Abstract: work on the topic “Grammatical transformations in translation. Grammatical transformations
Material prepared by O. A. Eliseeva
Translation from one language to another is impossible without grammatical transformations. Grammatical transformations are, first of all, a restructuring of a sentence (a change in its structure) and all kinds of replacements - both syntactic and morphological. Grammatical transformations are determined for various reasons- both purely grammatical and lexical in nature, although the main role is played by grammatical factors, i.e. differences in the structure of languages.
When comparing the grammatical categories and forms of the English and Russian languages, the following phenomena are usually discovered: 1) the absence of one or another category in one of the languages; 2) partial match; 3) complete coincidence. The need for grammatical transformations naturally arises only in the first and second cases. In Russian, compared to English, there are no grammatical categories such as articles or gerunds, as well as infinitive and participial complexes and absolute nominative construction. Partial coincidence or discrepancy in the meaning and use of corresponding forms and constructions also requires grammatical transformations. This may include such phenomena as partial discrepancy in the category of number, partial discrepancy in the forms of the passive construction, incomplete coincidence of the forms of the infinitive and participle, some differences in the expression of modality, etc.
First of all, we will focus on the article, because the article (both definite and indefinite), despite its extremely abstract meaning, often requires semantic expression in translation. As is known, both articles have pronominal origin: the definite article comes from the demonstrative pronoun, and the indefinite article from the indefinite pronoun, which goes back to the numeral one. These original meanings of articles sometimes appear in their modern usage. In such cases they lexical meaning must be conveyed in translation, otherwise the Russian sentence would be incomplete and inaccurate, since the denotative meaning of articles is semantically an integral part of the entire semantic content of the sentence. Its historical connection with the numeral one is very clear in the following example:
Yet H. G. (Wells) had not an enemy on earth. (G.B. Shaw) However, Herbert did not have a single enemy in the world.
The meaning of the definite article also often requires translation, especially when it comes before a numeral.
Only in the fields where talent cannot be hidden have the young conquered - the theatre, music, football, computers, physics, fashion. (“Daily Mail”) Young people are nominated only in cases where natural talent cannot be hidden.
From all the above translations, it is clear that ignoring the lexical and sometimes grammatical meaning of the article during translation would lead to an incomplete or inaccurate transfer of content.
In Russian there are no infinitive complexes that are so common in English. Let us consider only the translation of the infinitive complex with the preposition for.
On its return journey the spacecraft must be accelerated to some 25,000 m.p.h. for it to enter the earth’s orbit. (“The Times”) Upon return, the spacecraft's speed must be increased to approximately 25,000 miles per hour to enable it to enter Earth orbit.
In this case, the infinitive complex is translated by a subordinate clause of the goal.
However, very often grammatical transformations are also necessary when transmitting the corresponding forms and constructions due to some discrepancies in their meaning and use. Such discrepancies are observed, for example, in the use of the category of number.
United Nations Secretary General U.Thant has strongly criticized South Africa, Rhodesia and Portugal for their policies in Africa. (“Morning Star”) Secretary General UN W. Tant sharply criticized South Africa, Rhodesia and Portugal for the policies they pursued in Africa.
The noun “politics” does not have a plural form, because the word “politicians” is the plural form of the noun “politician” - a political figure.
As for uncountable nouns, especially those that express abstract concepts, the number of discrepancies may be greater. For example: ink - ink, money - money, watch - hours, news - news, and vice versa: to keep the minutes - keep minutes, to live in the suburbs - live in the suburbs, on the outskirts - on the outskirts, etc.
A discrepancy is also found in some cases of using the infinitive. The Russian infinitive does not have a perfect or continuous form.
Thus, all the phenomena considered - the absence of an appropriate form, partial coincidence, differences in the nature and use of the form - cause the need for grammatical transformations during translation.
Article transfer
In some cases, the indefinite and definite articles require the transfer of their meanings in translation. Let's look at a few examples:
A. The indefinite article is used:
1. in the classifying function:
The only sensible solution in the Middle East is a peace which would withdraw Israeli troops. The only reasonable solution to the Middle East issue is a peace that would ensure the withdrawal of Israeli troops.
It is commonly stated that a government should resign if defeated on a major issue in the House of Commons which has been made one of confidence. (The Times) It is generally argued that the government must resign if it is defeated in the House of Commons on any serious issue which the opposition regards as a question of confidence in the government.
In this case, the indefinite article approaches in its meaning the pronoun some - some.
2. before names of people and place names:
Do not appeal to the great mass of Americans who are middle-of-the-roaders people to reject the far-right policies of a Barry Goldwater. He calls on moderate Americans, who make up a significant number, to reject the far-right political agenda of figures like Barry Goldwater.
Not a Kennedy. He's from the Kennedy family.
Was not introduced to a Mr Black. He was introduced to a certain Black.
B. the definite article is used:
1. before the person’s name:
The Richard who appeared in More’s account was a man highly-strung and capable of both great evil and great suffering. (The) Richard whom Moore portrayed in his study was a man under nervous tension and capable of great evil and great suffering in equal measure.
2. before the name of the country or city:
England is gray industrial cities-Leeds and Bradford, Newcastle and Birmingham. That's the England that really counts. England is a gray industrial city - Leeds and Bradford, Newcastle and Birmingham. This is true England.
Rearrangements
The reason for the change in word order is the “communicative division of the sentence.”
Danger of a coup by reactionary forces in the country to install “dictatorship of terror” increased yesterday following intensification of difficulties inside the Armed Forces Movement. Yesterday in the country, due to growing difficulties in the ranks of the Armed Forces Movement, the danger of a coup by reactionary forces with the aim of establishing a “dictatorship of terror” increased.
Translation English sentences required transformation of the sentence structure to achieve the most accurate match.
In some cases, a change in word order during translation is determined by the degree of freedom of semantic compatibility in both languages, as well as compression inherent in the English language.
Thus, in the title White fear behind US violence, the combination white fear cannot be translated into Russian as “white fear”. The structure of the Russian sentence should be different and the translation could be as follows: Violence in the USA is caused by the fear of whites. White fear is what causes violence in the US, etc.
When translating the following sentence, not only the restructuring of the sentence is required, but also a number of substitutions.
United States and Chinese negotiators held the fifth session of their talks on the problem of civilian repatriation at U.N. headquarters at Geneva today. (“Daily Worker”) The fifth meeting between US and Chinese officials on the issue of civilian repatriation took place today at UN headquarters.
In addition to the restructuring of the sentence - moving the time and place circumstances to the beginning of the sentence, rearranging the predicate and replacing the subject and object - a number of other replacements were required, both grammatical and lexical. Since the simple verb to negotiate in Russian corresponds to a stable combination - “introduce negotiations”, naturally, there is no derived noun denoting an agent of action. Therefore, the noun negotiator is translated using a lexical replacement - “representatives”. The English predicate held is expressed by a transitive verb with a direct object, and the subject is the agent of the action. In the Russian translation the predicate is expressed reflexive verb and the subject is no longer the agent of the action - “a meeting took place.” The adjectives Chinese, civilian and, accordingly, the definitions United States and United nations are translated as nouns in the genitive case due to different compatibility in English and Russian: “representatives of the United States and China, UN headquarters, repatriation of civilians.”
It should be noted that during the translation we also had to resort to omitting their talks and adding “civilians”.
Substitutions
a) Replacement of word forms
Changing numbers for nouns: War Atrocity on Peace Conference Eve. Atrocities (of the interventionists) on the eve of the peace conference. Poor Nations Losing Talent to the Rich. Specialists are leaving less developed countries for more developed ones.
b) Parts of speech substitutions
It is quite common to replace an adjective (most often derived from a geographical name) with a noun: Greek prosperity was followed by a slump. Greece's economic prosperity was followed by a crisis.
Often you have to translate a noun into a verb, an adjective into an adverb, or an adverb into an adjective, an adjective into a noun, etc. For example: The Times yesterday warned editorially... Yesterday, in its editorial, the Times newspaper warned...
In translation, the adverb editorially is expressed as a noun with an adjective.
Replacement of parts of speech during translation can also be caused by the absence of a corresponding adjective. For example: An attempted overthrow of Ethiopia. Attempted coup in Ethiopia.
c) Replacements of sentence members: At the end of Word War I, the big monopolies held the United States within their grasp more firmly than ever, both industrially and politically. By the end of the First World War, the large US monopolists had achieved unprecedented power over both industry and political life countries.
The replacement in this case is due to the lack of a corresponding adverb in the Russian language.
Division of sentences during translation
The use of external division when conveying an absolute construction with the preposition with can be seen in the following example:
The old capitalists and bureaucratic managements remaind the directors and managers of the new nationalized industries, with a few right-wing trade-union officials thrown in for luck. Old owners and administrative management of directors and managers of new nationalized enterprises. In addition, several right-wing union officials were added.
Combining sentences during translation:
Election officials are elected on a bipartisan basis. They can verify voters' eligibility to vote and inspect ballots to prevent fraud. Bipartisan selection of poll watchers and their right to challenge voters and their voters are designed to prevent ballot-box stuffing.
As can be seen from this example, combining two sentences into one not only allows you to shorten the text, but also greatly facilitates its perception.
INTRODUCTION
1.1 About the concept of “translation”
1.3 Emotional Continuous
1.4 Past Continuous
1.5 Future Continuous
1.6 Perfect Continuous forms
2.2 Past Continuous
2.4 Perfect Continuous forms
Theoretical sources
Lexicographical sources
Text material
continuous translation English time
INTRODUCTION
Translation is one of the oldest human activities. The difference in languages prompted people to undertake this difficult, but much-needed work, which served and continues to serve the purposes of communication and exchange of spiritual values between peoples. Therefore, it is not surprising that all emerging research in the field of translation studies is relevant and does not lose interest among readers.
Therefore, it is not surprising that the topic of my course work was the use of the Continuous form and the possibility of translating it into Russian. This topic is not accidental, because... There has always been and continues to be the problem of translating grammatical forms that do not have equivalents in the target language. In addition, I think it is important for many English language learners. Indeed, during the learning process, many of us have more than once encountered the following problem: “how to translate this or that sentence from English into Russian and vice versa, especially when we had to use constructions that are unusual for the language or simply non-existent.” To know for sure whether the use of a particular form is acceptable in each specific case, you simply need to know all the cases of its use by native speakers.
That. the purpose of my course work is to study the Continuous form, and the tasks can be defined as follows:
1. Consideration of general cases of use of the Continuous form: both established and not fully established in the language.
2. Study of translation methods related to differences in the grammar of English and Russian languages.
3. Studying the problem of translating the Continuous (Progressive) form, which has no analogues in the Russian language.
First of all, let us consider the views of various researchers on this issue. Major differences in views on the use of the Progressive form cannot be noted; For the most part, the authors identify identical functions, which can vary only in certain aspects without causing fundamental disagreement. It can also be emphasized that some authors pay attention to new uses of this form, but they are not numerous, since although the language is developing, it is not so fast.
In my work, I was based both on the research of Soviet linguists of the 60s - 80s, and on more recent works of the 90s - 2000s. In addition, I used information from the Internet. The research of Soviet linguists was presented in textbooks on theoretical grammar of the English language and in works devoted to translation. The main sources include the works of Ivanova I.P., Barkhudarov L.S., and others. On the Internet, you can find mainly sites on this topic distance learning With practical exercises and a small number of pages devoted to the rules for using the Continuous form. I was personally interested in the electronic version of the textbook “A University Grammar of English by Randolph Quirk and Sidney Greenbaum. Longman Group: Essex, England. 1993. (46-47). Used with permission. Understanding English Grammar by Martha Kolln. 4th Edition. MacMillan Publishing Company: New York. 1994. (89-90)". This page is presented in English, its email address is indicated in the list of references. We will need these sources to note the general rules for using the Continuous form. In addition, I turned to G. A. Weichman’s book “New in English Grammar”, where he talks about special cases of using the Continuous form or about those already accepted and entrenched in the language norm in Lately. For translation issues, I used the books of V.S. Vinogradov, T.A. Kazakova, A.V. Fedorov. and other authors.
In the practical part of my course work, I analyze the meanings in which the Continuous form is used, and methods for translating it from English into Russian. For this purpose, I rely on the following sources: the text of Lewis Carroll’s book “Alice in Wonderland” and two versions of its translation: Demurova and Zakhoder. I use the following methods for this: continuous sampling, grammatical analysis and quantitative calculation.
Part 1. GRAMMATICAL TRANSFORMATIONS DURING TRANSLATION
1.1 About the concept of “translation”
The concept of translation is interpreted by translation studies specialists differently, but they all agree on one thing: that this process is complex and requires serious training from the translator, having a lot of knowledge and skills.
