just explain the different parts, reveal the idea of each theme, give explanations as to music forms, timbres, and performance methods, but also built a communicative area for the transmission of information to professionals and was heard. Hence, the author belongs to the academic music discourse community. At the same time, the usage of semantically incompatible lexis and incompatible methods of music language breaks the rules of the music discourse community. As for incompatible lexis, a speaker uses certain language means, taking into consideration the communicative task, and the listener decodes the form and retrieves the content, following M.V. Vlavatskaya [12]. Then the question arises: what communicative task did O. Messiaen undertake and what content, in his opinion, the addressee needed to retrieve if the choice of lexical compatibility in the French author’s comments to his works contradicts the addressee’s “relevant information context” [12]? The composer himself answers this question in a series of interviews, published as a book: “Ces textes sont ˂…˃ écrits dans une langue française qui veut être le correspondant de ma langue musicale. C`est pour cette dernière raison qu`ils ont quelquefois surprise” [7, p. 174]. Apparently, we may see here O. Messiaen’s encyclopedic domination, which “reveals itself <…> in the opportunity to give verbal description to the subject of discussion” and “presupposes a high cultural level” of the French author, and also in striving for communicative leadership, in defending innovatory views [15, p. 275-276].

O. Messiaen’s encyclopedic domination is revealed through the opportunity to project the whole of knowledge, specific views on his works, and creating the synergism of musical and extramusical components. This author’s quality can also be seen in the texts of interviews, in which he expounds on his creative credo, defends his right for innovations, and demonstrates a very high cultural level, comparing his creative work with the work of his predecessors and contemporaries. The composer’s communicative leadership is especially realized in the introduction to

“Vingt regards sur l'enfant-Jésus”, through the combination of nominal sentences in the text holding the objective character of truth, with dialogue-oriented personal pronouns, his direct address to a performer, as well as personal memories. The choice of incompatible lexis is also of pragmatic character due to the desire to achieve communicative leadership, because the composer knows that the majority of performers do not understand the difficult language of his works. Thus, through the verbal expression of incompatibility, the author helps to understand an artistic sense of unfamiliar timbre, register, tone and rhythm combinations; this broadens the horizon of an addressee’s textuality.

To conclude, O. Messiaen is a discourse personality who belongs to academic music discourse. Due to period conditions, the composer had to go against the societal mainstream, and was ahead of his contemporaries in his music language perception. To do so, he used extramusical discoursive genres, creating metatext and music sheet text synergism. Explanatory metatext comments, which in their details present the performer with the idea of the whole music work and of each individual part, allow the author to realize his encyclopedic domination. Using different language means O. Messiaen manages to reach communicative leadership in the academic discourse community of musicians.

105

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 3 (14), 2016

Bibliographic list

1.Plotnikova S.N. Govoryashchij/pishushchij kak yazykovaya, kommunikativnaya i diskursivnaya lichnost' / S.N. Plotnikova // Vestnik Nizhnevartovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. – 2008. – №4. – S. 37-42.

2.Swales J. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings / J. Swales. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. – 260 p.

3.Aleshinskaya E.V. Teoretiko-metodologicheskie osnovy razgranicheniya zhanrov professional'nogo diskursa / E.V. Aleshinskaya // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Filologiya. – 2014. – № 5 (31). – S. 5-23.

4.Karasik V.I. Yazykovoj krug: lichnost', koncepty, diskurs / V.I. Karasik. – M.: Gnozis, 2004. – 477 s.

5.Olivier Ph. Messiaen ou la lumière / Ph. Olivier. – Paris: Hermann Editeurs, 2008. –

194 p.

6.Samuel C. Entretiens avec Olivier Messiaen / C. Samuel. – Paris: Editions Pierre Belfond, 1967. – 236 p.

7.Dingle C., R. Fallon Messiaen Perspectives 2 / C. Dingle, R. Fallon. – Abingdon and New York: Routledge, 2016. – 464 p.

8.Vinogradova V.S. O tekstah i kommentariyah O. Messiana k fortepiannomu ciklu

«Dvadcat' vzglyadov na Mladenca Iisusa». Rezhim dostupa: http: // elibrary. ru/ download /30254342. pdf (data obrashcheniya – 01.08.2016).

