3. Wolfram Willss’ division of ts.

Wolfram Wills (late 80s) – representative of German School of translation

TS division

(related but separate branches)

1. “General Science” of Tr. which evolves tr. tr. theory : a) categorized texts thematically and functionally

2. strictly oriented to text linguistic premises (what is the theme and function of the text)

3. translators have to process “text analytical competence”

4. text : - more tr.-oriented (you feel it as tr.)

• less tr.- oriented (you don’t feel)

2. “ Descriptive Studies” - empirical phenomena, it focuses on “text pragmatic equivalence” or the same set of ideas and concepts. It involves intralingual and interlingual tr.

1. intralingual – (perephrasing the meaning of the original ) e..g “Мандри Гулівера” – for kids and adults (in the same level)

2. interlingual - transferring of the mean into TL. They are stages of the same process (Willss)

3. Applied research – point out particular difficulties and ways of solving certain problems.

• analyzing errors – a frame of reference for an. Errors.

• Structure to accessing quality, norms of evaluating quality/

3. The definition of ts

Translation Studies – a discipline compressing theory, practice, methods, history and didactics of translation/ interpreting.

4. The objectives of ts.

To describe the phenomena of translating and translations as they manifest themselves in the world of our experience (J.S. Holmes)

To establish general principles – by means which these phenomena can be explained and predicted.

The subject of TS

– translation / interpreting as a creative activity related both to language and literature, implying language contact and render the original text (ST) in source, language (SL) by means of the target language (TL) to create a target text.

2) Pragmatic aspects of translation (Комиссаров В.Н. Теория перевода (лингвистические аспекты). Ch. IX)).

В зошиті

3) Translation norms (Комиссаров В.Н. Теория перевода (лингвистические аспекты). Ch. X ).

4) TrSt through history:

1. Four periods of the literature on the theory, practice and history of

translation (G. Steiner. After Babel, 1975)

G. Steiner penodization of history of European translation studies:

I. (Romans -18 century) ampirical analyses, accumulation of knowledge.

II. (19^th century - 2 quarter of the 20 century) first ideas of systematic theoretical realization. What does it mean "to understand the text"?. Hermeneutic motion. Who is a translator?

3. (2 quarter of the 20 century - ?) linguistization of theory machine translation, statistical methods. What is a translation?

4. (2 half of the 20 century- ?) formation of the scholarship "translation studies", interdisciplinarity.

5) The definition of translation /interpreting

Translation - is the transfer of one written language into another written language without changing the meaning, register or nuances of the source language and without additions or omissions.

Interpreting -

Interpreting. Kind of interpreting

There are different types of interpreting:

1. Simultaneous interpreting is a technique used by interpreters at b:.linguai and multilingual conferences where the delegates speak in their own 1. to delegates who speak another 1.

2. Consecutive interpreting takes much longer because the interpreters wait for a gap in the original speech or talk before giving the translation.

3. Liaison interpreting takes place when two people of different mother tonjue are conversing and an interpreter translates into and out of each language as each participant speaks.. It is used at high-level events.

4. Community interpreting is another form of liaison interpreting in multilingual and multiracial societies (police, doctors etc).

6) The functions of translation (articles by O. Cherednychenko, V.Radchuk).

In his article “Functions of translation in the modern world” O. Cherednychenko uses a traditional

classification of translation functions as a foundation of his own division. Thus the scholar adheres to basic distinction between communicative, cognitive, and aesthetic functions. The fourth function on the list is the nation-shaping function which has to do primarily with the Ukrainian language and “the issue of (its − O. M.) preservation in global cultural space” [10, 9]. Professor Cherednychenko does not limit nation-shaping function of translation to the past decades; he voices hope that “translation will continue to perform its protective function in respect of the Ukrainian language” [10, 9]. Identification of nation-shaping function with protective one deserves special attention. As it will be visible further introduction of the novelties and protection of the traditional issues go hand in hand and together add up to what is now celebrated as a nation-shaping function of translation.