The essence of translation is to express through the means of one language everything that has already been expressed through the means of another language (or the original language).
The translation process includes two stages. At the first stage, in order to translate, the translator needs to understand the text, all its linguistic subtleties, he needs to know the realities associated with the material being translated, he needs to analyze the text, interpret it for himself. At the second stage, it is necessary to be able to create a text, using all the richness of the target language, to find means of expression in it.
It must be remembered that working on the translation of any text always remains a creative process. It requires the translator to have knowledge of the languages being compared, the realities inherent in these two languages, and certain skills. We will dwell on this in more detail.
The translation process itself is a series of mental operations with the help of which the translator finds the necessary correspondences for converting units source text into translation text units. Figuratively speaking, “the translator’s brain receives a piece of source text as input and produces a piece of translation text as output.” By comparing these text segments, we can talk about ways of moving from the first to the second, about translation techniques with the help of which the first text is, as it were, transformed into the second.
Transformations that enable the transition from source text units to target text units are called translation interlingual transformations. Depending on the nature of the units of the source language, lexical, grammatical and stylistic transformations are distinguished.
Lexical techniques are applicable when the source text contains a non-standard linguistic unit at the word level, for example, a proper noun, inherent in one language environment and absent in the target language; term in a particular professional field; words denoting objects, phenomena and concepts characteristic of the source culture or for the traditional naming of elements of a third culture, but having a different structural and functional order in the translating culture.
Pumpyansky notes the possibility of using lexical means of translation depending on the traditions of conveying a particular meaning in different languages. He says that in one language a certain semantic unit can be conveyed grammatically, while in another it is customary to convey it lexically, in separate words. He calls this phenomenon “grammaticalization of vocabulary.”
Grammatical techniques are applicable when the object of translation, burdened with non-standard dependencies, is one or another grammatical structure of the source text. Compared to lexical problems, this type of problem is less difficult for a translator, but it has its own specifics and requires certain techniques.
The most common grammatical transformations include:
Syntactic assimilation (literal translation).
Rearrangement.
Partial or zero transfer.
Functional Replacement of sentence members or parts of speech.
Adding and deleting words.
Division and combination of sentences.
Stylistic translation techniques are used in cases where the object of translation is stylistically marked units of the source text.
Since our task is to study grammatical form, let's take a closer look at grammatical devices. Speaking about grammatical transformations, T.A. Kazakova divides them depending on the similarities and differences in the grammatical properties of linguistic units.
On the one hand, the commonality between the grammatical properties of the Russian and English languages is determined by their common belonging to the Indo-European family and is manifested in the presence of common grammatical meanings, categories and functions. But at the same time, the difference in the principles of grammatical structure, expressed in the belonging of these languages to different grammatical groups, is reflected in significant differences between grammatical properties, for example, in the existence of dissimilar grammatical categories.
There is another view. Fedorov A.V., for example, identifies three main types of grammatical discrepancies between the original language and the target language.
When an element is encountered in the original language that has no formal grammatical correspondence in the target language.
When the language into which the translation is being made contains elements that do not have a formal correspondence in the original language, and yet are inevitably used in translations.
When the target language contains grammatical elements that formally correspond to the elements of the original language, but differ from them in the functions they perform.
It should not be forgotten that both the difference and the similarity between grammatical forms, their functions and meanings can be complete or incomplete. In this case, Kazakova talks about the possibility of complete translation or various options for incomplete translation. She gives the following translation recommendations for languages with similar and different grammatical forms:
Full translation - is used under the condition of complete similarity of both grammatical forms and their meanings and functions in the source and target languages.
Zero translation - can be used in two cases: “when the grammatical form in the source and target languages coincides, but the tradition of explication of certain elements of content within this form does not coincide,” i.e. in both languages: both in the source language and in the target language, this grammatical form exists, but traditionally its meaning is conveyed by other forms; in the second case, it is used to translate non-equivalent grammatical units. In this case, the grammatical form is not translated, but is omitted, but only if this does not affect the semantic information.
Partial translation is used in conditions of similarity between grammatical forms, when the same grammatical form can have several meaningful functions, but these functions differ in composition and quantity in the source and target languages.
Functional replacement - like zero translation, is used in two cases: “when the functions or meanings of similar grammatical forms do not coincide in the source and target languages”: in such cases, the source form during translation can be replaced by another form with similar functions. In the second case, when there is no form equivalent to the given one in the target language, only its semantic or grammatical functions in the text are translated. Thus, the translator seems to be looking for compensation, a grammatical form that is similar in functional and semantic properties.
Assimilation is used when translating compound constructions, the combinatorics of which do not coincide in the source and target languages, as well as in conditions where the requirements for explicitness/implicitness of an expression do not coincide.
Conversion or structural replacement - is used if in two languages there are different requirements applied to the explicitness of an expression in the source and target languages, as well as when there are differences in combinatorial rules for the compatibility of grammatical forms. Those. when, during translation, instead of a specific form of the source language, a similar but different one is used, which can be a substitute, preserving its categorical meanings. For example, conversion is often used when translating an English gerund: in a Russian text, instead of a gerund, either a verbal noun, an infinitive, or a Russian form of a gerund is used.
Conversion is the most common translation technique in conditions of differences in morphological forms and categories. It consists in changing the morphological status of the original grammatical unit, but at the same time its categorical meanings are preserved.
Antonymous translation is used to remove a possible conflict between the lexical and grammatical compatibility of language units in the source and target languages.
Expansion - used to transform synthetic forms into analytical ones in cases where either the grammatical rules for a given form or the nature of the context require it. It is also used to translate forms that carry a large semantic load that Russian equivalents cannot convey. As a result, there is a need to expand the translation form.
Contraction - is expressed in the reduction of the morphological form of the original unit, subject to the full or partial preservation of its categorical meanings and is used when translating an analytical form in a context that allows the same information to be conveyed grammatically or lexically more concisely.1
Next, we will look at possible cases of using the Continuous form, which, I think, is no less important, since even with knowledge of all the above transformations, translation from Russian into English still remains a difficult issue.
1.2 Continuous (Progressive) Tense
The most common and most common use of the form Present Continuous(Progressive) Tense is its use to express a continuing unfinished action occurring at the moment of speech. The moment of speech can be expressed by the following adverbs or phrases: now (now), at the moment (at the moment), currently, at present, presently (currently), etc., or is specified by the circumstances of time (at 6 o' clock, In 1982, in a couple of weeks), but may be clear from the context. When translating in this case, it is often necessary to introduce adverbs of time in order to fully convey the meaning of the Continuous form,1 in addition, it is important to note that the predicate in the Continuous form is always translated into Russian in an imperfect form.2
This function is undeniable and is noted first by many authors. For example, L.S. Barkhudarov and D.A. Shteling in a textbook on English grammar say: “As forms of the continuous form, Continuous forms express an action in its flow, in its specific execution, and the process expressed by the non-perfect form of the continuous form can refer directly to any one moment (for example, directly to the very moment of speech or to some moment in the narrative), but can last a significant period of time, sometimes measured in years.” 3
Separately, we can highlight the use of the Continuous form to express a long-term action taking place in the present period, not necessarily at the moment of speech. This action is conceived as not constant, limited in time. Therefore, it is impossible to use this form for statements like “eternal truths”, for example Cats drink milk. (Cats drink milk), while The cat is drinking milk now (The cat is now drinking milk) is also possible, since it conveys a particular specific action occurring at the moment of speech. I.P. Ivanova speaks about this case of use. She calls the form Continuous discharge and defines it as follows: “A long discharge is a visually temporary form expressing the procedural nature of an action. A certain segment of action is considered at the moment of its occurrence, in the process of its unfolding, regardless of its beginning or end.” 4
In addition, this tense is used to express a planned action related to the near future (for example: I’m leaving tomorrow), replacing the future tense form in this function, and displaces the Present Indefinite form (for example: I leave tomorrow). It is interesting to note that the Present Continuous is 7-8 times more frequently used in modern English than the Present Indefinite.
It is also important to note that this tense is used to express a future continuous action (instead of the Future Continuous) in adverbial subordinate clauses of condition and time, which are introduced by the conjunctions if, when, while, etc. or conveys a future event that at the time of speech is already planned and will happen soon. In this meaning, The Present Continuous is used with verbs of movement or action (activity and motion): to see, to meet, to go, to come, to leave, to start, etc. and usually with a tense adverbial pointing to the future.1
To express the intention to perform an action or confidence in its performance in the future, along with the Present Continuous (Progressive), the Present Continuous (Progressive) is often used from the verb to be in combination with the infinitive of the verb in the meaning “I am going to, intend, intend”:
He is going to spend his summer vacation in the Crimea. - He is going to spend his summer holidays in Crimea.
If the sentence is about intention, expressed by the verbs to go or to соме, the construction to be going to do smth. The Present Continuous (Progressive) of the corresponding verbs is replaced:
He is going (coming) there (here). - He is going to go (come) there (here).
That be going + Infinite also expresses the greater likelihood or inevitability of an action in the future. The subject in this case is inanimate:
The sky is clearing up; the rain is going to stop in a minute. - The sky is clearing; the rain will stop in a minute.
But due to the fact that the Continuous form (as well as the Perfect) does not find its analogues in the Russian language, a number of difficulties arise both in translating these forms and in determining their place in the system of aspectual-temporal forms. Initially, the Continuous form was considered in the system of dichotomous relations Continuous-non-Continuous, contrasting Continuous with the main category. But if we take into account the Perfect-Continuous form (or perfect-continuous discharge), Smirnitsky concluded that Perfect cannot be a species, and proposed to consider it as a category of temporal reference.
But there is another point of view, which denies the inevitability of dichotomous relationships. Although it is convenient, the relationships between linguistic units are much more complex. It turned out that in the English language no aspectual forms exist without combination with a temporal meaning. Those. any species form has a temporary meaning on which species relations are superimposed.1
Khaimovich generally speaks of the controversial existence of the species as such. According to some English linguists, aspect belongs to a semantic category rather than a grammatical one, or is not recognized at all as a category of modern grammar. But the Continuous form also cannot be considered as temporary. On the one hand, the main function of Continuous - simultaneity - can be conveyed by other forms of the verb, and with the help of function words. At the same time, the Continuous form itself does not always express simultaneity.
Thus, we can conclude that the categories of type and time are directly related to each other. Both of them characterize actions, but different points of view. The tense of the verb shows when the action took place, and the aspect tells how it developed.
1.3 Emotional Continuous
Particular attention should be paid to the use of Present Continuous (Progressive) forms in emotionally charged statements. For example, this form can also be used with adverbs that characterize constant, habitual actions:
He"s always writing with a special pen just because he likes to be different (irritation). - He always writes with a special pen just because he doesn’t want to be like everyone else.
Continuous forms are more emotional. They can express the fleeting irritation of their interlocutors.
You're burning yourself out. And for what?
You don’t even begin to understand- you’re no different from the rest. Burning myself out! You bet I’m burning myself out! I’ve been doing that for so many years now- and who in hell cares?
The continuous form is used here for actions that are far from indifferent to the speaker. The present continuous tense is also used in conversation to express surprise, disbelief, and indignation at the words of the interlocutor. 1
By the way, although rare, the use of the Continuous form can be found when describing a process, the implementation of which can be observed regularly, every time, but only under certain conditions:
I know that I don’t like being watched when I am eating. -I know that I don't like being watched while I eat.
It is known that in a living, emotional narration about events that occurred in the past or expected in the future, the so-called historical present is used. Brugman and O. Jespersen use the term “real dramatic”. The dramatic present creates a kind of artistic illusion - the past is told as if it were unfolding before the eyes of the reader or listener.
Similarly, the continuous forms of the present, past and future are often used in cases where, due to the nature of the action, the indefinite form should be used. The Continuous form, depicting an action in its flow, attracts additional attention to it, represents the process as particularly significant or, at least, proceeding intensively.2 This mainly applies to verbs expressing perception, mental activity and speech (Verbs of Inert Perception and Cognition). It is believed that these verbs cannot be used in the Progressive form because they express unchangeable qualities, but “the continuous form begins to appear even in verbs that previously did not have. V.I. Fefelov and G.S. Shur (1975), for example, believe that almost all non-procedural verbs can be used in a continuous form
Arnold I.V. Stylistics of modern English (decoding stylistics). Textbook A manual for pedagogical students. Institutes with specialty No. 2103 “foreign languages”. In other words, the appearance of a non-processual verb in a continuous form signals us about a change in its meaning.