9.Chernigova I.V. Kommunikativnyj potencial parateksta francuzskih hudozhestvennyh proizvedenij XVI-XVII vekov: na materiale avtorskih i izdatel'skih predislovij: avtoreferat dissertacii ... kandidata filologicheskih nauk: 10.02.05 / I.V. CHernigova. – Irkutsk, 2006. – 20 s.

10. Kol'cova L.M. Zagolovok v strukture hudozhestvennogo teksta / L.M. Kol'cova // Nauchnyj vestnik Voronezh. gos. arh.-stroit. un-ta. Seriya: Lingvistika i mezhkul'turnaya kommunikaciya. – 2007. – Vyp. 2. – S. 6-19.

11. Mihajlova S.V. Femininnaya identichnost' i sposoby ee ob"ektivacii v hudozhestvennom diskurse XVII veka: dis. … kand. filol. nauk: 10.02.19 / S.V. Mihajlova. – M., 2012. – 236 s.

12. Vlavackaya M.V. Rol' sochetaemosti slov dlya govoryashchego i slushayushchego s pozicij kombinatornoj lingvistiki / M.V. Vlavackaya // Vestnik IGLU. – 2012. – №2 (19). Rezhim dostupa: http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/rol-sochetaemosti-slov-dlya-govoryaschego-i- slushayuschego-s-pozitsiy-kombinatornoy-lingvistiki (vremya obrashcheniya: 27.07.2016).

13. Morozova N.M. Leksikograficheskie i lingvokul'turologicheskie aspekty muzykal'nogo diskursa v seti Internet / N.M. Morozova, A.A. CHernobrov // Vestnik NGPU. – 2016. – № 2(30). – S. 138-149.

14. Kryuchkova T.M. Ponyatie ehkspressivnosti v sovremennoj lingvistike / T.M. Kryuchkova // Nauchnyj vestnik Voronezh. gos. arh.-stroit. un-ta. Seriya: Lingvistika i mezhkul'turnaya kommunikaciya. – 2006. – Vyp. 1. – S. 48-51.

15. Vikulova L.G. Francuzskij literator XVII veka: ehnciklopedicheskaya dominaciya, lingvisticheskaya kompetenciya, kommunikativnoe liderstvo / L.G. Vikulova // Drevnyaya i Novaya Romaniya. – 2016. – Vyp. 17. – S. 266-278.

Analysed sources

1*. Messiaen O. Vingt Regards sur L'Enfant-Jésus pour Piano — Paris: Durand, 1971.

2*. Dingle C. Vinght Regards sur L’Enfant-Jesus, URL: http://www.classical- music.com/review/messiaen-4 (дата обращения – 10.08.2016).

3*. Dingle C. Vinght Regards sur L’Enfant-Jesus, URL: http://www.classical- music.com/review/instrumental-messiaen-knapik-sept-12 (дата обращения – 10.08.2016).

106

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 3 (14), 2016

4*. Dingle C. Vinght Regards sur L’Enfant-Jesus, URL: http://www.classical- music.com/review/messiaen-20 (дата обращения – 10.08.2016).

107

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 3 (14), 2016

THEORY AND PRACTICE OF TRANSLATION

UDC 81’25:378.147

Maxim Chikov

Dobrolyubov Linguistic University of Nizhny Novgorod

Head of the Chair of German, Translation, and Interpreting

e-mail: maxim.chikov@gmail.com

Yuliia Khramova

Dobrolyubov Linguistic University of Nizhny Novgorod

Post graduate student of the School of Translation and Interpreting

e-mail: julia_chram@mail.ru Yevgeniia Filileeva

Dobrolyubov Linguistic University of Nizhny Novgorod

Student of the German Department of the School of Translation and Interpreting

e-mail: evgenijafilileeva@gmail.com

М. Chikov, Y. Khramova, Y. Filileeva

ON THE ROLE OF TRANSFORMATIONS IN TRANSLATION AND THEIR

IMPORTANCE IN TRANSLATORS TRAINING

Different approaches to translation transformations can hardly be unified. In this paper, the opinion is presented that the transformations are mostly lexical-grammatical. We also argue that purely grammatical transformations are very rare. In our opinion, the reason for most transformations lies in the language and the greatest challenge in translators and interpreters training is providing them with a required command of a language. Beside the transformational translation method, the interlineary method is treated in the paper, mostly basing on translation equivalents which exist on different language levels. Description of frequent translation difficulties and solutions in a certain language pair is promising, which shows that most numerous transformations base on different combinatorics of two lexical units in two languages. All the translational actions base upon a binary model according to which a unit is always being compared to one of the elements connected with it.