1) Communicative function

Written translation has become a channel of literary communication between cultures, the means of the dialogue between civilizations. Translator is a mediator in a bilingual communication – a multiplicity of translations.

2) Cognitive function – aims at transmitting the information to a recipient and corsequently at extending the recipient’s back-ground knowledge.

3) Developing function. Translation stimulates the development of gender-stylistic diversity of the TL. The history of translation witnessed how genre varieties of SL were gradually entering the TL. Simultaneously with assimilating new genres through translation, TL runs the process of renovating already existing genres.

4) Nation-shaping function

- Nation history of XIX-XX c. including undoubtedly proves that the translation from the world (culture) literature was a powerful means of keeping and developing the native language.

- As a mediator in the interlingual and intercultural communication, translation acts as s guard and a promoter of its own language and culture.

11) The medieval translations: (vertical vs horizontal approach).

The medieval translations – vertical – translation into vernacular from a SL that had a special prestige (as Latin) or as – horizontal – where both Sl and TL had similar value (as Norman – French into English)

Horizontal approach – unlimited freedom of treating the original (borrowing, adaptations, imitations).

Vertical translation – mostly word for word technique because the source was highly estimated and it seemed a sin to reinterpret it.

12) The RENAISSANCE

• Etienne Dolet (1509-46) “How to Translate Well from one Language into Another” (1540): Five principles for the translator (…enumerate…).

1. the translator must fully understand the sense and meaning of the original author, although he is at liberty to clarity obscurities.

2. The translator should have a perfect knowledge of both SL and TL.

3. The translator should avoid word-for-word renderings

4. The translator should use forms speech in common use.

5. The translator should choose and order words appropriately to produce the correct tone.

• The major characteristic of the period

13) The XVII c.

• John Dryden (1631-1700) “Preface to Ovid's Epistles” (1680): Three basic types of translation (…enumerate…).

1. metaphrase: or turning an author word by word, and like by line, from the language into another (literary translation)

2. paraphrase: or translation with latitude (Cirecon - sense for sense translation)

3. imitation where the translator can abandon the text of the original as he sees fit.

• the translator must be poet, to translate poetry.

• master of both language.

• Must understand both characteristics and “spirit” of the original author.

14) The XVIII c.

• Alexander Fraser Tytler The Principles of Translation (1791): (…enumerate…)

Communication is possible for him. He covers difference between language and culture.

1. the translator should give a complete transcript of idea of the original work.

2. the style and manner of writing should be of the same character that of the original.

3. the translator should have all the case of the original composition.

The translator must try to adopt to the author – the idea of XVIIIc.

15) Romanticism

• F. Schleiermacher (1768-1834) (…contribution…)

• W. Humboldt Introduction to his translation of "Agamemnon“ (1816): Three types of translation (…enumerate…)

1. translation with the flavour of foreign (the original realias are recreated)

2. translation with the flovour of foreignness (original syntactic patters are copied out)

3. translation deprived of all formal and semantic features, which are peculiar to the ST.

• Johan Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832) “Translations” (1819): Three kinds of translation (…enumerate…).

1. the first kind acquaints us with foreign countries our own terms. A plain prose translation is best for purpose. (matter are meaning and subject)

2. the second kind, is that of appropriation though substitution and reproduction, where the translator absorbs the sense of a foreign work but represents it as his own in his own terms – imitation, adaptations.

3. The third kind, is one which aims for perfect identify between the SL and TL text. In other words: the translation should approximate as close as possible to the external form of the original work.

16) The Victorians

• Major characteristic of the period

- is a demand to convey the remoteness of the original in time and place. Some Victorians translators made their translations deliberately archaic and obscure, thus vying the remoteness of the ST in time and place.

• Dante Gabriel Rossetti (1828-82)

- a translator is subservient to the forms and language of the original. Original text received as beauty, art.