This issue is covered in more detail by G. A. Veykhman: “The verbs measure, weight, taste can be used in the Continuous in the transitive meanings of “measure”, “weigh”, “sniff”, “taste”, but not in the intransitive meanings - “to have some- or size”, “weigh”, “smell”, “have any taste”. Wed: Why’s the man measuring the street? and The room measures 10 meters across. The verb think is used in the Continuous in the meaning of “to think, reflect”, but not in the meaning of “to believe, to consider”, “to have any opinion”. Wed: What are you thinking about? and I think you are right; I don't think much of his latest book. The verb feel is often used in the Continuous in the meaning of “to feel”, but rarely in the meaning of “to believe, consider”, “anticipate”. Today the norm is I feel/ am feeling fine and I feel we shouldn’t do it, and the exception is Can I go out the back way? I’m feeling I might run into trouble.”2. It is not only Weichmann who speaks about this use of the verb to feel. “Domestic textbooks usually classify the verb to feel as one of the group of verbs that are not used in the Continuous. However, in fact, the verb to feel does not belong to this group. In modern (even official) English, it is quite acceptable and recommended to say “I”m feeling awful” (I feel awful), and not “I feel awful”, if we are talking about this moment.”
The verb have is not used in the Continuous in the sense of “possessing, having” and is rarely used in this form in the sense of having to, i.e. in sentences such as We’re having to work hard these days. The verb see can be used in the Continuous in the meanings of “meet”, “visit”, “consult” (I’m seeing my solicitor this afternoon.), as well as in the sense of “watch (a film or play)” (What film are you seeing? ). It is rarely used in this form in the meaning of “see” (I’m seeing a good many churches on my way south) and is not used at all in the Continuous in the meaning of “understand” (I see what you mean). The verb hear can be used in the Continuous to mean “to receive news,” but is rarely found in this form in the meaning of “to hear (discriminate, perceive by ear).” Examples of such rare use are the sentences: He was not hearing what I said and I was seeing and hearing it done. Usually, in the case of visual and auditory perception, instead of Continuous, they prefer to use can could + see/hear. For example: I can hear a funny noise.
The use of the verb to be in the Continuous form deserves special attention.
The verb be is used in the Continuous if it acts as a connective with some predicates expressed by adjectives and nouns (as well as substantive phrases). As you know, there are adjectives that express temporary characteristics of an object (such as hungry), permanent characteristics (such as dead) and characteristics that can be either permanent or temporary (such as nice). It is the adjectives of the last group that are typically used as predicates with the copula be in the Continuous. Compare:1
You’re being very clever today - How smart you are today!
The children are being very quiet. - The children became (suspiciously) quiet.
I'm not being silly.
I'm not silly.
I'm not being a fool
I'm not stupid.
A similar idea appears in Kolln. He proposes to determine the difference between static and dynamic verbs (stative and dynamic) in relation to their qualities of desire / reluctance. He looks at the difference between so-called dynamic adjectives (or dependent objects) and static ones.
"I'm being silly"
A person himself chooses whether to be stupid, but he cannot choose whether to be tall. Since "tall" is considered a static (or inert) adjective, you cannot say "I am being tall"; at the same time, "silly" is a dynamic adjective, and with such an adjective we can use the Progressive form.
It's the same with verbs. Two plus two equals four. Equals is an inert, static verb and cannot be used in the Progressive form. In this case, we do not have a choice depending on our desire (we will not say “Two plus two is equaling four.”)
In a similar way, one can distinguish the characteristics of desire/unwillingness in sentences with nouns or adverbs.
“She is being a good worker” - She is a good worker (because she herself wanted to be one.) But at the same time we will say “She is an Olympic athlete”, and not “She is being an Olympic athlete”, because she is already an Olympic champion, regardless of whether she wants to be one or not, she has already become one.2
Predicates with the connective be in the Continuous are used to convey not only the meaning of the temporary manifestation of any attribute, but also a number of additional semantic shades. So, using this form the speaker:
A) Expresses his attitude to the subject’s behavior
Mary is being an idiot. - Mary is behaving like an idiot.
B) Strives to weaken the characteristic that characterizes the subject
John is being angry. - John is angry.
C) Make it clear that the subject's actions should not be given much importance
He is being funny. - He’s joking (don’t take it seriously).
1.4 Past Continuous
“The past tense of a long discharge (in the terminology of Ivanova I.P.), like the present tense, conveys the course of a process, a certain stage of action in a certain period of time; but the starting point in this case is different than in the present tense form.” The long discharge of the past tense (compared to the main discharge) details the way it proceeds, lingering at a certain stage and thereby delaying the development of alternating actions. The starting point for him is not the moment of speech, but a moment in the sphere of the past tense, which Ivanova I.P. calls the temporary center of the past tense; the relationship with the moment of speech is mediated through the temporal center of the past.
Past Continuous expresses the time-limited duration of an event and, in addition, this form suggests the incompleteness of the action; To understand this, it is enough to consider two examples:
I was doing my homework.
I did my homework.
Unlike the main category of the past tense, the Continuous form cannot be used in combinations without connection with other sentences, “by itself,” without indicating time in the past. This indication can be expressed lexically or by mentioning another action in the past, expressed by the Past Simple form. In cases of such use of the Past Continuous form, the action it expresses often serves as a background for other actions. The Past Continuous is typically used in a complex sentence, but such use is not necessary; if the Past Continuous is used in a simple sentence, then the temporal center is indicated outside this sentence, sometimes quite far from it. In other words, this form is used to express a specific process that occurred at a certain moment (or period of time) in the past or a process that occurred at the moment when some other action occurred.
In addition to these meanings, the Past Continuous form can convey a connotation of greater politeness than the Present and Past Indefinite. Just compare the following examples:1
Do you want to see someone? (not very polite)
Did you want to see someone? (more polite)
Were you wanting to see someone? (even more politely)
Although questions in the Past Continuous are sometimes less polite than questions in the Past Indefinite. For example:
What were you doing before you came here? (sounds more polite)
What did you do before you came here?
In the following examples, the opposite is true:
What were you doing in my room?
What did you do in my room?
What were you doing in my room, huh?
What were you doing in my room?
In addition, the Past Continuous can express a shade of timidity when the speaker seems to explain his behavior in response to the unspoken question What are you doing here?. For example: I was thinking that you might need a hammer.
1.5 Future Continuous
“As a Future form, this form expresses an action, although real, but still only planned, expected or assumed. As a Continuous form, it expresses an action that will be performed or take place at one time or another (in the future)."
I'll be looking for you in London. - I will look for you in London.
I hope we'll be seeing you again. -I hope we will definitely see each other.
An action expressed by the Continuous form often acquires an emotional connotation. Also, the Future Continuous, when used in spoken conversation, takes on a different meaning. value, - value assumptions, modalities, consequences.
She will be waiting up for me, he said. I shall hurt her beyond words.
It should be noted that this form is used infrequently, since the exact planning of a process that will take place at a designated time, regardless of its end or beginning, is rarely expressed in language.
According to G.A. Weykhman, Future Continuous forms have spread in oral speech: “Future Continuous conveys a shade of greater politeness than Future Indefinite. This, in particular, allows you to use the Future Continuous to tactfully ask about the plans of your interlocutor. For example: Will you be using the tomorrow? If not, can I borrow it? Questions with Shall I+ a verb in the Continuous form, in contrast to questions with the Indefinite form, convey an official and polite tone. For example: Shall I be seeing you tomorrow?
Future Continuous forms have also extended to speech etiquette formulas. Instead of the older See you soon they now say I shall be seeing you. The latter in colloquial style has been shortened to Shall be seeing you and Be seeing you. I shall also be going; I shall be getting along and speech formulas with the complication of similar verbs with the modal verb must and its equivalent have to. For example: I must be getting along."
1.6 Perfect Continuous forms
Perfect Continuous forms are a combination of perfect and continuous forms. In the indicative mood they are used almost exclusively in the Present and Past forms (the Perfect Continuous form is used extremely rarely). As continuous forms, they depict an action in its specific execution and completely exclude the meaning of completeness and effectiveness. As perfect forms, they express an action in the period preceding something in the content of the utterance. Thus, the Perfect Continuous form expresses the action in its specific course in the previous period. Unlike the non-perfect forms of the continuous form, the perfect forms of the Perfect Continuous depict an action not at any one specific moment, but throughout the entire period of its occurrence.
Present Perfect Continuous.
As the Present form, it expresses a message related to the moment of speech and relevant to it. As a Perfect form, it expresses an action taking place in the previous period. As a Continuous form, it expresses action in a specific accomplishment.
This form can mean:
An action in its concrete commission, occurring right up to the very moment of speech or taking place in the indefinite past (but also before the moment of speech).
(Rarely) an action that takes place in a previous period whenever under certain conditions (generalization):
Past Perfect Continuous.
As the Past form, it expresses an action that took place in the past and is not related to the present. As a Perfect form, it denotes an action in the period preceding some moment (in the past). As a Continuous form, it depicts an action in its concrete completion (always still unfinished). It could be:
An action that took place throughout the entire period, up to the moment that this period preceded.
An action that took place at one or another previous time, sometimes distant, sometimes not distant; the action may refer to the indefinite past.1
As for the translation of this form, it is usually conveyed by the past tense of the imperfect form. And, if when translating the present tense such signalizers as “just now”, “now” appear, then the Past Perfect form is characterized by the appearance of the adverb “already” during translation, which emphasizes the perfection of the action.
So, what trends can we see now? Considering the Continuous form, we approached it from three sides. What do we see? In short, there are three problems:
case of use;
translation capabilities;
Speaking on the first question, we can say about the undeniable expansion of the use of Progressive forms, in addition to the fact that this form is used to convey a long unfinished action occurring at the moment of speech (Present), simultaneously with other actions in the past (Past) or planned in the future (Future) . It also has many other functions.
Firstly, the function of conveying emotions has long been entrenched in language. Such as surprise, disbelief, fleeting irritation. In addition, the Continuous form is often used instead of the simple form to attract additional attention. In this case, the described process is perceived as taking place more intensely compared to the action expressed by the Simple form. Secondly, speaking about the use of Continuous forms, one cannot fail to note the increase in the number of verbs used in this form. Many researchers say that often non-processual verbs, previously considered unusable in the continuous form, begin to be used in the Continuous form. This is explained by the fact that non-processual verbs acquire new meanings that can convey the duration of an action.
To summarize, there are four cases of using the Continuous form:
An unfinished action occurring at the moment of speech.
A continuous action taking place in the present period is not necessarily at the moment of speech.
A future continuous action or event that is planned and will happen soon.
Emotional statements.
To these four, of course, it is necessary to add the Past and Future Continuous, as well as the Continuous form of the verb to be in combination with the infinitive of the verb in the meaning “I am going to, intend.”
Moving on to the next problem, to methods of translating the Continuous form into Russian, we must immediately say that here we are faced with the case of translating a grammatical form that does not have a correspondence in the target language.
Generally speaking, all techniques used in translation are divided into three groups: lexical, grammatical and stylistic.
Kazakova says that lexical techniques are used when translating a non-standard unit at the level of one word. For example, a proper name, a term, a reality that does not exist in another language. I think that the translation of grammatical structures can also be classified as lexical techniques. Pumpyansky calls this technique grammaticalization of vocabulary. In this case, the transfer of meaning by means of the target language is taken as a basis, i.e. The translator, using lexical means, conveys the meaning intended by the author through grammatical constructions.
The second group of means: grammatical, are used in translating grammatical structures. These tools, in turn, are divided into two subgroups: for translating constructions that have no analogues in the target language and for constructions that are similar in two languages. To translate the Continuous form, we need the tools of the first of these subgroups: zero translation, functional replacement, conversion, expansion and conjugation.
The third group of means: stylistic. They are used when translating stylistically colored units.
Turning to the third and last problem discussed in my work, to the problem of the category of species, I note that it is not related to issues of translation. It can rather be attributed to purely theoretical questions: the place of the Continuous form in the system of type-temporal relations. The main difficulties here arose in connection with the attempt to present the entire system of species and time in a dichotomy, opposing two forms to each other. This system had to be abandoned. It was concluded that in English no aspectual forms exist outside of combination with a temporal meaning. Likewise, the Continuous form, simultaneously with the specific meaning of duration, can convey the temporal meaning of simultaneity. Or maybe these values should not be transmitted. There is no unambiguity in these meanings conveyed by this form.
Part 2. Practice. FUNCTIONS OF THE CONTINUOUS FORM AND METHODS OF ITS TRANSMISSION INTO RUSSIAN LANGUAGE
2.1 Continuous (Progressive) Tense
I must be getting somewhere near the center of the earth.