Keywords: Translation equivalents, variants, transformations, translation unit, language levels, style, transformational translation model, binary translation model, category, Sense – Text model, functional grammar.

Nowadays, last but not least due to development of Skopos theory and functional approach [1], [2], more and more translation schools place emphasis on extra-linguistic factors avoiding linguistic ones and basing on the western translators training system according to which translators learn their profession after they already have a good command of language (to disambiguate we remark at the very beginning that by “translation” written translation as well as interpreting are meant in this paper).

______________________________________

© Chikov М., Khramova Y., Filileeva Y., 2016

108

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 3 (14), 2016

We do not depreciate the functional paradigm, but, we would like to draw attention, firstly, to a great linguistic and transformational potential of translational activities taken by the Skopos theory for granted, secondly, to the necessity of training in language and translation at the same time, e.g. as it traditionally takes place in Russia. However, we suppose that in the modern world this trend will grow and it will be less and less possible to train only in languages first and in translation then.

Observation of translators’ training process shows that they mostly fail in understanding just the technological component of translation, i.e. linguistics and transformations. They are frequently quite sure that any translational operation is a transformation, while transformations are divided in lexical, grammatical, and stylistic ones, and are often caused by culture and mentality differences. In gaining their translation competence they often fail to define what transformation system they follow. However, we do not refer to either lacks of education or of students’ abilities, or to unimportance of transformations for translation as a whole. We mean a general underestimation of the linguistic factor in translation, a trend strengthening in the recent time.

There is no need to assume that modern translation studies have completely got rid of transformations. Russian scholars who accept the Skopos approach suppose the transformation theory to be one of the translation components. Vadim Sdobnikov, describing translation strategies and tactics on the base of communicative situations typology, accounts transformations which are drawn up in Russian classical translation studies a part of mechanisms to realize respective tactics [3].

The objective of this paper is to show and to explain the contradictions in existing transformation systems, to propose their more consequent classification as well as a more universal rule of translational operations, the technological binary model; to clear up the status of certain transformation types, translation equivalents and variants, and the status of the translation unit. To optimize translators training we see it crucial to consequently consider the translation activities exactly from the linguistic point of view.

Moreover, it seems productive not only to develop a transformations system itself, but also to study frequent translation difficulties in a certain language pair (German – Russian in our case) to classify respective solutions. This approach was applied by Yakov Retsker [4] when he described grammar transformations.

The approach by Retsker, founder of the Russian theory of regular translation correspondences, is also efficient because he does not classify grammatical transformations and remarks that all of them are usually lexical, too [4, p. 38, p. 76]. An example of a grammatical transformation, quite rare a phenomenon, we will demonstrate below. Nevertheless, grammatical transformation as a type is singled out in the most works on translation studies. Leonid Barkhudarov defines within one of his four functional transformation types grammatical and lexical transformations [5, p. 194]. His examples hereto show, however, not purely grammatical, but lexical- grammatical ones. Lev Latyshev observes within language-structure-and-level transformations syntactic and stylistic ones, the formers thus being grammatical [6, p. 108 – 109]. Aleksandr Shveytser also writes about grammatical transformations, which, however, should be understood in terms of Chomsky’s generative grammar (on which Nida’s transformational translation model is based) as lexical-syntactic ones [7, p. 77 – 93]. It is to point out that Latyshev’s syntactic transformations are lexical-syntactic, as well, compare (hereinafter literal English translations of Russian examples are given to show peculiarities of Russian):

Frau Müller bekam rote Bäckchen. – Щёчки г-жи Мюллер порозовели. Frau Müller bekam rote Bäckchen. – The cheeks of Mrs. Müller grew red.