• Matthew Arnold (1822-68)

- a translator must focus on the SL text primarily and must serve that text with complete commitment. The TL reader must be brought to the SL text through the mean of the translation.

• Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (1807-81)

- a translator is relegated to the position of a technician, neither poet nor commentator, with a clearly defined but severely limited task.

• Edward Fitzgerald (1809-63)

A text must live at all costs: “It is better to have a live sparrow than a stuffed eagle”. The aim is to bring a version of the SL text into TL culture as a living entity.

17) Translation shifts are small linguistic changes occurring in translation of ST to TT.

18) Vinay and Darbelnet: classical taxonomy of linguistic changes in translation.

19) Catford uses the term ‘translation shift’ in his linguistic approach to translation.

20) Theoretical work by Czech scholars (Levý, Popovic and Miko). Czech writing on translation shifts.

21) Katharina Reiss’s early work on text type (equivalence at text level, linking language functions to text types and translation strategy);

22) Justa Holz-Mänttäri’s theory of translational action;

23) Hans J. Vermeer’s skopos theory;

24) Christiane Nord’s translation-oriented text analysis.

25) Polysystem Theory

26) Toury and descriptive translation studies (The concept of norms of translation behaviour)

Gideon Toury was the second member of Polysystem School. His work may be divided into two periods: 1972-1976 – a comprehensive sociological study of the cultural conditions affecting the tr. of foreign language novels into Hebrew (“Tr. Norms and Literary tr. into Hebrew” (1977)); and second 1975-1980 (“The History of Literature Tr. into Hebrew”). He analyzed translations into Hebrew done from 1930 till 1945 and generated the numbers of books, translators, authors, etc to discover the actual decisions made during the translation process, and a system of rules (linguistic, literary, sociological) governing the tr. in the given polysystem. He said that non translation is entirely acceptable to target culture because it will always bring new info and forms defamiliarizing that system. And non tr. is adequate because the cultural norms will cause shifts from the ST. He singles out three norms of tr.: 1. Preliminary (norms that are established in target culture, depends on the authors, schools, genres preferred by target culture); 2. Initial (individual translator’s choice to the whole text – the way he is going to translate it); 3. Operational (the actual decision translator makes during translation process).

27) 'Laws' of translation (The law of growing standardization. The law of interference).

Toury hopes that the cumulative identification of norms in descriptive

studies will enable the formulation of probabilistic 'laws' of translation

and thence of 'universals of translation'. The tentative laws he proposes are:

1 The law of growing standardization (pp. 267-74), which states that 'in

translation, textual relations obtaining in the original are often modified,

sometimes to the point of being totally ignored, in favour of [more]

habitual options offered by a target repertoire' (p. 268). This refers to the

! disruption of the ST patterns in translation and the selection of linguistic

options that are more common in the TL. Thus, for example,

there will a tendency towards a general standardization and loss of variation

in style in the TT, or at least an accommodation to target culture

models. This is especially the case if, as commonly occurs, translation

assumes a weak and peripheral position in the target system.

2 The law of interference (1995: 274-9), which sees interference from ST

to TT as 'a kind of default'. Interference refers to ST linguistic features

(mainly lexical and syntactical patterning) being copied in the TT, either

'negatively' (because they create non-normal TT patterns) or 'positively'

(the existence of features in the ST that will not be non-normal in the TT

makes them more likely to be used by the translator). Toury (p. 278)

considers tolerance of interference to depend on sociocultural factors

and the prestige of the different literary systems: there is greater tolerance

when translating from a prestigious language or culture, especially

if the target language or culture is 'minor'. These laws are further

discussed in section 7.2.4 below.

28) Toury's model in action Toury (1995) presents a series of case studies, including an 'exemplary' study

of conjoint phrases in Hebrew TTs. Conjoint phrases or binomials are pairs

of near-synonyms that function together as a single unit. Examples Toury

gives from English are able and talented and law and order; and, from German,

nie und nimmer. He discusses (pp. 103-4) the significance of such phrases in

Hebrew literature, indicating that their use is prevalent in old written Hebrew

texts from the Bible onwards and in Hebrew texts from the end of the

eighteenth century onwards, when the language was struggling to adapt to

modern writing and was under the influence of imported literary models.

