методичка 3 (1)

et; in his right hand he held his sword Glamdring. Behind him came Gimli, his eyes glinting in the dim light as he turned his head from side to side. Behind the dwarf walked Frodo, and he had drawn the short sword, Sting. No gleam came from the blades of Sting or of Glamdring; and that was some comfort, for being the work of Elvish smiths in the Elder days these swords shone with a cold light, if any Ores were near at hand. Behind Frodo went Sam, and after him Legolas, and the young hobbits, and Boromir. In the dark at the rear, grim and silent, walked Aragorn.

Термін виконання: семінарське заняття 3

Очікуваний результат: розвинуті вміння практичного застосування знань про стилістичні труднощі перекладу, а також сформовані навички перекладу імен, вдосконалені навчально-стратегічні компетентності мовної особистості.

51

LECTURE 5

LEXICO-SEMANTIC ASPECTS OF TRANSLATION

Semantic structure of the message and its main components.

Semantic redundancy as one of the main properties of oral discourse.

Lexical aspects of translation. “Trouble-making” lexical items.

Subject field words (terms). Set phrases (clichés) and phraseological units

(idioms): ways of rendering them.

Semantic structure of the message and its main components.

Linguistics distinguishes between the notions of meaning, sense and semantics

(Бондарко, Падучева, Чернов). The term semantics has three meanings: 1) contents, all information rendered by linguistic units; 2) section of linguistics dealing with contents or information rendered by linguistic units; 3) one of the sections of semiotics (science about signs) (Лингвистический энциклопедический словарь).

Meaning of linguistic units is described as their contents reflected in the respective dictionaries or grammar books. The notion of sense goes outside pure linguistics and has to do with the context and situation of communication (the subject field of communication, aims of participants, their background knowledge). Therefore sense of linguistic units comes to life in real speech as a result of relations established between meanings of linguistic units and communicative situations. Indeed, it is practically impossible to translate such words as coach, challenge, event, network, powerless, account, run, рахунок, партія, справа, or practically any other word until the word is placed in the context and until the act of predication (creation of a proposition) takes place. Therefore, translators interpret sense of linguistic units which is born in each particular act of speech as a result of producing messages by speakers.

Messages have certain semantic structure, the main element of which is the proposition, i.e. a ”picture” of the world, a “statement” about the world, which may be true or false, which is pronounced with a certain purpose, and which has the

52

subject and the predicate, e.g. It is cold outside.

Messages must also contain the following components, which may be verbally expressed (explicit) or “hidden” (implicit):

Deictic component: orientation of the message with regard to the person, space and time, e.g. I warn you that it is cold outside;

Modal component: treatment of the proposition by the speaker as possible, impossible, desired, mandatory, unnecessary, likely, unlikely, doubtful, etc., e.g. I warn you that it is probably cold outside;

Evaluative component: positive or negative evaluation of the elements of the proposition (or absence of such evaluation – “zero evaluation”), e.g. I warn you that it is cold outside, so, since you are unwell, you’d rather wear your warm sweater;

Pragmatic component: indicator of the aim of the utterance (communicative intention), e.g. I warn you that it is cold outside.

It is quite obvious that for successful translation it is not enough to translate only the “propositional side” of the message but also render all other components of its semantic structure, thus ensuring that it “makes sense” for the addressee and produces desired effect.

Semantic redundancy as one of the main properties of oral discourse.

Semantic redundancy (семантична надмірність) is an important property of a discourse (especially of the oral one). It provides safeguards for successful transmission of information. It is generally believed that semantic redundancy of messages is based upon 1) repetition of components of the message and 2) interrelation of components of the message which are manifested through contextual relationships. In oral discourse these relationships are ensured by means of lexical and semantic cohesion, which is so important for successful comprehension and translation of messages.

Repetition is treated (Michael Hoey) as occurrence of one or more items (words or word combinations) in a sentence that by themselves tell the addressee nothing new

53

but reinstate some elements from the earlier sentences. Repetition links and

interrelation links are established between meaningful components of oral discourse

through anaphoric, cataphoric and exophoric relationships.

Repetition links:

simple lexical repetition occurs when a lexical item that has already occurred in the text is repeated with no greater alteration than can be explained in terms of a grammatical paradigm ( singular vs plural, present vs past, etc.). Only lexical words can enter into such a link. Connections between grammatical or function words as articles, prepositions, particles are not treated as repetition links;

complex lexical repetition occurs when two lexical items share a lexical morpheme, but are not formally identical, or belong to different parts of speech (have different grammatical functions), e.g. computer – computing, human – humanity, politics – political, сіль – солоний, їсти – їжа, etc.