As to stylistic transformations in Latyshev’s system, they are obligatorily to include language component, lexis and/or grammar. Compare

109

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 3 (14), 2016

der Panzer… wurde auf Herz und Nieren geprüft – установка… была проверена… осно-

вательно [6, p. 110]

der Panzer… wurde auf Herz und Nieren geprüft – the machine … has been… thouroughly tested,

where there is a lexical transformation without grammar alterations, although this lexical transformation is a little unusual, as a word in the target language corresponds not to a word, but to a phrase in the source language. Nonetheless, this transformation is purely lexical in its form, whenever stylistic differences in special sublanguages of Russian and German cause it.

There is no unification in definition of certain transformations in various systems: thus, for Retsker the antonymic translation is a lexical transformation, while for many others it is of complex character [6, p. 121], [5, p. 215]. Ryurik Minyar-Beloruchev gives examples of an antonymic translation referring as to a word (Russian “on account of security”, French “on account of danger”) as to a whole sentence (“I remember everything” – “I forget nothing”) [8, p. 106]. This explains different approaches. It should be however remarked that the antonymic translation is often really a complex transformation, or, according to Latyshev, contains beside the altered word one more component, something like mathematical “minus times minus results in plus”.

Latyshev makes an important remark on a division of a transformation in at least two parts:

…Schwester, die ihm… die Hand überließ – сестры…, которая… не отнимала от него руки…

…Schwester, die ihm… die Hand überließ – sister… who… did not take away her hand from him…

The verb in the target language contains a negation seme, so, to preserve the whole positive meaning this verb is used in a negative structure. Thus, it is not an amorphous complex transformation we have to do with here, but, two units realized in it. This is a vision of a binary basis of transformational operations which we describe below and which, in our opinion, more clearly defines the operations essence.

In transformations classifications there are also other contradictions. Shveytser calls the Text – Sense model by Igor Mel’chuk and others a semantic translation model [7, p. 94 – 117], while John Catford’s model is a situational model for him [7, p. 117 – 139], [9]. On the other side, there are authors who call a situational (or situational-denotative) model the model by Ilya Revzin – Viktor Rosenzweig, while Catfords model is a semantic one for them [10]. Catford’s reference to the situation is however quite explicit; such terminological interaction is just a sign of principal similarity of all the models and transformational theory basics.

In modern works the categories crucial for a successful translation, especially for its linguistic and transformational part, are defined as, e.g., exactness, compliance with the sense, correspondence between terminologies, quality of language, style, compliance with ethnical norms, which reflects the requirements formulated in Russian translation studies as equivalence, closeness to the original, compliance with various norms, with the communicative function, etc. [11].

To bring logics in transformations classification, following seems to be considered. Transformations are caused by either linguistic or extra-linguistic (i.e. genre and style or other cultural) reasons, and are technologically divided into lexical and lexical-grammatical (i.e. lexicalmorphological and lexical-syntactical). The semantic base of transformations lies in categories, which are described from different points of view in, to give some significant examples, generative grammar, situational model (either by Catford or by Revzin – Rosenzweig), Text – Sense model, Russian functional grammar theory (Aleksandr Bondarko and others) partly founded on the German theory of semantic field, etc.

110

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 3 (14), 2016

We would like to point out that for a translator’s intuition a simple division into lexical and grammatical transformations may be sufficient: in stressful conditions of limited time he takes a decision to change either a word or grammar, while in the latter case words change so to say by themselves. But, in a theoretical description, definition of grammatical transformations would inevitably lead to a contradiction which could be left without notice if purely grammatical transformations did not really exist, although in rarest cases.

Irina Gayduk shows a grammatical transformation in the following example: with the intention of restating – с намерением изложить (literally in Russian: with the intention to restate) [12]. Formally, it is a grammatical transformation. However, one could not but see its strict determination. As the author also writes, in Russian there is no gerund, thus, such structures can probably be rendered by only two methods: using an infinitive with a following substantive, as in the example above, or using a substantive in Genitive (instead of the infinitive) also followed by a substantive in Genitive (which appears to be a little clumsy anyhow). All the same, it seems to be not a transformation, but a replacement, according to Latyshev (Russian podstanovka), or a variant (or may be even an equivalent) according to Retsker. The advantage of Latyshev’s system is that he distinguishes, as Retsker did, between replacements and transformations (while Retsker wrote of equivalents, variants and contextual correspondences, and transformations).