However, the preference for conjoint phrases has declined over the past fifty

years, now that Hebrew is a more confident and central literature. Nevertheless,

Toury (p. 105) suggests that the number of such phrases in Hebrew

translations tends to be higher than in Hebrew STs and that translations also

contain more newly coined or 'free' combinations (rather than fixed

phrases). He supports this with examples from Hebrew translations of children's

literature, of Goethe and of a story by Heinrich Ball (Ansichten eines

Clownes). In the latter case, the translator's very frequent use of conjoint

phrases to translate single lexical items in German produces a TT that is

almost 30 per cent longer than the ST. The effect, in a translation published

in 197 1, is also to make the Hebrew seem very dated.

From these findings, Toury puts forward a possible generalization to be

tested in future studies across languages and cultures. The claim (p. 11 1) is

that frequent use of conjoint phrases, particularly in place of single lexical

items in the ST, 'may represent a universal of translation into systems which

are young, or otherwise "weak" '. The consideration of translated literature as

part of a hierarchical system shows the way DTS interlinks with polysystem

theory.

The final stage of Toury's model is the application of the findings. An

example is his own translation of Mark Twain's Connecticut Yankee in King

Arthur's Court, where Toury says he has deliberately used frequent conjoint

phrases in Hebrew in order to create 'a parodistic air of "stylistic archaism"'

29) Chesterman’s translation norms (Product or expectancy norms. Professional norms).

Chesterman himself (pp. 64-70) proposes another set of norms, covering

the area of Toury's initial and operational norms (see figure 7.3 above). These

are (1) product or expectancy norms and (2) process or professional norms:

1 Product or expectancy norms 'are established by the expectations of

readers of a translation (of a given type) concerning what a translation

(of this type) should be like' (p. 64). Factors governing these norms

include the preJominant translation tradition in the target culture, the

discourse conventions of the similar TL genre, and economic and ideological

considerations. Chesterman makes two important points ahout

these norms:

(a) Expectancy norms allow evaluative judgements about translations

OTHER MODELS OF DESCRIPTIVE TRANSLATION STUDIES

2 Professional norms 'regulate the translation process itself' (p. 67). They

are subordinate to and determined by expectancy norms. Chesterman

proposes three kinds of professional norm:

since readers have a notion of what is an 'appropriate' or 'accept-

(a) The accountability norm (p. 68): This is an ethical norm, dealing

with professional standards of integrity and thoroughness. The

translator will accept responsibility for the work produced for the

commissioner and reader.

(b) The communication norm (p. 69): This is a social norm. The

translator, the communication 'expert', works to ensure maximum

communication between the parties (compare Holz-Manttari's

model of translational action in chapter 5).

(c) The 'relation' norm (pp. 69-70): This is a linguistic norm which

deals with the relation between ST and TT. Again, in terms similar

to those discussed in chapter 5, Chesterman rejects narrow equivalence

relations and sees the appropriate relation being judged by the

translator 'according to text-type, the wishes of the commissioner,

the intentions of the original writer, and the assumed needs of the

prospective readers' (p. 69).

able' translation of the specific text variety and will approve of a

translator who conforms to these expectations (p. 65).

(b) Expectancy norms are sometimes 'validated by a norm-authority of

some kind' (p. 66). For example, a teacher, literary critic and publisher's

reader can confirm the prevalent norm by encouraging trans-

These professional norms are validated partly by norm authorities such as

other professionals and professional bodies and partly by their very existence

(p. 70). They include new areas not covered by Toury, and therefore they

may be useful in the overall description of the translation process and

product.

30) The Manipulation School.