Interrelation links:

simple paraphrase occurs whenever a lexical item may substitute another item in context with no important change in meaning. Here belong most of the contextual synonyms, e.g. produce – cause, book – volume, killings – executions, викликати – спричиняти, робота – праця, особа – людина, etc;

complex paraphrase occurs when one of the lexical units includes the other, although they may share no lexical morpheme. Here belong the majority of antonyms, e.g. happy – unhappy, hot – cold, dry – wet, день – ніч, стояти – лежати. Complex paraphrase also occurs when an item is a complex lexical repetition of another item (writer – writings) and also a simple paraphrase of a third item (writer – author). In this case a complex paraphrase link is established between the second and the third items (writings - author). This link is called “a link triangle” (Hoey);

co-reference repetition occurs when two items are interpreted as having the same referent, i.e. refer to the same object of the real world (denotatum) in the given context, e.g. scientists – biologists; Augustus – the Emperor;

54

pro-form substitution occurs when certain grammatical words such as pronouns, adverbs, substitute lexical items, e.g. citizens – they, жінка – вона.

Semantic redundancy of oral discourse provides not only for successful transmission of maximum information in the process of communication but also for filling in the communicational gaps in oral interpretation.

Lexical aspects of translation. “Trouble-making” lexical items.

Most scholars believe that any unit of speech may be subject to translation. Experiments show that human brain is capable of keeping in memory around 7 focuses of meaning which are formed around the key words of oral discourse. The key words include subject field words, set phrases and idioms, numerals, proper names, abbreviations, acronyms, non-equivalent lexical items.

“Trouble-making” lexical items require taking interpreter’s decision and the success of translation depends on the ability of the interpreter to react to information which is culturally or professionally specific.

Proper names make up one of the most “trouble-making” groups of lexical items.

The best safeguard for an interpreter is to have at hand a list of names of people and organizations subject for interpretation. Next step is to use one of the accepted ways of rendering proper names (Гиляревский, Старостин 1985; Ермолович 2001;

Корунець 2001; Леонович 2001):

practical transcription: Anthony Blair – Ентоні Блер, Lord Judd – лорд Джадд, Sunningdale Road – Саннінгдейл роуд;

transliteration: Donald – Дональд, Hastings – Гастінгс;

“traditional” (historical) rendering: Texas – Техас, Vienna – Відень, Queen

Elizabeth – королева Єлизавета (however, Prince Charles – принц Чарльз but not

Карл), Ярослав Мудрий – Yaroslav the Wise;

“ordinary” translation (for the names of organizations): World Bank –

Світовий банк, The House of Commons – Палата громад, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe – Парламентська Асамблея Ради Європи. However, there is a tendency to use practical transcription or transliteration if the name of an

55

organization contains certain connotation or “national colouring”: Greenpeace –

Грінпіс, Верховна Рада – Verkhovna Rada, Державна Дума Російської Федерації

– The State Duma of the Russian Federation.

For rendering names of newspapers, magazines, journals, hotels, shops, private homes, ships, trademarks, etc. mainly practical transcription and transliteration are used.

Successful rendering of specific items of national lexicon (реалії ) depends upon the level of the cultural competence of the interpreter. The following methods can be applied: practical transcription or transliteration, e.g. ombudsman – омбудсмен,

прокуратура – prokuratura; translation by means of an analogy, e.g. roundabout

– транспортна розв’язка; loan and word-for-word rendering, e.g. skyscraper –

хмарочос; descriptive translation, e.g. Brummy – мешканець Бірмінгему,

бірмінгемський діалект.

Abbreviations and acronyms make up a part of interpreter’s active stock of lexical items, e.g. EU – European Union, GDP – gross domestic product. Lists of abbreviations of a specific nature have to be requested from the background sources before the interpretation, e.g. PIU – Project Implementation Unit, TOR – terms of reference, УДКР – Українська державна корпорація по реструктуризації.

Selection of the way of rendering abbreviations may range from transliteration (e.g.

BBC – Бі-бі-сі) and ordinary translation (e.g. PACE for Parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe – ПАРЄ for Парламентська асамблея Ради Європи) to descriptive and loan translation (e.g. EFF for Extended Fund Facility – програма розширеного кредитування, СІЗО for слідчий ізолятор – pre-trial detention centre or SIZO).

Subject field words (terms). Set phrases (clichés) and phraseological units

(idioms): ways of rendering them.

Subject field words (terms) are usually defined as monosemantic words, deprived of any expressive meaning. However today, with the increased specialization of all sectors of human life due to technological and scientific progress, the problem of

56

understanding and rendering terminology has to be addressed in somewhat new dimension. The reason for this is that many lexical items acquire different terminological meanings in the context of different sectors or subject fields of human activity. E.g.: yield – доход від цінних паперів, врожайність, продуктивність,

видобуток, осування, потужність, здаватися у полон, пружинити.