Equivalents (variants) or, according to Latyshev, replacements are such translational operations in which a unit is automatically replaced by another one, e.g. a term by a term, a proper name by a proper name, a phrase by a phrase, a word with a certain meaning by such word in the target language (Bank – bank, Ministerium – ministry); as Retsker puts it, equivalents exist for two reasons: identity of the signified object or traditional cross-lingual contacts. We would only add that such a unit should not be only a word or a phrase anyhow. An equivalent can be a sentence, a group of sentences (i.e. a contract clause), a joke, a verse (e.g. an existing translation of it), etc. The conditions of using an equivalent are various. Equivalent is not a systematic linguistic phenomenon, but a psychological one rather. A translator creates his equivalents base during his whole life, finding them on his permanent search when working on a written translation or preparing for an oral interpreting. Equivalents save his time and strengths.

In the most works on translation there is no clear differentiating of equivalents and transformations. Moreover, singling out so called “words without equivalents” misleads the translators, making them believe that those are, for example, only culture-specific elements. But, from the point of view of translation studies, there are no equivalents in Russian, say, for affection or sincerity, either (Retsker’s examples). Considering that an equivalent is not always a linguistic phenomenon, there is no possibility to speak of “words with equivalents” or “words without equivalents” at all. As mentioned above, every translator can have his own equivalents.

Variants in comparison with equivalents exist as a certain, though limited, amount, and are chosen from this amount according to context, situation, style, all in one, various factors determining translational solutions. There is no clear differentiation between equivalents and variants: Arm and Hand may be considered to be variants of Russian рука (Russian has only one word for it), but also to be its equivalents in its different meanings. The choice of a “variant” like Arm or Hand is much more determined than that of a respective variant to affection (we suppose that in case of variants there are normally more than two possibilities). As already mentioned above, a use of Arm or Hand instead of рука or vice-versa is in no case a transformation because the translational operation is strictly determined and not arbitrary. From the point of view of language logic such an operation really seems to be a lexical transformation, a concretization or a generalization, but, from the point of view of a translator it is not performing a transformation but using an existing variant or even equivalent. Retsker’s example student classified by him as requiring a transformation of concretization (in Russian there are different words for University student, school student, etc.) shows, in our opinion, not a transformation, but choice of a variant [4, p. 43]. Compare another example with English mount meaning any animal to ride on. In case of

111

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 3 (14), 2016

Christ on his mount – Христос на осляти

in Russian an equivalent from the existing Bible translations is required where it is clearly said that he was riding on a donkey (moreover, in the archaic form), and in case of

Napoleon on his mount

(Napoleon was riding on a camel) either a variant is to be supposed (if the names of the animals to ride on are all variants, which gives a number much more than two, but still quite limited), or really a lexical transformation [4, p. 42]. We can easily imagine that in various contexts mount may stand for quite various objects, and in different cases the respective translational solution will be either a variant choice or a lexical transformation of concretization. There is also no clear differentiation between variants and transformations as there is no such differentiation between variants and equivalents.

We would also suppose that a translator not only gathers his equivalents base all his life, but also tries to make variants to equivalents and, on the other side, make transformations to variants and then to equivalents. May be, in the long run, he has a certain amount of transformations he does not need to reflect on any more, and it empowers him to quickly produce high quality results in challenging conditions of a simultaneous interpreting, of a translation of big standardized texts, etc.

Let us consider a well-known example of a voice “transformation”:

Das Haus wird von Arbeitern gebaut – Рабочие строят дом.

Das Haus wird von Arbeitern gebaut – The workers build the house.