In 1985 the book entitled “The Manipulation of Literature” was published. Its authors were Theo Hermans, Jose Lambert and Henrik von Gorp. The aim of it was to show translators how to manipulate the ST to inform and conform to the existing cultural constrains. It is an approach to literary tr. that is descriptive, target-oriented, functional and systemic; with the interest focused on the norms and constraints that govern the production and reception of tr.

Much discussion has taken place reevaluating the very definition of what tr. text is. The group has found that it is sometimes “hide” within a foreign model. In daily use people occasionally find themselves using translation without being aware of it Borderline cases such as pseudo-translations (tr-s when no original exists): ant translations via an intervening language (Secondary tr.), film adaptations, versions, imitations and false tr-s, non-translation within tr-n (proper names). The translational relationships between the ST and TT are being replaced by networks of relationships and concepts of intertextuality.

Translation scholars in English and America like Bassnett, Levefere (who moved to America in early 80s) David Lloyd focus on the analysis of the influence of extraliterary upon literary. In 1981 in “Beyond the Process: Literary translation in Literature and Literary Theory”, Lefevere argues that literary systems do not occur in vacuum but within the ideological milieu of an era, i.e. the pressure of social and historical life upon the tr-or and his strategies for influencing the ideological milieu. In order to show how the ideological component limits literary discourse, he introduces the concept of “refracted text”. Abridged and edited versions of classics for children and TV might be characterized as the most obvious forms of refraction. Lefevere defines and adds the concept of “patronage” to his model in order to better investigate such ideological pressures. Patrons can be individuals such as Medicis and Louis XIV; groups, such as religious bodies or a political parties; or institutions, such as publishing firms and school systems.

31) Ivan FRANKO as a Translator Translation Studies Scholar.

The history of the world culture knows few such people with versatile interests in life as Ivan Franko. His creative legacy is immense, for he was .a great writer, poet, playwright, as well as the founder of the Ukrainian literary criticism. He did a lot in the realm of translation studies.

In numerous articles, he emphasized the importance of introducing a wide readership to the most outstanding examples of the world literature, specified that each educated people should have the best pieces of art and science among their cultural achievements. Rendering foreign poetry, poetry of different times and peoples in the native language enriches the soul of the whole nation, endowing it with such forms and expressions of feelings as it has never had before. It builds the bridge of understanding and compassion between us and remote peoples and generations.

I.Franko started his activity .as a translation scholar yet when he attended senior classes in the gymnasium. He was translating till the last day of his life, regarding translation as a powerful social-political means of educating people, expanding the outlook of the readers and breaking the walls of national limitations. He treated translation as a means of improving one's own skills. The translated works and their originals served I.Franko as a basis for the linguistic, and literary research. He constantly stressed the necessity of choosing such literary pieces for translation which would facilitate fighting the wrong in the society and evoke the good at least in younger generations.

I.FRANKO translated works of different genres, different literatures and different epochs. Almost half of his translations were made from Slavonic languages: Bulgarian, Serbian folk songs, A. Pushkin, M. Lermontov, N. Nekrasov, A. Mickiewicz, J. Neruda. He translated English poetry (W. Shakespeare, G. Byron, P.B. Shelley, Th. Moore), Scottish (R. Bums), German (J.W. Goethe, F". Schiller, H, Lessing,H. Heine), French (V. Hugo), Latin (Horace, Ovid), Old Greek (Homer, Sappho, Alcaeus, Xenophon, Sophocles), Italian (Dante) and others. I.FRANKO rendered into Ukrainian abstracts of the Nibelungenlied (The Nibelungs' Song). He contributed greatly to the creation of the Old Greek, Old Arabic, Old Indian and Old Roman Poetry Anthology; translated Old Scottish, Old Icelandic and Old Norwegian ballads, Old Chinese, Portuguese and Albanian folk songs, Spanish romances and Romanian folk legends, etc. He viewed the folk legacy of different .peoples not only as a sample of literary creativity but as a repository of the deep meaning, significant ethical and social problems which lie tried to emphasize in his translations.