In this example, be getting is used to mean “to achieve something” at the present moment. In Zakhoder’s translation, “I’m probably already somewhere near the center of the Earth!” the verb is completely omitted. Here we see zero translation. In Demurova’s translation “I’m probably approaching the center of the Earth,” the form “approaching” conveys the meaning of the present tense and performs the function of an action performed at the moment of speech. Those. here we can talk about compensation: the functions performed by the Russian verb are equivalent to the functions of the English verb. Functional substitution is used here. Although, if we perceive the Continuous form as analytical, it turns out that during translation this form was subjected to contraction or compression.
Oh my ears and whiskers, how late it’s getting!
In this example, the Continuous form uses the construction it’s getting late. A literal translation of this sentence is impossible. Both translators conveyed the main meaning:
Zakhoder: “Oh, you ears - my mustache! How late I am!
Demurova: “Oh, my mustache! Ah, my ears! How late I am!
In all likelihood, conversion was used because here there is a difference in the semantic load of the English verb and in the tradition of sentence construction. In this case, the Russian “It’s so late already!” and English “How late it’s getting!” are not semantically equivalent. IN in this example the English phrase apparently conveys the meaning of "I'm late."
What a curious feeling! I must be shutting up like a telescope.
Both translators translated the word Continuous be shutting up as follows:
Zakhoder: “Oh, what is this happening to me! I probably really do fold up like a spyglass!”
Demurova: “What a strange feeling! I’m probably folding up like a spyglass.”
They conveyed the semantic meaning of the verb: “close”, and in relation to the telescope “fold” - the functional meaning of the form
Continuous: a continuous action occurring at the moment of speech. This means that we can talk about the use of contraction because in the source text we see an analytical form.
Now I’m opening out like the largest telescope that ever was!
When translating this sentence, Zakhoder used a very interesting transformation. “Now I’m not just a spyglass, but a whole telescope!” He conveyed the meaning, i.e. the fact that Alice grows in height is elongated. And instead of conveying it in one word, he used deployment. Another translation option shows us the possibility of conveying both meaning and form in one word: “I now open up like a spyglass.” Those. Demurova applied contraction.
Oh dear, what nonsense I’m talking!
In this example, a verb is used that conveys the action being performed at the moment. Zakhoder used one of the meanings of the verb “to talk” - “to chat.” And he translated this sentence as follows: “Lord, what nonsense I’m talking!” The verb “I’m chatting”, just like “am talking,” speaks of an action taking place at the moment of speech. Both meanings: semantic and grammatical are conveyed, etc. In the English language we see the analytical form of the verb, then we can talk about the use of such a translation transformation as contraction.
Demurova acted differently: “Well, what nonsense am I talking about!” She conveyed the grammatical meaning of the Continuous form and expressed the duration of the action occurring at the moment of speech. During the transformations, the meaning of the English verb was distorted. Demurova used a phrase characteristic of the Russian language, used in a similar situation and preserving categorical meanings. From which we can draw a conclusion about the use of conversion.
I must be growing small again.
At first glance, this example attracts attention due to the peculiarity of sentence construction that is not characteristic of the Russian language. In Russian, a phrase of this type will be perceived by native speakers as incorrect. Those. here, when translating, instead of a specific form of the source language, a similar but different one must be selected, which can be its substitute in the Russian language and will preserve its categorical meanings. Translators had to use conversion:
Zakhoder: “Oh, I’ll probably be little again!”
Demurova: “Apparently, I’m shrinking again.”
Will the roof bear? - Mind that loose slate - Oh it’s coming down!
Zakhoder: “Will the roof hold it?
Be careful, you! There's only one tile that's barely alive!
Oh, it’s falling, it’s falling!”
Demurova: “Will the roof hold it?
Carefully! This tile is wobbly...
Lost it! It’s falling!”
In this example, the verb “is coming down” in the Present Continuous form means “to collapse, fall” and conveys the action taking place at the moment of speech. The translators translated it as “falls” - this form of the verb conveys the meaning of the action being performed at the present moment. Both meanings: semantic and grammatical are conveyed, etc. In the English language we see the analytical form of the verb, then we can talk about the use of such a translation transformation as contraction.
He's murdering the time! Off with his head!
An example of a verb in the Present Continuous form. The verb “to murder the time” is used here to mean “to waste, kill time.” In Zakhoder’s translation, “He’s only wasting our time! Cut off his head! This verb is in the present tense, conveying an action currently taking place. Thus, this verb conveys both meanings: grammatical and lexical, and because In the English language we see the analytical form of the verb, then we can talk about the use of such a translation transformation as contraction.
Demurova translated differently: “Kill time! He wants to kill time! Cut off his head! She transformed the Continuous form into an infinitive and expanded the verb, giving it an additional modal meaning. On the one hand, this transformation can be called conversion, i.e. a technique when, during translation, instead of a specific form of the source language, another is used, which can be a substitute, preserving its categorical meanings. But in this translation the verb “to kill” is used twice in different forms. Considering the second verb, we can talk about deployment as a translation transformation of the expansion of the form of the target language unit.
Who’s making personal remarks now?
In this example, the verb “to make a remark” is in the Present Continuous form, which here conveys the action occurring at the moment of speech, and also has the grammatical meaning of the duration of the action. The lexical meaning of this verb is: “to make a remark.” Zakhoder translated this sentence as follows: “Who now makes comments to unfamiliar people?” He chose an equivalent such as “makes comments,” which is in the present tense and conveys the action taking place at the moment of speech. From which we can draw a conclusion about the use of contraction.
In Demurova’s translation, this phrase sounds slightly different: “And now who’s getting personal?” She conveyed the grammatical meaning of the Continuous form and expressed the duration of the action, but at the same time a verb was selected that carried a different semantic load. Most likely, in this case we can talk about zero translation.
Would you tell me, why are you painting those roses?
In this example, we will look at the verb “paint”, which is in the Present Continuous form.
Zakhoder: “Please tell me, why are you painting these roses?”
Demurova: “Please tell me why you paint these roses?”
Both translators chose the same equivalent in the present tense in this case. The duration of the action is conveyed, and the lexical meaning of the verbs is the same. And because the translation concerned the analytical form of the verb, then we can conclude that such a technique as contraction was used.
“How are you getting on? Said the Cat.
In this sentence, the verb “get on” is used in the Continuous form, meaning “to achieve success, move forward, pass, flow (about time, about life). How are your things getting on? ♦How are your things going?” In this case, the Continuous form conveys the action taking place at the moment of speech. The translators made the following transformations.
Zakhoder: “Well, how are you doing? - asked the Cheshire Cat"
Demurova: “How are you? - asked the Cat"
Both translations do not contain a verb, which indicates the use of a zero translation. But at the same time, they convey the semantic functions of an English utterance. Here there was a simple omission of the verb, so characteristic of the Russian verb in the present tense. That is, we can talk about the different explicitness of the two languages, which led to such a transformation. In this case, we can talk about conversion.
“Who are you talking to? Said the King.
In this sentence, the verb “to talk to” is in the Present Continuous form, expressing a long-term action occurring immediately at the moment of speech.
Zakhoder: “Who are you talking to, girl? - asked the King"
Demurova: “Who are you talking to? - asked the King.”
In this case, the translators selected almost the same equivalent in the present tense form. Both of these verbs convey the duration of an action, and the lexical meaning of the verbs also coincides. And because the translation concerned the analytical form of the verb, then we can conclude that such a translation technique as contraction was used.
2.2 Past Continuous
She felt that she was dozing off, and had just begun to dream that she was walking hand in h and with Dinah, and was saying to her very earnestly.
Here the verb was dozing off conveys an action performed simultaneously with the action conveyed by the verb felt and has the meaning “sleeping while walking.” In Zakhoder’s translation “And then she fell asleep for real, and she already began to dream that she was walking with Dinka arm in arm and for no apparent reason sternly telling her” we see the completed action: “fell asleep”, i.e. the translator did not convey the meaning of the duration of the action. This is only possible with zero translation. In Demurova’s translation, “She felt that she was falling asleep. She already dreamed that she was walking hand in hand with Dina and was asking her with concern,” the verb “falls asleep” has the meaning of an unfinished long-term action, which indicates that the functions of the Continuous form have been transferred. This means that contraction was used.
Now let's look at the other two verbs in the Continuous form: was walking and was saying. They convey an action that occurs simultaneously with the action conveyed by the verbs “begun to dream”. This means that in this case the Continuous form is used in the function of conveying the action occurring at the moment of speech. “Was walking” in this case means “walks, walks,” and “was saying” means “speaks.” In Zakhoder’s translation we see “walks” and “talks” - both verbs convey duration. Both grammatical and semantic loads are preserved. This means that a functional replacement was used. Demurova translated them as “going” and “asking.” After a similar analysis, it is clear that there is also a functional replacement here. And because the translation concerned such a form of the verb as analytical, we can talk about contraction.
Soon her eyes fell on a little glass box that was lying under the table.
In this example, the action of the verb in the Continuous form “was lying” occurs over a certain period of time, longer than the action of the verb “fell”. Those. it is assumed that the box is lying there at the moment of action, and may have been lying there for some time before. In Zakhoder’s translation, “Then she noticed that there was a small chest under the table.” the form of the verb “to lie” was used as “lies.” This form of the verb conveys the action taking place at the present moment, and its semantic qualities coincide with the English verb. Their only difference is that the way this form of English is formed is analytical. From which we can conclude that contraction was used.
In another version of the translation, “Then she saw a small glass box under the table,” the verb “to lie” is completely absent. Demurova in this case used a zero translation.
She was surprised that she had put on one of the Rabbit’s little white kid gloves while she was talking.
The Past Continuous verb “was talking” in this example has the meaning of ongoing action. In Zakhoder's translation, "... she was very surprised to find that, without noticing it, she had pulled on a tiny rabbit glove." the verb with the meaning “to talk”, the analogue of the English verb “to talk” is completely absent. The translator in this case used a zero translation.
Demurova made the following transformations: “... to her surprise, she noticed that while she was speaking, she pulled a tiny rabbit glove onto one hand.” As a result, in her translation we see the verb “spoke”, the characteristics of which are both the duration of the action and the past form, inherent in its English counterpart. From which we can conclude that contraction was used.
She was now about two feeling high, and was going on shrinking rapidly; she soon found out that the cause of this was the fan she was holding.
From the point of view of grammatical meaning, two verbs in the form of the Present Continuous are approximately the same: a long action performed in the past simultaneously with the main action and even during a period of time that began earlier (especially the verb was holding). In Zakhoder’s translation, “It was already only about sixty centimeters deep, and it continued to melt right before our eyes. Fortunately, Alice immediately realized that the fan was to blame for everything - it was still in her hands...” The verb “was going on” is translated as “continued.” The duration of the action in the past is conveyed and the lexical meaning of the verbs is the same. And because the translation concerned the analytical form of the verb, then we can conclude that such a technique as contraction was used. Demurova also translated this verb: “... it was no more than two feet, and it continued to rapidly decrease. She soon realized that the fan she was holding in her hands was to blame...”
As for the second example: “was holding”, then, apparently, Zakhoder used a zero translation, and Demurova used a contraction. The verb “kept” is similar in all meanings to English: the grammatical meaning of a long process in the past and the lexical meaning. Zakhoder’s version is quite controversial: on the one hand, the verb “was” can convey both continuous and simple past tense, and on the other hand, with a low degree of probability it can be called the equivalent of the verb “was holding”.
So she was considering in her own mind.
In this example, the action of the verb in the Continuous form “was considering” occurs over a certain period of time. The translators made the following transformations:
Zakhoder: “Out of grief, she began to think”
Demurova: “She sat and thought”
Both translations contain the verb in the past tense. And in both translations the verb is expanded. But there is a difference: in the second version, the verb in the imperfect past tense form conveys the duration of the action, and the form of the verb in the first version does not give us the opportunity to talk about procedurality. This is only possible with zero translation. And in the first option we are dealing with deployment.
It was much pleasanter at home, when one wasn’t always growing larger or smaller, and being ordered about by mice and rabbits.
In this example we can see examples of two verbs in the Past Continuous form. The first of them is “wasn’t growing larger or smaller.” This example is interesting from the point of view of the difficulties of translation into Russian. Semantically, this verb is divided into two opposites, and if in Russian it is possible to express the meaning of the first: “to grow,” then the phrase “to grow down” will be obviously incorrect. The general meaning was conveyed in both translations.
Zakhoder: “Now you’re big, now you’re small, and all sorts of mice and rabbits push you around as they want.”
Demurova: “It was so good at home! There I was always the same height! And all sorts of mice and rabbits were not my order.”