Roughly subject field words of any language may be classified into three groups:

general subject field words (known to most educated speakers of the language);

special subject field words (known to all people who work in a particular sector, such as computer science, banking, accounting, agriculture, medicine, etc.

professional jargon and slang (words known to comparatively narrow groups of professionals, often working for particular institutions or companies).

Whatever traditional or electronic dictionaries, as well as computer translation software may be available, the best way for a translator to cope with terminology is to keep personal records, then compile them into glossaries and thus improve personal skills.

Set phrases and idioms are “structurally, lexically and semantically fixed phrases or sentences having the meaning which is not made up by the sum of meanings of their component parts” (Корунець 2001). An important feature of these units is their figurative (connotational) meaning. The difference between the two is that set phrases are often used in oral discourse adding positive or negative assessment to it (coldblooded killing, double standards, гальмуючий фактор, подати на розгляд,

розсипання у вдячності) while idioms are used in cases, when there is a strong need to reinforce argumentation by reference to the popular wisdom, or wisdom of our ancestors or famous people (to cast pearls before swine, to fish in troubled waters,

підкласти свиню, на ладан дихати).

Set phrases due to their frequent occurrence are easier to keep in memory comparing to idioms, some of which are quite rare, outdated or culturally specific. The best way of rendering set phrases and idioms is to choose an absolute equivalent or an analogy, e.g. cold-blooded killing – холоднокровне вбивство, to kill two birds with one stone – убити двох зайців. If no equivalent or analogies can be found, there

57

exists an option of a descriptive translation, e.g. to climb on the band wagon –

приєднатися до руху (групи людей, політичної партії), що має шанс на успіх.

Literature

Бурак А.Л. Translating culture. Перевод и межкультурная коммуникация. Этап 1:

уровень слова / А.Л. Бурак. – М. : «Р.Валент», 2002. – 152 с.

Комиссаров В.Н. Теория перевода (лингвистические аспекты): Учеб. пос. для ин-

тов и ф-тов ин. яз. / В.Н. Комиссаров. − М. : Высш. шк., 1990. − С. 79-93.

Комиссаров В.Н., Коралова А.Л. Практикум по переводу с английского языка на русский: Учеб. пос. для ин-тов и ф-тов ин. яз. − М. : Высш. шк., 1990. − С. 71-97.

Корунець І.В. Теорія і практика перекладу (аспектний переклад): Підручник /

І.В. Корунець. − Вінниця : Нова книга, 2000. − С. 91-198.

Максимов С.Є. Усний двосторонній переклад (англійська та українська мови) /

С.Є. Максимов. – Київ : Видавничий центр КНЛУ, 2002. – С. 39-58.

Hervey, Sandor. Thinking Translation. A Course in Translation Method: French-

English / S. Hervey. − London, NY : Routledge, 1992. − P. 87-114.

ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION

Translating different layers of vocabulary.

Choice of words in creating target text.

What are zero equivalents and why do they exist?

What ways to achieve equivalence on lexico-semantic level do you know?

ВПРАВИ ДЛЯ САМОСТІЙНОГО ОПРАЦЮВАННЯ

Рекомендації щодо вживання перекладацької

транскрипції/транслітерації.

Схема перекладацької транскрипції з української/російської на англійську

мову:

58

Схема перекладацької транскрипції з англійської на українську/російську

мову:

Сполучення літер, як от -ch-, -aw- тощо, передаються згідно правил читання:

-ч-, -о, -оу-.

Вживання перекладацької транскрипції/транслітерації потребує ретельного культурологічного аналізу тексту з метою визначення традиційних форм

компонент змішаного перекладу поряд з калькуванням, семантичним перекладом або перекладацьким коментарем.

ВПРАВА 8: Визначте і запишить перекладацькі відповідності до наданих імен

та назв.

59

A. Eugene Garside Edward Westbury

Sophie Wilkins Aubrey Herbert

Graham Hancock Katharine Woolley

James Dylan Giles G, Stephens

Marion Edmonds William Cathcart

Howard Carter H. J. Plenderleith 78

Б. Tutankhamen Chichen-Itza

Amenemhet Moctezuma Pyramid of Cheops Nebuchadnezzar

Chephren Quetzalcoatl

Mcnelaus Rosetta Stone

Euripides Queen Shub-ad

Eurymedon Xerxes

Corinth Harun al-Rashid

Phidias Nazareth Zeus

B. Vintage Books

Random House of Canada Limited

Dell Publishing Co., Inc.

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Trace Analytical Laboratories, Inc.

Eastman Kodak Company

Symantec Corporation

UNIX System Laboratories

Hitachi, Ltd.

CompuServ, Inc.

Г. The Grand Canyon Wyoming

River Dart Kentucky

Devonshire New Jersey

60