Translating from various genres, languages and epochs, I.FRANKO enriched Ukrainian with new lexical and idiomatic potentials, contributed a lot to the theory and practice of translation. I.FRANKO translated not only literary but also scientific texts. He also translated a lot from Ukrainian. Hence, twenty Shevchenko's verses ("Caucuses", "Testament", "Beside the hut the cherries are in bloom", abstracts from the poem "Maria"), as well as plenty of Ukrainian folk songs found their new life in the German language. Such two-ways translation with Ukrainian being the source and the target language allowed him to master the depth and peculiarities of the translator's art most profoundly and brought him to innovation conclusions. I.FRANKO for the first time in the history of Ukrainian translation deeply and multilaterally developed the key problems of the artistic translation, elaborated a clear theoretical system. The principles of translation are not neutral, they are pre-defined by the viewpoint and social position of the translator.

I.Franko was the author of more than 50 articles in different languages about Shevchenko's creativity. I.Franko specified that the simplicity of Shevchenko's verses, picturesqueness and ease attract a translator but very often pose immense, sometimes unsurpassable, difficulties in translation. In the article Shevchenko in German clothes, I.FRANKO argues that the translation of Shevchenko into non-Slavonic languages cannot absolutely faithfully render the content and form of the original, .that is why something must be sacrificed.

The theoretical literature on translation often disregarded the legacy of I.Franko due to the "obsolete", "dialectal" language of his translations. However, no one of these paid attention to the hard work I.Franko did on his language polishing it all the time as well as to the richness of his lexis and flexibility of his syntax. As far as dialectal words and stresses are concerned, a number of other recognized writers (Panas Mymyi, Vassyl Stefanyk) used quite a few words, expressions and stresses which do hot coincide with the modern literary norm. I.Franko was also accused of referring to ancient times, to the works which had already had their day. I.Franko himself argued that real art never gets old. Working on the translations I.Franko always relied on profound knowledge in culture and history of different peoples and his personal historico-literary research. I.Franko mostly provided his and other translations with historical and bibliographical commentaries, sometimes with profound insights into the epoch of the author and literary-public value of the work. His reviews often turned into serious theoretical investigation.

I.Franko studied the history of the Ukrainian translations of the works of A.Mickiewicz in his article "Adam Mickiewicz in the Ukrainian literature", of W.Shakespeare in his prefaces and commentaries to the Ukrainian translations. He initiated the study of the Germanphone Shevchenkiana in "Shevchenko in German Clothes", "Shevchenko in German". He studied the translation legacy of S. Rudankskyi, L. Borovykovskyi, M. Starytskyi, A. Krymskyi, P. Kulish, O. Makovei, P. Nishchynskyi and others. As in his times the science of translation was only at the rise, the scholar had to begin mostly with reviews and started just with ABC like that the translator should well know both languages. The higher must the achievements of I.Franko be evaluated. It was I.Franko who just voiced the idea, which became extremely popular in the later studies: it is very difficult to translate from a cognate language, especially a closely cognate language. Ukrainian – Polish: stresses; Ukrainian – Russian: word length.

Analyzing the source text as a scholar, I.FRANKO then produced it in the TL as a poet. While criticizing this or other interpretation, he at the same time pointed to how it would be better to reproduce the source idea. Making a linguostylistic analysis of the translations of the others, I.Franko often provided the readers with his own verbal and poetic translations. Thus by way of contrasting the translation with the source text and separate translations with each other, I.Franko initiated the method of the linguostylistic analysis of translation, for the first time in the Ukrainian literary science he suggested that the translation be treated integrally in literary, linguistic, linguostylistic, psychological and aesthetic aspects.

The problem of I.FRANKO as translation studies scholar is closely related to the problem of I.FRANKO as the editor of translations. Thus, M.Azhniuk studying the manuscript of Kulish's translation of W.Shakespeare's Hamlet came to the conclusion that I.FRANKO introduced above 800 corrections into the text.