And from the point of view of the accuracy of conveying the grammatical functions of the English form Continuous, neither one nor the other option conveys the duration of the action of the verb “was growing”. In all likelihood, both of them are examples of zero translation.
As for the second verb “wasn’t being ordered about”, it is an example of the Past Passive Continuous. Traditionally, the passive form of the English language is translated into Russian using the active voice. Perhaps we can consider this transformation a conversion.
Alice was getting so used to queer thing happening.
The verb in the Past Continuous form “was getting used” in this example has the meaning of a continuing action occurring in the past.
Zakhoder: “She is already accustomed to all sorts of miracles”
Demurova: “She has already begun to get used to all sorts of oddities”
The translators made different transformations, but in both cases the verb was used in the past tense form indicative mood perfect look. It does not convey the grammatical meaning of duration inherent in the English Continuous form. From which we can draw a conclusion about the use of zero translation. But at the same time, we can assume the use of other transformations.
For example, converting the analytical form of an English verb into one word could be called contraction or compression. And such a translation as “started to get used to” could be called a functional replacement, i.e. selection of a grammatical form close in functional and semantic properties, compensation Alice cried again, for this time the Mouse was bristling all over.
This example is worth paying special attention to. The verb “was bristling” in the English text conveys a prolonged action. Dictionary entry: “bristle” - “to bristle, stand on end.” Now let's look at the translation options:
Zakhoder: “... Alice screamed again, because the Mouse was all bristling.”
Demurova: “The Mouse’s fur stood on end.”
In the first example, the verb “bristled” conveyed semantic functions, but it did not convey the meaning of duration. There is clearly a completed action here. The use of zero input is obvious. In the second example, the sentence “the Mouse was bristling all over” was expanded: the translator clarifies that it was the fur that stood on end. Those. This is an example of deployment.
“We, indeed!” cried the Mouse, who was trembling down to the end of his tail.
Both translators rendered the verb in the Past Continuous form as synonymous verbs in the form of gerunds. They made transformations by representing the English form in the form of gerunds. Here we see the use of such a technique as conversion, i.e. the use of a specific form, not inherent in the English language, that preserves the categorical meanings of the unit of the source language.
Zakhoder: “Speak? - the Mouse squeaked indignantly, trembling from the very tip of its tail.
Demurova: “We won’t? - cried the Mouse, trembling from head to the very tip of its tail.
I’m afraid I’ve offended it again!” For the Mouse was swimming away from her as hard as it could go and making quite a commotion in the pool as it went.
This sentence contains two examples in the Past Continuous form: “was swimming away and making quite a commotion,” although the second example could at first glance be mistaken for a participle.
Zakhoder: “Meanwhile, the unfortunate Mouse swam away from her interlocutor as best she could - only the waves went around.”
Demurova: “The mouse swam away from her with all its might; there were even waves in the water.”
The first example “was swimming away” was rendered almost identically by both translators. Both verbs convey duration and coincide in semantic meaning with English. Both meanings: semantic and grammatical are conveyed, etc. In the English language we see the analytical form of the verb, then we can talk about the use of such a translation transformation as contraction. The translators approached the second example differently. They conveyed the English “to make a commotion” rather through a description of the action, i.e. resorted to deployment.
Alice noticed with some surprise that the pebbles were all turning into little cakes as they laid on the floor.
In this case, the verb “to turn into” is in the Past Continuous form, conveying an action that takes place over a period of time simultaneously with the action of the verbs “noticed” and “lay”. Zakhoder was unable to convey the duration of this action: “And then Alice noticed with surprise that the pebbles on the floor had all turned into cookies.” He omitted the grammatical form, although, in general, this did not significantly affect the meaning. In this case, we can talk about zero translation.
“Alice, meanwhile, was surprised to notice that the pebbles, falling on the floor, immediately turned into pies.” In Demurova’s translation, the verb “transform” is in the present tense and conveys a long-term action. It can be concluded that contraction is used.
An enormous puppy was looking down at her with large round eyes.
In this example, the verb “look down” is in the Past Continuous form, conveying a continuous action.
Zakhoder: “The colossal shaggy puppy looked at her from top to bottom with huge round eyes.”
Demurova: “The giant puppy looked at her with huge round eyes.”
Both translators chose the equivalent “looked”. This verb is in the imperfect past tense form and conveys the procedural nature of the action. Both meanings: semantic and grammatical are conveyed, etc. In the English language we see the analytical form of the verb, then we can talk about the use of such a translation transformation as contraction.
She had never been so much contradicted in all her life before, and she felt that she was losing her temper.
The verb “to loose temper” is translated into Russian as “to lose patience” and in Russian does not convey a long process. This is how the translators put it:
Zakhoder: “She has already begun to lose patience a little.”
Demurova: “Alice got a little angry.”
In the first version, the translator expanded and changed the action of the verb. But at the same time, he managed to convey the action in its process, unfinished. To do this, the translator converted one English verb into two Russian ones. We can talk about using deployment.
In Demurova’s translation, the verb “angry” states an action that has already been completed, i.e. grammatical meaning not conveyed. The dictionary meaning also does not coincide with the English “to loose temper”. This is an example of a zero translation.
And when she looked back the fish-footman was gone, and the other was sitting on the ground near the door.
In this example, the action of the verb in the Past Continuous form “was sitting” occurs over a certain period of time, longer than the action of the verb “looked back”. Those. it is assumed that the frog doorman was sitting at the moment of the action and possibly for some time before that. Let's look at the translation options for this sentence:
Zakhoder: “And when she, having laughed to her heart’s content, returned to her previous place and dared to look out from behind the bush again, the crucian carp was no longer there, and the doorman was sitting on the ground at the entrance to the house and staring senselessly at the sky.”
Demurova: “... when she returned and looked out from behind the tree, Footman Bream was no longer there, and Little Frog was sitting near the door on the ground, mindlessly staring at the sky.”
Both translators chose the equivalent “sat.” This verb is in the imperfect past tense form and conveys the procedural nature of the action. Both meanings: semantic and grammatical are conveyed, etc. in English we see the analytical form of the verb, then we can talk about the use of such translation transformation as contraction secondly, because they’re making such a noise inside, no one could possibly hear you.
The verb “to make a noise” in this example, in the Present Continuous form, is translated into Russian as “to make noise, to make a sensation.” Both translators used the verb "to make noise" in the present tense, thus compressing the English verb:
Zakhoder: “Second: they are so noisy there that no one will hear your knock.”
Demurova: “And secondly, they make so much noise there that no one will hear you anyway.”
Those. both translators shortened the analytical form of the English verb when translating, thus resorting to contraction the Duchess was sitting on a three-legged stool in the middle, nursing a baby, and the cook was leaning over the fire stirring a large cauldron...
This sentence contains two examples of verbs in the Past Continuous form, the action of which occurs simultaneously.
Zakhoder: “... in the middle, the Duchess sat on a three-legged stool and rocked a baby on her lap; the cook was bending over the stove, stirring something in a large saucepan.”
Demurova: “... in the middle, on a wobbly stool, the Duchess sat and rocked the baby; the cook leaned over the stove a huge cauldron, filled to the brim with soup.”
If we look at the first verb, we can immediately notice that both translators chose the equivalent “sat.” This verb is in the imperfect past tense form and conveys the duration of the action, although it could convey the action of a verb in the Past Simple form. Both meanings: semantic and grammatical are conveyed, etc. In the English language we see the analytical form of the verb, then we can talk about the use of such a translation transformation as contraction.
As for the second verb: “was leaning,” the translators approached it differently. Zakhoder transformed it, presenting the English form in the form of the gerund “bent over”. Here there is a use of a change in the morphological status of a grammatical unit, which indicates the use of such a technique as conversion. Demurova chose the verb in the past tense form: “bent over.” This verb conveys a meaning equivalent to an English verb, but it does not convey grammatical meaning. The action of this verb is already complete; it does not imply the duration of the process. In all likelihood, this is a zero translation and as for the baby, it was sneezing and howling alternately without a moment’s pause.
This sentence contains two examples of verbs in the Past Continuous form, the action of which occurs simultaneously. In addition, actions are characterized by duration. And the verbs “to sneeze” and “to howl” have the meaning of “sneeze” and “howl, howl, howl heart-rendingly, roar, howl,” respectively.
Zakhoder: “... and the baby didn’t take any breaks at all: he either sneezed or roared and stopped roaring only to sneeze.”
Demurova: “... and the baby sneezed and squealed without a break.”
Both translators selected verbs with the same grammatical functions. Verbs are in the past imperfect form. Apparently, a technique such as contraction was used here, because the verbs in the English text have an analytical form.
The only things in the kitchen that didn’t sneeze, were the cook, and a large cat which was sitting on the hearth and grinning from car to ear.
The action of the two verbs in the Past Continuous form presented in this example occurs simultaneously and presumably takes a period of time longer than the action of the verb “didn’t sneeze” and the same as the verb “were”. The meaning of these verbs is: “to sit” and “to grin” - “grin, smile widely, bare teeth.” Let's consider the following translation options:
Zakhoder: “In the entire kitchen, only two people did not sneeze: the cook herself and the huge cat - he was lying by the stove and smiling from ear to ear.”
Demurova: “Only the cook didn’t sneeze, and even a huge cat that sat by the stove and smiled from ear to ear.”
Both translators selected verbs with the same grammatical functions. Verbs are in the past imperfect form. They convey the grammatical meaning of duration. Both meanings: semantic and grammatical are conveyed, etc. In the English language we see the analytical form of the verb, then we can talk about the use of such a translation transformation as contraction.
… but the cook was busily stirring the soup, and seemed not to be listening.
In this example, two constructions were used in the Continuous form: the verb “to stir” in the Past Continuous form and the continuous form from the infinitive of the verb “listen”. Let's consider the following translation options:
Zakhoder: “... she, having missed this hint deaf ears, again busily stirs her soup.”
Demurova: “... but she did not pay any attention to this hint and continued to stir her soup.”
Let us first consider the translations of the verb “was stirring”. Zakhoder transformed the entire situation, moving it from the position of the present tense. In its translation, the verb “stirs” conveys a long-term action occurring at the moment of speech. Because Both meanings: semantic and grammatical are conveyed, and in English we see the analytical form of the verb, then we can conclude that such a translation transformation as contraction is used. In Demurova’s translation, the analytical form of the English verb found a different analogue: “kept stirring.” We cannot say that this form is analytical,
But at the same time, the verb “continued” adds an additional meaning of duration to the verb “stir.” This technique can be defined as deployment.
The second verb: “not to be listening” was translated as follows. Zakhoder used the verb form of the gerund “missing the ears.” This participle is in the past perfect form. It does not convey the duration of the process, but symbolizes its completion. In addition, the semantic functions of the verb “to listen” were not conveyed. Apparently, such a technique as zero transfer was used.
Demurova translated this verb with the expression “didn’t pay attention.” The verb “did not turn” is in the past perfect form. It does not convey duration, but speaks of an action that has already taken place. Those. This is an example of a zero translation.
The poor little thing was snorting like a steam-engine when she caught it.
The verb “snort” in this example is in the Past Continuous form and conveys an action that lasts for a period of time longer than the action of the verb “to catch” and simultaneously with it. This is evidenced by the pronoun when. Both translators chose the same equivalent and used the same grammatical form.
Zakhoder: “The poor baby was puffing like a locomotive.”
Demurova: “The poor thing was puffing like a steam locomotive.”
The verb “puffed” is in the past tense imperfective form. This verb conveys the duration of an action, which means that the grammatical meaning is conveyed as well as the lexical meaning, we can talk about the use of contraction.
Also its eyes were getting extremely small for a baby.
In this example, the verb “to get small” is represented in the Past Continuous form, meaning “to become small.” This is how this verb was transformed.
Zakhoder: “Yes, and the eyes were a little too small for a normal child”
Demurova: “The face seemed very suspicious to her: the nose was so upturned that it looked more like a snout, and the eyes were too small for a baby.”
In Demurova’s translation, the verb is completely omitted, which gives us grounds to talk about a zero translation. And Zakhoder chose the verb as “were.” This verb does not convey duration, but speaks of an action that has already taken place. Those. This is an example of a zero translation. In general, in both versions the eyes did not “become” small, but already “were” so.
But perhaps it was only sobbing.
Here in the Past Continuous form is the verb “to sob” - “to sob, sob.”
Zakhoder: “Still, maybe he was just whining?”
Demurova: “Maybe he just sobbed.”