When translating from German into Russian, the passive voice often needs some translational solution. It may be rendered, firstly, by the passive voice (i.e. by the interlinear method which is described below), secondly, by the active voice, thirdly, by the reflexive voice. From the point of view of the language and of the generative grammar the two latter cases are transformations. But, from the point of view of the translation studies, rendering of the passive voice requires a choice between three variants, from which the reflexive voice (in Russian) seems to be most frequent and may even pretend to be an equivalent. Considering that the Passive voice in German usually eliminates mentioning the subject and that rendering by the Russian active voice needs this mentioning, as a rule, we can conclude that a simple change of the voice is not always a purely grammatical operation. As for the example above, it is an artificial one which was invented to illustrate the voice category. In life such examples can hardly be experienced.

We have already mentioned that purely grammatical transformations are quite rare. We came across a necessity and a possibility of such a transformation working on a translation of a fragment of Herrndorf’s famous novel “Tschick” within a students’ project [1*]. The novel had been translated into Russian before, but, we considered one more translation possible to be carried out.

The novel is written in the historic present to be lively and colloquial. Translating into Russian we noticed that this tense was not always possible to be used. It did not have to do with mysterious peculiarities of German or Russian culture, different mentalities, genre laws, etc.: it was determined by language peculiarities only. Compare the passage where the situation before an important conversation between the doctor and the main character, a teenager, is described, and our translation (the English translation is adapted to the norms of Russian as close as possible):

112

Series «Modern Linguistic and Methodical-and-Didactic Researches» Issue № 3 (14), 2016

Als ich wieder humpeln kann, holt er mich in sein Zimmer, in dem ausnahmsweise mal ein Schreibtisch steht und kein medizinisches Gerät, und da setzen wir uns dann gegenüber wie Firmenchefs, die den nächsten Deal eintüten. Auf dem Tisch steht ein menschlicher Oberkörper aus Plastik, wo man die Organe rausnehmen kann. Der Dickdarm sieht aus wie ein Gehirn, und vom Magen blättert die Farbe ab. [1*]

Как только я смог передвигаться, он отвел меня в свой кабинет, где в отличие от других больничных комнат стоял письменный стол и не было ни одного медицинского аппарата; мы уселись напротив друг друга как два босса, которые должны обсудить следующую сделку. На столе – пластиковый макет туловища c вынимающимися органами. Толстая кишка похожа на мозг, а с желудка слезла краска.

As soon as I could move, he took me to his office, where there was only a desk, other than in normal hospital rooms, and no medical device; we sat down opposite one another like two bosses who would discuss the next deal. On the table, a plastic dummy with organs which can be taken out. The large bowel is like a brain, and the color has peeled from the stomach.

First of all, the attention is attracted by the verbal form kann. Usage of model verbs, particularly in German, is known for some peculiarities. It may be caused by the structure of German, which, on the one side, has no category of verbal aspect and, on the other side, whose amount of analytical forms is considerable. Modal verbs function not only as such. Compare the following example from the EU program statement (with our Russian and English translation, while English is most possibly adapted to Russian norms just to show the difficulties of rendering into Russian). What is declared by the modal verb?

Der Gedanke eines vereinigten Europas war früher nur ein Traum der Philosophen und Visionäre. Victor Hugo konnte sich beispielsweise friedliche, von humanistischen Gedanken inspirierte „Vereinigte Staaten von Europa“ vorstellen. [2*].

Мысль о единой Европе раньше была лишь мечтой философов и провидцев. Так, Виктор Гюго представлял себе возможность существования мирных, вдохновлённых гуманистической мыслью «Соединённых Штатов Европы».

The thought of a unified Europe was earlier only a dream of philosophers and visionaries. Such, Victor Hugo imagined a possibility of existence of peaceful United States of Europe, inspired by humanistic thoughts.

In English, like in German, “…could imagine peaceful United States of Europe…” may comply with the norms, but, in Russian, usage of a modal verb would describe the situation as an occasional one. The thought expressed in German is quite clear because no other people could imagine it, that is why we tried to render this meaning by other lexical means. But in Russian the modal verb would also contradict the connection between two sentences one of which has a meaning of possibility. In the first sentence there need to be a predicate which would correspond to the modal verb in the second one, moreover, if the second one is introduced by for example or such. Compare sentence or phrase interconnections with a modal verb can which are normal for Russian:

He was a strange person. He could, for example…

If I could, I would do it.

113