The first scholarly research of I.FRANKO in the field of translations makes up a preface to his translation of Faust (1880). There he specifies that he tried to make it understandable to the society. His main stress lay on clarity of the dialogues avoiding dialectal vocabulary unless it was necessary to render the corresponding colouring in the original, if also explained, his usage of now obsolete forms, which were frowned on by the contemporaries.

1. Demands to rendering versified original

2. The main principles of I.FRANKO's theory of translation.

The main principles of I.FRANKO's theory of translation:

1. the translator bears responsibility to the society;

2. the task of a translation is to maximum precisely render the original by means of the TL so that it could replace the original to the target reader;

3. the translation should reflect all aspects of the original: content, style, form, with content prevailing;

4. the translator should be knowledgeable in the SL and TL and should study the original in its relation to the author's creativity, historical epoch, life of the people (scholarly approach);

5. poetic works can be translated only by poets;

6. translations must be done only from the original (with few exceptions);

7. precision of the translation depends not on conveying the words but on conveying the spirit;

8. the language of the translation must comply with the literary norms;

9. the translator should faithfully reproduce the nationally-biased features of the original in the content, style and form;

10. the translator should always have in mind the peculiarities of the wide readership (notes, explanations, etc.)

3. “Каменярі. Український текст і польський переклад. Дещо про штуку перекладання”

His article Каменярі. Український текст і польський переклад. Дещо про штуку перекладання was written in May, 1911 and still remains a brilliant example of the linguostylistic analysis of translation. It is very interesting, because it I.Franko-the author of the original provided a critical review of the translation done by Sydir Tverdokhlib into Polish. In this article he already summed up the demands to the translator. I.FRANKO stressed that a translator should always remember the didactic power and educational value of the translated literature.

32) Mykola Zerov as a translator and TS scholar. (“У справі віршованого перекладу”).

33) Mykola Lukash as a translator and TS scholar.

34) Hryhoriy Kochur as a translator and TS scholar.

35) Grammatical transformations (4 main types).

There are 4 main types of grammatical transformation:

1) rearragment; (is the change in structural partern of the utterance).

2) substitution (replacement); (is transference of an idea expressed by a definite grammatical category of the SL by a different grammatical category of the TL).

3) addition (supplemention); (implies supplementing some grammatical category in the TL version to adequately render the meaning of the SL utterance).

4) omission (the leaving out some grammatical category in the TL version as superfhuous).

36) Structural and connotative realia

The ways of rendering English Articles; The Category of Gender; the Category of Number; The Tense System; the Category of Aspect; the Category of Voice; the Category of Modality; Translation of Verbals; Translation of Complexes with Verbals (Complex Object, Complex Subject, For-To-Infinitive construction, Absolute Constructions, Predicative Constructions with the Gerund.

Realia – word or word-combination name objects characteristics of life, culture, social and historical development of one nation and alien to another.

Structural and connotative realia – is a language unit that reflects structural and connotative peculiarities of the SL and does not have direct equivalence in the TL. Usually they are loaded with secondary information and powerful expressiveness. (R.P.Zorivchak).

Deep structure of the tence determise its semantic interpretation;

While a surface structure is the phonetic representation of the same sentence.

The most common deep structural clases:

1. relations between the doer and the action – a student read;

2. the action and the object of the action – reads a book;

3. the action and the addressee – gave to his friend

4. the attributive.

37) Main types of semantic correspondences (full correspondence; partial correspondence; absence of correspondence).

38) Main types of lexical transformations (specialization; generalization;sense development; antonymous translation; compensation; addition; omission);

39) The ways f translating lexical units which have no equivalents in the TL (transcription; transliteration; claque translation [full calque, partial calque. Referent-image calque and connotative image calque]; translation by analogue; descriptive translation)

The ways of translation lexical units which have no equivalence in the TL:

a) transliteration is rendering the spelling of a SL word with TL letters, e.g.