The difference between these two translations lies almost only in the form of the verb. In both cases, this is a verb in the past tense, but in the first version it is imperfect, while in the second it is perfect. Hence the difference in transmission in conveying grammatical meaning. In the first case, the duration of the action is conveyed, and in the second, its completion. Thus, in the first example, the technique of contraction or compression was used, and in the second, zero translation was used.
While she was looking at the place where it had been, it suddenly appeared again.
In this example, the Past Continuous verb: "was looking" conveys a continuous action that occurs over a period of time longer than the action of the verb "appeared". It refers to an action that began in the past and continues until the action of the verb "appeared" and perhaps even longer. This is evidenced by the conjunction while. The translators made the following transformations:
Zakhoder: “For a long time she could not take her eyes off the branch on which the cat had just sat”
Demurova: “She stood and looked at the branch where the cat had just been sitting, when suddenly he appeared again in the same place.”
Both variants convey the duration of the process of contemplation in a similar way to the English verb, but the verbs themselves were expanded, which added additional semantic load to them with an even longer duration of action. As a result of these transformations, Russian verbs, of course, did not become analytical, but were significantly expanded, which indicates the use of such a transformation as deployment.
He had taken his watch out of his pocket, and was looking at it uneasily.
In this case, the verb “to look” is in the Past Continuous form, conveying an action that takes place for some time at the present moment after the action of the verb “take” is in the Past Perfect form.
Zakhoder: “The hat took his watch out of his pocket and looked at it with concern....”
Demurova: “He looked at them with alarm.”
The translators selected the form of the Russian equivalent as the verb “looked” or “looked”. These verbs are in the past perfect form. They do not convey duration, but speak of an action that has already taken place. Those. These are examples of zero translation.
“There’s no such thing!” Alice was beginning very angrily.
The construction “was beginning” in this sentence in the Past Continuous form conveys the meaning of the duration of the action occurring at the moment of the action, and has the meaning “to begin”. In Zakhoder’s translation: “What kind of jam? - Alice was indignant,” the verb “indignant” was used, which is in the form of the past tense of the perfective indicative mood. It does not convey the grammatical meaning of duration inherent in the English Continuous form. The semantic meaning here is also distorted. From which we can draw a conclusion about the use of zero translation.
The verb “screamed” in Demurova’s translation “There are no such wells,” Alice screamed indignantly” is also in the past tense form of the perfective indicative mood. It similarly conveys neither the semantic nor the grammatical functions of the English form. From which we can draw a conclusion about the use of zero translation.
The last time she saw them, they were trying to put the Dormouse into the teapot.
In this example, the action of the verb in the Past Continuous form “was trying” occurs over a certain period of time, longer than the action of the verb “saw”, but at the same time simultaneously with it. Those. it is assumed that their effect was quite long-lasting, unlike Alice's. Let's look at the translation options for this sentence:
Zakhoder: “But, turning around at the end, she only saw that they were trying to stuff Sonya into the teapot.”
Demurova: “Looking around for the last time, she saw that they were putting Sonya in the teapot.”
In Zakhoder's translation, the English verb is translated as “trying.” This verb is in the present tense. It conveys the duration of the action, which means that the grammatical meaning is conveyed as well as the lexical meaning, we can talk about the use of contraction. Demurova omitted this verb completely, thus using the zero translation said the Queen, pointing to the three gardeners who were lying round the rosetree; for, you see, as they were lying on their faces.
In this sentence, two identical verbs “to lie” are in the same Past Continuous form. In the first case, the verb “were lying” conveys an action lasting for a certain period of time that began before the beginning of the moment of action of the verb “said” and simultaneously with it. In the second case, the verb is only repeated. In the first case, we learn about this action, and in the second, we are explained how it happens. The translators made the following transformations:
Zakhoder: “- asked the Queen, pointing with her chin at the three gardeners, who were still lying around under the bush. After all, as you remember, they lay face down..."
Demurova: “- asked the Queen, pointing to the gardeners who had fallen around the bush. They were lying face down..."
In the second case, both translators rendered the verb “were lying” in the same way, using the same form of the past tense verb of the indicative imperfective mood. This verb conveys the grammatical meaning of duration; the semantic functions of the English verb are also preserved, from which we can conclude that the contraction is used, because we are talking about translating the analytical form of an English verb.
The verb “were lying” in the first case was transformed by translators in different ways. For Zakhoder, this is the verb “lying”, which is in the past tense form of the indicative imperfective mood. For Demurova, this is the gerund “fell down.” The verb “lying” conveys the procedural nature of the action, corresponding to the English verb. This translation option is similar to the translation “were lying” discussed earlier, which means that contraction was also used here.
As for the translation of the Continuous form of the Russian form of participle, then most likely we can talk about the use of conversion, i.e. about the use of a specific form, not inherent in another language, that preserves the categorical meanings of a unit of the source language.
She was walking by the White Rabbit, who was peering anxiously into her face.
This example uses two verbs in the Continuous form. The action they perform occurs simultaneously and conveys procedurality. Let's look at the translation options for this sentence:
Zakhoder: “Alice turned around - the White Rabbit was cowardly next to her, looking ingratiatingly into her face.”
In this translation, the English verb “to walk” is translated as “to be a coward.” It is in the form of a past tense imperfective verb and conveys the meaning of the duration of the action inherent in the Continuous form. Thus, this verb conveys both meanings: grammatical and lexical, and because In the English language we see the analytical form of the verb, then we can talk about the use of such a translation transformation as contraction. The second verb in this example is in the Continuous form: “was peering” is translated into Russian by the gerund “looking in”. As for the translation of the Continuous form of the Russian form of participle, then most likely we can talk about the use of conversion, i.e. about the use of a specific form, not inherent in another language, that preserves the categorical meanings of a unit of the source language.
Demurova: “She looked up and saw the White Rabbit walking nearby and looking at her worriedly.”
In this translation, both English verbs in the Past Continuous form are translated into Russian by verbs in the Present Tense form. In the theoretical part, the historical present time was already mentioned, but in this case, this is, apparently, the author’s decision to convey the text from the position of the present tense, and not additional emotionality. Apart from the inconsistency of tense, all other functions of the English verb are transferred, from which we can conclude that the contraction is used.
It was talking in a hurried nervous manner, smiling at everything …
In this sentence we see two examples of verbs in the Past Continuous form. Their action occurs simultaneously with each other, and both of them convey a long-lasting effect. They were translated like this:
Zakhoder: “He smiled at everyone and everyone, fussed and chattered something incessantly”
Demurova: “He said something quickly and nervously and smiled at everyone.”
The translators selected verbs with the same grammatical form: a verb in the past tense imperfective form. In this form, it conveys the meaning of the duration of the action inherent in the Continuous form. Thus, these verbs convey grammatical meaning. Their lexical meaning also does not contradict the meaning of the English verb. And because In the English language we see the analytical form of the verb, then we can talk about the use of such a translation transformation as contraction.
And, as the doubled-up soldiers were always getting up and walking off to other parts of the ground.
This example uses two verbs in the Continuous form. The action performed by them occurs simultaneously and conveys duration. Among other things, this example is interesting because here, apparently, one can observe an example of an emotional long time. Proof of this is the presence of the adverb “always” (we considered the possibilities of its use with the Continuous form in the theoretical part). The continuous form is used here for actions that are far from indifferent to the speaker. She may express momentary irritation here. Or perhaps not. Let's look at the translation options for this sentence:
Zakhoder: “And on top of all this, the soldiers who served as the gates every now and then got up and walked around the site to stretch their legs.”
Demurova: “... and the goalkeeper soldiers straightened up and went to the other end of the site”
The semantic meaning, in general, of all verbs corresponds to English. The grammatical form was conveyed by verbs in the same form: in the past tense imperfective form. In this form, it conveys the meaning of the duration of the action inherent in the Continuous form. From which we can draw a conclusion about the use of contraction.
She was looking about for some way of escape, and wondering whether she could get away without being seen.
In this example, we can observe two cases of using the Past Continuous form: the verbs “be looking about” in the meaning “to examine something.” place, look around, ponder, ponder, weigh all possibilities” and “be wondering” meaning “to admire, be interested in, want to know, doubt.” Let's look at the translations of this sentence.
Zakhoder: “She began to think about how to sneak away unnoticed as quickly as possible.”
The phrase “started to think,” which conveys the semantic meaning of these verbs, consists of two verbs in the past tense form. But they do not convey the duration of action because their characteristic is a perfect appearance. The use of null translation is obvious.
Demurova: “She looked around and began to think about how to sneak away unnoticed.”
This translation reflects both verbs. The verb “was looking about” is translated as “looked around.” This form does not convey grammatical meaning, because characterizes a completed action. “Started to think” is also a perfective form and does not convey the duration of the action. In both of these cases, the zero translation was used and he called to the Queen, who was passing at the moment.
Here the verb “was passing” conveys an action performed simultaneously with the action conveyed by the verb called and has the meaning “to go, pass, pass by, pass.” In Zakhoder’s translation “... and shouted to the Queen passing nearby,” we see an example of the transmission of the English Continuous form through the Russian form of the gerund. We can talk about applying conversion, i.e. about the use of a specific form, not inherent in another language, that preserves the categorical meanings of a unit of the source language. Demurova used a similar verb form:
“Seeing the Queen passing by, he shouted...”
The King and the Queen, who were talking at once, while …
In this example, the action of the verb in the Continuous form “were talking” occurs over a certain period of time. The translators made the following transformations:
Zakhoder: “All three spoke at the same time...”
Demurova: “The executioner, the King and the Queen argued noisily; each shouted his own, not listening to the other..."
Various verbs were selected that approximately convey the meaning of the verb “to talk”. It should also be noted that both of these verbs are in the imperfect past tense form and convey the procedural nature of the action. Both meanings: semantic and grammatical are conveyed, etc. In the English language we see the analytical form of the verb, then we can talk about the use of such a translation transformation as contraction.
2.3 The construction “is going to” and the transfer of the future tense
I suppose Dinah’ll be sending me on messages next!
This sentence uses the Continuous form. It was conveyed as follows:
Zakhoder: “What the hell, Dinka will start ordering me around!”
Demurova: “It’s still not enough for Dina to give me instructions!”
Both translators took the phrase “will be sending me on messages” as the unit of translation. In Zakhoder, it is translated into Russian by the verb of the future tense “he will begin to command me,” which, in general, does not contradict the transfer of the functions of the English verb, from which one can draw a conclusion about the use of the contraction. Demurova completely changed the form, conveying the meaning and adding emphasis to this sentence. But still, a complete distortion of form and, in some way, meaning forces us to conclude that a zero translation is being used.
Coming in a minute, nurse!
In this sentence we see an example of the use of the Present Continuous form in the function of conveying an action occurring in the future tense. The form itself is reduced here, which is typical of colloquial speech. The translators approached this sentence as follows:
Zakhoder: “I can’t, nanny!”
Demurova: “Now, nanny!”
Both translators selected constructions characteristic of colloquial speech. Neither option contains a verb. But they still cannot be called zero because semantic functions are transferred. In all likelihood, a technique such as conversion was used here, i.e. conveying the meaning of a statement through the use of a specific unit of the target language that preserves the categorical meanings of the source unit. The entire phrase was taken as the unit of translation.
She took up the fan and a pair of the gloves, and was just going to leave the room.
In this sentence, the verb in the Continuous form is in the past tense. We included it in this group because this verb: “is going to” expresses the intention to perform some action in the future. In this case, this construction is in the form of the past tense, due to the fact that the entire narrative is devoted to events of the past. Both translators translated this construction as follows.
Zakhoder: “She took a fan and gloves and was about to leave”
Demurova: “Alice took a fan and a pair of gloves and was just about to leave the room.”
Both translation options reflect the construction “is going to” with one verb “to gather”. The Russian verb conveys the semantic and grammatical functions of the English verb, from which we can conclude that a functional replacement is used.
If you're going to turn into a pig, my dear.
The construction “is going to”, standing in the present tense, conveys the intention to perform some action in the future. Let's look at the translation options:
“Look, my dear, if you decide to behave like a pig…” - in Zakhoder’s translation the verb with this meaning is completely absent. He distorted the meaning of the sentence and did not convey the grammatical form. What does it mean about zero translation?
Demurova: “Tell you what, my dear, if you’re going to turn into a piglet...”
Here the grammatical and semantic functions of the English verb are transferred, i.e. functional substitution was used.
Of course, of course; just what I was going to remark myself.
Here the construction “was going to” conveys intention in the past. The translators rendered it as follows:
Zakhoder: “Of course, of course, that’s exactly what I wanted to say!”
Demurova: “Of course, of course, I was just about to say the same thing”
Semantic functions have been transferred. Moreover, in the first version we see such a transformation as “wanted”. This verb, like “going to,” conveys intention, which indicates the use of functional substitution and when she had got her head down, and was going to begin again.
Similar to the previous use of the construction “is going to” in the past tense form.
Zakhoder: “... but she barely had time to carefully straighten the flamingo’s neck and was about to hit his nose into the ball...” - the grammatical and semantic functions of the English verb are fully conveyed, which indicates a functional replacement.
Demurova: “... just put it upside down under his arm, pull his legs back, aim and get ready to hit the hedgehog with it...” - the English verb in the past tense was converted into a Russian verb in the future tense. Thus, the semantic functions are preserved, but the grammatical form has been distorted. This is possible by using null translation.
He had never had to do such a thing before and he wasn’t going to begin at his time of life.
Both translators rendered “Is going to” in the past tense using the present in Russian.
Zakhoder: “He has never done such things and in his old age he has no plans to do so!”
Demurova: “He has never done this and is not going to do this”
This transformation cannot be called a zero translation, because in this case, the present tense is used to add expression, the so-called emotional continuous. In this case, we can talk about using functional replacement.
2.4 Perfect Continuous forms
Alice had been looking over his shoulder with some curiosity.
In this example, we see a verb in the Past Perfect Continuous form, which expresses the action in its specific course in the period preceding the moment of speech. Let's pay attention to translation transformations:
In Zakhoder’s translation “... said Alice, who was watching with great interest the manipulations of the hare, looking over his shoulder,” we see an example of the transmission of the English form Continuous through the Russian form of the gerund. We can talk about applying conversion, i.e. about the use of a specific form, not inherent in another language, that preserves the categorical meanings of a unit of the source language.
In Demurova’s translation, “Alice looked curiously over his shoulder,” the verb was translated into Russian, having undergone the following changes: it was transmitted in the imperfect past tense form. Thus, the Russian verb conveys semantic and grammatical functions, and we can conclude that a functional substitution is used.
At this moment Five, who had been anxiously looking across the garden, called out “The Queen! The Queen!”
This example presents a verb in the Past Perfect Continuous form, which expresses an action in its specific course in the period preceding the moment of speech. This construction is translated as follows.
Zakhoder: “At this time Six, who was looking around anxiously every now and then, shouted: “Queen!” Queen!"
In this case, we see an example of the transmission of the English form Continuous through the Russian form of the gerund. We can talk about applying conversion, i.e. about the use of a specific form, not inherent in another language, that preserves the categorical meanings of a unit of the source language.
Demurova: “At that moment Five (he was peering into the garden all this time) shouted: “Queen!”
Here the verb has been rendered in the imperfect past tense form. It has the meaning of duration. Thus, the Russian verb conveys semantic and grammatical functions, and we can conclude that a functional substitution is used.
What have you been doing here?
We were trying…
I see! - said the Queen, who had meanwhile been examining the roses.
This example shows three uses of the Continuous form:
Present Continuous, Past Continuous, Past Perfect Continuous. From the theoretical part we know that the Perfect Continuous form expresses an action in its specific course in the previous period and completely excludes the meaning of completeness and effectiveness. Let's pay attention to the translation:
Answer me, what were you doing here?
So we tried...
Clear! - shouted the Queen, who at that time was carefully examining the roses.
Demurova:
What were you doing here?
We wanted...
All clear! - said the Queen, who meanwhile was carefully examining the roses.
To translate verbs into the Perfect Continuous form, equivalents such as “did” and “examined” or “looked at” were selected. All these verbs are in the past tense imperfect form. In this form they convey the meaning of the duration of the action inherent in the Continuous form. The meaning of completeness and effectiveness is completely excluded here. Thus, these verbs convey grammatical meaning. Their lexical meaning also does not contradict the meaning of the English verb. And because In the English language we see the analytical form of the verb, then we can talk about the use of such a translation transformation as contraction. As for the non-perfect verb in the Past Continuous form, both its meanings: both semantic and grammatical, are conveyed. This conclusion can be drawn from the analysis of two selected analogues: “tried” and “wanted”. Both of these verbs convey the grammatical meaning of the English verb, but only the Zakhoder version accurately conveys the semantic meaning. This verb conveys both meanings: grammatical and lexical, which means we can talk about the use of such a translation transformation as contraction because in English we see the analytical form of the verb. Demurova's version of the translation of this verb distorts the meaning. And this is only possible when using zero translation.
In the practical part of my course work, I gave examples of using the Continuous form in English and two options for their translation. This was done on the basis of Lewis Carroll’s book “Alice in Wonderland” and two versions of its translation: N.M. Demurova and a retelling from English. B.Zakhodera.
I divided all examples into three groups according to the form of the verb used:
Continuous (Progressive) Tense
The construction “is going to” and the transfer of the future tense (Future)
Perfect Continuous Forms
We analyzed seventy-two examples of the use of the Continuous form and all searches can be summarized in the following table. The first column lists the translation transformations used, the top line indicates the number of applications of each technique by Zakhoder, and the bottom line - Demurova. The remaining four columns reflect the data in relation to each time.
|
translation tools // functions |
||||
|
zero transfer (Z) |
||||
|
functional replacement (3) |
||||
|
conversion (C) |
||||
|
contraction (Z) |
||||
|
deployment (Z) |
From this table it can be seen that out of seventy-two cases of use of the Continuous form, twelve are in the Present Continuous. Most often, contraction and conversion were used in translation.
The most common tense based on our source is the Past Continuous: 68% of the total verbs are in the Continuous form. The most commonly used technique when translating the Past Continuous form into Russian is contraction, which can be explained for the most part because this English form is analytical, which cannot be reflected in the form of a Russian verb. In addition, translators often used zero translation. This was due to the fact that many Russian verbs did not convey the duration value characteristic of the Continuous form. In addition, the translator either translated the grammatical form without paying attention to its functions, or simply bypassed it using lexical transformations. In this regard, it is important to note the following feature: the meaning of duration is most often conveyed by Russian verbs in the form of the past tense of the imperfective form, while the perfective form does not have this property. There are also several examples of using conversion, because... conversion is most often used when changing the morphological status of a form. The use of such a form as deployment is rare.
In the group “The construction is going to and conveying the future tense” we have combined several different forms of verbs: one Future Continuous, one Present Continuous conveying an action taking place in the future, and five examples of using the construction “is going to”. The use of the Continuous form in the function of conveying the future tense is the smallest, so I combined these examples with examples of “is going to” constructions. When translating them, translators most often resorted to functional substitution. They selected a correspondence in the Russian language that had the same semantic and grammatical functions. When translating the Present Continuous form, which conveys the meaning of the future tense, conversion was used because it is most often used when changing the morphological status of a form: the Continuous form is used in the present tense, and in Russian it is translated into the future form.
Verbs in the Perfect Continuous form are used extremely rarely. Five examples were found in Lewis Carroll's text. It is impossible to derive any patterns from such a quantity. But in general, the transformations are similar to the techniques used in translating the Past Continuous.
In conclusion, it can be noted that the translation of the Continuous form requires special attention from the translator. First of all, he must determine exactly what functions this form performs in each specific case, and then select the appropriate form in Russian. Because Most often it is impossible to completely transfer all functions, then the translator has to select the most important ones and carry out transformations in accordance with this.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL LIST OF USED LITERATURE
Theoretical sources
Arnold I.V. Stylistics of modern English (decoding stylistics). Textbook A manual for pedagogical students. Institutes with specialty No. 2103 “foreign languages”. Ed. 2nd, revised - Leningrad: “Enlightenment”, 1981.-295 p.
Arnold I.V. Fundamentals scientific research in linguistics. - M.: Higher. School, 1991.-140 p.
Barabash T.A. English Grammar.- M.: Yunves, 2001.-256 p.
L.S.Barkhudarov, D.A.Steling. English grammar. M.: Publishing house of literature in foreign languages. 1960.-422 p.
Veykhman G.A. New in English grammar: A textbook for institutes and facts of foreign languages. - M.: Astrel Publishing House LLC: AST Publishing House LLC, 2001. - 128 p.
Vinogradov V.S. Introduction to translation studies (general and lexical issues). - M.: Publishing House of the Institute of General Secondary Education of the Russian Academy of Education, 2001. - 224 p.
Gruzinskaya I.A., Cherkasskaya E.B., Romanovich A.Yu. Just about the main thing. English grammar. - M.: Yunves, 2001.-361 p.
Dorodnykh A.I. Variation of verb forms in modern English. - Kharkov: Vishcha school. Publishing house at KhSU, 1988.-176 p.
Ivanova I.P., Burlakova V.V., Pocheptsov G.G. Theoretical grammar of modern English: Textbook - M.: Higher. School, 1981.-285 p.
Kazakova T.A. Practical fundamentals of translation. St. Petersburg: Soyuz Publishing House, 2000.-320 p.
Komissarov V.N. General theory of translation: problems of translation studies in the coverage of foreign scientists. M.: CheRo, 1999.-136 p.
Komissarov V.N. A word about translation. M.: International relationships, 1973.-216 p.
Levitskaya T.R., Fiterman A.M. Theory and practice of translation from English into Russian. M.: publishing house of literature in foreign languages, 1963. - 264 p.
Monk Bruce. English language: verb tenses. M.: Bustard. 2000-384 pp.
Practical English grammar. K.N.Kachalova, E.E.Izrailevich. M.: Unvest List, 2000. - 718 p.
Pumpyansky A.P. Reading and translation of English scientific and technical literature: vocabulary, grammar, phonetics, exercises. Mn.: LLC "Potpourri", 1997. - 608 p.
Rastorgueva T.A. Essays on the historical grammar of the English language: tutorial for institutes and faculties. Foreign Yaz.-M.: Higher School, 1989.-160 p.
Rubtsova M.G. Reading and translation of English scientific and technical literature: a lexical and grammatical reference book. M.: LLC "AST Publishing House": LLC "Astrel Publishing House", 2002. - 384 p.
Fedorov A.V. Fundamentals of the general theory of translation. M.: Higher School, 1986.- 398 pp., p. 215
Khaimovich B.S., Rogovskaya B.I., Theoretical grammar of the English language. M.: “Higher School”, 1967.-298 p.
Lexicographical sources
New English-Russian. Russian-English dictionary: 45,000 words. - K.: A.S.K., 2002. -726 p.
New large English-Russian dictionary: In 3 volumes / Yu.D. Apresyan, E.M. Mednikova, A.V. Petrova and others - 7th ed., stereotype. - M.: Russian language, 2002.-832 p.
Stolyar V.G. English-Russian thematic dictionary of phrasal verbs for students. - M.: List-New, 1999 - 560 p.
Text material
Carroll L. Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. Through the mirror and what Alice saw there, or Alice through the looking glass. - 2nd ed., revised - St. Petersburg: LLC “Kristall Publishing House”, 2000.-432 p.
Carroll L. Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. - Novosibirsk: Novosibirsk Book Publishing House, 1987. - 280 pp.
Lewis Carroll. Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. - London: Penguin Books, 1994. - 150 p.
2016. T. 26, issue. 6
BULLETIN OF UDMURT UNIVERSITY
HISTORY AND PHILOLOGY SERIES
UDC 802.0-07 S.Yu. Solomatina
GRAMMATICAL TRANSFORMATIONS WHEN TRANSLATING TEXTS FROM ENGLISH INTO RUSSIAN (BASED ON ENGLISH ESSAYS)
The article discusses current issues related to grammatical transformations, which, in turn, are the most common type of interlingual transformations in translation. Translation from one language to another is impossible without grammatical modifications. The article examines the grammatical categories of gender and number. Grammatical translation problems are determined by the need to adequately convey syntactic structures, since the essay genre very often has a special syntactic organization, expressed in the selection of a certain type of sentence. A comparative analysis of translations of English essays by Ewell Gibbons, Langston Hughes, Richard Howe, Joe Goodwin Parker, May Sarton and Alan Peyton makes it possible to find out how typical translation difficulties associated with grammatical transformations in such a literary genre as the essay are overcome.
Key words: grammatical transformations, grammatical category of number, grammatical category of gender, translation activity, essay, adequacy of translation.
When translating texts from English into Russian, you have to solve not only lexical problems, but also problems of a grammatical nature. The grammatical phenomena of a particular language, associated with the laws of its structure and conditioned by them, in their totality are different from the grammatical phenomena of another language, although in certain respects they may have similarities with them. This discrepancy, which makes itself felt especially clearly in translation, determines the uniqueness of each language.