Waterloo – Ватерлоо

Майдан – Maydan

Transliterated words add a specific national coloring to the translation.

b) transcription is rendering the sound form of a word with letters of the TL.

Wilde – Уайльд; Oates – Оутс etc.

c) modeling words and word-combinations after the SL pattern (calque). Compound words are thus divided into their constituent parts and translated morpheme-by-morpheme, e.g.: sky-scraper – хмарочос. Word combinations are translated word-for-word, e.g.: Будинок Культури – House of Culture.

We differentiate full and partial calques. The samples above are full calques (the parts of the words or word combinations are literary translated). Partial calques (mixed or modified) which suggest partial translation combined with constricting the models from the TL material or, at least by TL sample.

Р.П. Зорівчак introduced the notions and terms of referent-image calque (literal translation of the first semantic layer – калькування зовнішньої маніфестації словесного образу) and connotative image calque (a motivated reproduction of certain connotative meanings of some constructions (the second semantic layer). Calque is a specific type of loan when each component of the SL structural-semantic models of SL is recreated by the SL language material.

Connotative image calque (смислово-образна калька) Sometimes the translation may be built with the use of different image which, however, possesses similar connotations and, thus equivalently influences the emotions of the target readership, For translation the primary importance is functional and communicative equivalence and secondary – lexical, grammatical and syntactical equivalence.

d) translation by analogues (метод уподібення) implies finding in the TL lexical units that are close in meaning to the SL lexical units that have no equivalents in the TL (drugstore - аптека; afternoon – вечір). Analogues are often used in translating words denoting social and political institution, e.g.: Міська рада – Municipal Council; Міський голова – Mayor; путівка – accommodation.

In artistic translation analogues are often used to render the meaning of lexical units denoting things or phenomena unknown to the users of the TL. E.g.:

e) descriptive translation is very often used in rendering the meaning of lexical units that have no equivalents in the TL however the translation demands high level of explicitness. It suggests the substitution of the SL lexeme by the TL word combination that explicates its meaning, in other words presents more or less full explanation or definition of the original meaning by means of the TL. Descriptive paraphrase preserves in translation both connotative and denotative semantics of the original lexical unit. By means of explication it is possible to recreate the meaning of any lexeme that does not have its equivalent in the Target Lexicon:

conservationist – прихильник охорони довкілля;

whistle-stop speech – виступи кандидата у ході передвиборчої агітаційної поїздки;

landslide – перемога на виборах із великою перевагою голосів;

40) Realia as a means of rendering national colouring. (Зорівчак Р.П. Реалія і переклад (на матеріалі англомовних перекладів української прози). –Львів: Вид-во при Львів. ун-ті, 1989. – 216 с.)

1. Realia vs. Internationalisms, Neologisms, Toponyms and Anthroponyms, Dialectal vocabulary, Terms.

Realia – word or word-combination name objects characteristics of life, culture, social and historical development of one nation and alien to another. We have to differentiate realia from International words, neologisms, toponyms and antroponyms, dialectal vocabulary and terms.

2. Realia proper – Historical realia; obvious realia – latent realia

There are such realias: realia proper (still existing nowadays) and historical realia (objects, which referents had died, and word enter a historical vocabulary).

3. The ways of rendering realia.

Ways of rendering: 1. Transcription (to spell the SL word by phonemes of TL); 2. Hyperonimic renomination (lexical transformation when the SL hyponym is substituted by TL hyperonym); 3. Descriptive paraphrase (the creation of a descriptive eq.); 4. Combined renomination (mixture of transcription and descriptive paraphrase (usually in footnotes)); 5. Loan tr. (rendering of structural-semantic model in TT component-for-component); 6. Contextual interpretation; 7. Situational eq., 8. Zero eq.

41) Idioms: six main methods of translating. (Зорівчак Р.П. Фразеологічна одиниця як перекладознавча категорія (На матеріалі перекладів творів української літератури англійською мовою). – Львів: Вид-во при Львів. ун-ті, 1983. – 175 с.)

17