Of course, reproducing the grammatical form of the original cannot serve as the purpose of translation. The goal is to convey the author’s thoughts, the expression of which in the original may correspond to other formal means. And only in the case when individual features of the grammatical form of the original play a certain stylistic role - for example, its brevity, parallelism in the construction of phrases or sentences, more frequent use of one or another part of speech - the translator’s task becomes not direct reproduction of these features, but recreating their functions by using similar means of expression contained in his native language.
The formation of grammatical competence necessary for the implementation of future professional communicative activities of a specialist can be attributed to the most pressing tasks of teaching, therefore the teacher should strive to implement communicative learning, the goal of which is to ensure that the student can freely navigate in a foreign language environment and adequately respond to various situations .
There are three main types of grammatical discrepancies between the source language and the target language:
The first case is when an element is encountered in the original language that has no formal grammatical correspondence in the target language (for example, the presence of an article and the difference between definite and indefinite article, analytical forms of the past tense in a number of Romance and Germanic languages - in the absence of these phenomena in the Russian language).
The second case is when the target language (TL) contains elements that do not have a formal correspondence in the source language (hereinafter - TL), and yet are inevitably used in texts of any genre (for example, the form of the verb type, a widely developed inflectional system, the presence of participles active form of the past tense and passive form of the present tense in the Russian language - in the absence of these grammatical means in certain Romance and Germanic languages).
The third case is when the TL contains grammatical elements that formally correspond to the elements of the FL, but differ from them in the functions they perform (for example, categories of gender, number, modality).
Cases of changes in the grammatical categories of a word in translation, small rearrangements or additions within small phrases are constant when transmitting any text; they are typical for the most “accurate” translation. In other words, the most formal precision in transmission
HISTORY AND PHILOLOGY SERIES
2016. T. 26, issue. 6
In the course of working on translations of texts, difficulties associated with conveying the category of number repeatedly arise. The category of number exists in both English and Russian languages. “This category expresses quantitative relationships that exist in reality, reflected in the minds of speakers of a given language and having morphological expression in the corresponding forms of the language.”
Despite the fact that nouns have singular and plural forms, both in Russian and in English, there is no complete semantic and functional coincidence between them. There are many cases when the singular form in Russian during translation corresponds to the plural form in English.
For example, in Euell Gibbons's essay “How to Cook a Carp” (1962), a striking example of the need to change the number is the following sentence:
One spring day, a cow-hand who had been riding that way reported that Clear Ditch was becoming crowded with huge carp .
The original text uses the singular noun carp. However, given the different combinability of words in the two languages, it is more natural to use plural the noun carp, since keeping the singular in the translation will violate the norms of the Russian language:
One spring day, driving past this ditch, a shepherd discovered that it was infested with huge carp.
Another example comes from Langston Hughes's essay "Purification" (Salvation, 1940):
And the whole building rocked with prayer and song.
And the whole building shook with prayers and songs.
The use of the plural in translation is more appropriate both in context and in tradition of use.
Here's another similar example from Richard Howe's essay “How to Write a Rotten Poem with Almost No Effort” (1978):
You"ve had a rotten day or an astounding thought or a car accident or a squalid love affair and you want to record it for all time.
You had a bad day, or amazing thoughts, or a car accident, or a wicked love affair, and you want to immortalize it.
In this sentence, when translating, it is better to use the plural of the Russian correspondence for English word thought.
Difficulties associated with the translation of texts may also arise when transferring the category of gender.
It should be recalled that the category of gender in Russian, compared to English, is expressed very clearly. In the Russian language, gender indicators are found in nouns (inflectional endings), in words that agree with them (adjectives, participles, past tense forms of verbs, etc.), and in pronouns. In English, clear gender distinctions are only found in personal, possessive and reflexive pronouns of the third person singular.
This is explained by the general structure of the Russian (synthetic) and English (analytical) languages. According to A.I. Smirnitsky, the category of genus can be represented by phenomena of different orders. So, for example, in Russian, for adjectives, gender is a grammatical category, while for nouns in the same language, gender is a lexical-grammatical category. In the English language, the only sign by which one could conditionally speak about the “gender” of a noun is its correlation with third person singular pronouns.
So, for example, when translating the essay “What is poverty?” (What Is Poverty? 1971) Jow Goodwin Parker, until the end of the third paragraph it is not clear on whose behalf the story is being told. Therefore, it is difficult to understand several sentences, since they need to correctly put adjectives and verbs in the appropriate person:
Here I am, dirty, smelly, and with no "proper" underwear on and with the stench of my rotting teeth near you.
76 S.Yu. Solomatina
2016. T. 26, issue. SERIES 6 HISTORY AND PHILOLOGY
I could bury it, but where is the shovel? . Another sentence: I have always been tired.
And only in the next sentence, it becomes clear that the narration is being told from the perspective of a woman:
They told me at the hospital when the last baby came that I... . At the hospital, when I gave birth to my last child, they told me that I had...
From the same essay one can give another example regarding the issue of transferring the category
Every night I wash every stitch my school age child has on and just hope her clothes will be dry by morning.
Thanks to the third person singular objective case personal pronoun her, we can translate school age child as “schoolgirl daughter.” Accordingly, the full translation of this sentence is as follows:
Every evening I wash all my schoolgirl daughter’s clothes, and I only hope that her things will be dry by the morning.
A similar problem arises in essays by other authors. Take, for example, May Sarton's essay “The Rewards of Living a Solitary Life” (1946). At the beginning of her essay, the author talks about moments of loneliness that her friend experienced: The other day an acquaintance of mine, ... .
It would have been impossible to determine the gender of this man if May Sarton had not further used the third person singular pronoun he and the reflexive pronoun himself in describing him: ... a gregarious and charming man, told me he had found himself unexpectedly alone in New York for an hour or two between appointments .
This allows us to translate an acquaintance of mine as “an acquaintance of mine”: Recently, a friend of mine, a charming and sociable man, told me that he unexpectedly found himself completely alone in New York for an hour or two between business meetings.
We can demonstrate with another example the need to change the gender category during the translation process. Let us turn to the text of the essay “The Joys of Solitude” by May Sarton:
We are busy wondering what does my companion see or think of this, and what do I think of it? .
Despite the fact that in the original text the author uses the personal pronoun I and the possessive pronoun of the dependent form my, the category of gender is not defined. You can verify this by paying attention to the first part of the sentence - We are busy wondering. Therefore, we should make a generalization and use the pronoun we instead of I and our instead of mine in translation:
We wonder what our friend sees or thinks about something, and what do we think about it?
Let us consider another difficulty associated with the problem of transferring the category of gender, using the example of Alan Paton’s essay “Eight Signposts to Salvation” (1975). The translator of this essay has a need to change the category of gender:
And the man is me, my wife, our children; he is the White man; above all he is the Afrikaner . In this sentence, the third person singular pronoun he only clarifies that we are talking about the person mentioned at the beginning of the sentence (And the man is me), therefore, as native speakers of the Russian language, we cannot add the third person singular pronoun into the translation - without distorting the meaning of the message. Therefore, we replace the pronoun - he with the pronoun - this:
And this person is me, my wife, our children; this is a white man; mostly South African.
So, an analysis of the factual material shows that in the process of translation it is inevitably necessary to make significant syntactic changes in the structure of the text. This is due to the need to more adequately convey the information contained in the text in accordance with the norms of the target language.
HISTORY AND PHILOLOGY SERIES
2016. T. 26, issue. 6
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Barkhudarov L. S. Language and translation (issues of general and particular theory of translation). M.: International relations, 1975. 240 p.
2. Ponomarenko E.P. Psychology of educational interaction in a technical university (on the example of foreign language teaching) // Practical psychology: intensive methods and technologies in training and personality development: collection. scientific Art. 2013. pp. 106-118.
3. Smirnitsky A.I. Morphology of the English language. M., 1959. 440 p.
4. Solomatina S.Yu. Formation of skills to achieve connotative equivalence in the process of training future translators (based on English essays) // Bulletin of the Izhevsk State Technical University named after M.T. Kalashnikov. No. 3 (67). Izhevsk: Publishing house IzhSTU, 2015. pp. 123-125.
5. Fedorov A.V. Fundamentals of the general theory of translation (linguistic problems): For institutes and faculties. foreign language: textbook. allowance. 4th ed., revised. and additional M.: Higher. school, 1983. 303 p.
6. Readings: an Anthology. 3. ed. New York, 1991. 523 pp.
Received by the editor 11/18/16
S.Yu. Solomatina
GRAMMATICAL TRANSFORMATIONS IN TRANSLATION OF THE LITERARY TEXTS FROM ENGLISH INTO RUSSIAN (EXEMPLIFIED BY AUTHENTIC ENGLISH ESSAYS)
The article deals with the topical questions of grammatical transformations. It is not difficult to observe that the classification of nouns is not and cannot be similar in the two languages, which may be the reason why the grammatical categories under consideration are different in English and Russian and may cause diverse misunderstandings. Grammatical transformations are the most common type of interlanguage transformations in translation. The paper outlines the problems of the grammatical category of number and the grammatical category of gender. Comparative analysis of the translation of the English essays of Euell Gibbons, Langston Hughes, Richard Howe, Jow Goodwin Parker, May Sarton and Alan Paton gives the opportunity to figure out how to overcome the typical difficulties associated with grammatical transformations.
Keywords: grammatical transformations, grammatical category of number, grammatical category of gender, translation activity, essay, translation adequacy.
Solomatina Svetlana Yurievna, Solomatina S.Yu.,
Candidate of Philology, Associate Professor
Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education “Izhevsk State Technical University” Kalashnikov Izhevsk State Technical University
University named after M.T. Kalashnikov" Studencheskaya st., 7, Izhevsk, Russia, 426069
426069, Russia, Izhevsk, st. Studencheskaya, 7 E-mail: [email protected] Email: [email protected]
1Lisitsyna V.O. 1Arutyunov E.K. 1
1 MAOU VPO "Krasnodar Municipal Medical Institute of Higher Nursing Education"
1. Barkhudarov L. S. On the issue of grammatical meanings and their transmission during translation. – M., 2012.
2. Barkhudarov L.S. Text as a unit of language and a unit of translation / Linguistics of text: In 2 parts - M., 2013.
3. Barkhudarov L.S., Shteling D.A. English grammar. – M., 2010.
4. Barkhudarov L.S. Language and translation (Issues of general and particular theory of translation). – M., 2011.
5. Komissarov V.N., Koralova A.L. Workshop on translation from English into Russian. – M., 2010.
There are different points of view regarding the division of transformations into types, but most authors agree on one thing: the main types of transformations are grammatical and lexical. In turn, these transformations are divided into subtypes.
Grammatical transformations involve transforming the structure of a sentence during the translation process in accordance with the norms of the target language. Transformation can be complete or partial, depending on whether the structure of the sentence changes completely or partially. Usually, when the main members of a sentence are replaced, a complete transformation occurs, but if only minor ones are replaced, a partial transformation occurs. In addition to replacing parts of a sentence, parts of speech can also be replaced. Most often this happens simultaneously.
Subtypes of grammatical transformations include: rearrangement, replacement. Rearrangement as a type of translation transformation is a change in the arrangement (order) of language elements in the translation text compared to the original text. The elements that are rearranged are usually words, phrases, parts of a complex sentence and independent sentences in the structure of the text. An English sentence, as a rule, begins with a subject (or subject group), followed by a predicate (predicate group), that is, the main thing - the center of the message (rheme) - comes first. Secondary information (topic) circumstances of place and circumstances of time are placed at the end. The word order of a Russian sentence is different: the secondary members of the sentence (adverbs of time and place) often come first, followed by the predicate and finally the subject. This must be taken into account when translating. This phenomenon is known as “communicative sentence division.” In the English text, the subordinate clause precedes the main clause, but in the Russian translation, on the contrary, the main clause precedes the subordinate clause. There are also opposite cases.
Substitutions are the most common and diverse type translation transformations. During the translation process, grammatical units can be replaced - word forms, parts of speech, sentence parts, types of syntactic connections, etc.
a) Replacement of word forms
Substitutions of word forms imply replacement of number in nouns, tense in verbs, etc. Thus, the norms of the English language dictate the use of the present tense form in subordinate clauses of time or condition, i.e. where the Russian equivalent verb would be in the future tense.
b) Parts of speech substitutions
This type of replacement is quite common. Its simplest form is the so-called “pronominalization,” or the replacement of a noun with a pronoun. When translating from English into Russian, the pronoun is reversely replaced with a noun. A very typical replacement when translating from English into Russian is the replacement of a verbal noun with a verb in the personal form.
When translating an English verbal noun - the name of an actor (usually with the suffix - er) it is natural and common to replace it with the Russian personal form of the verb.
During translation, other types of substitutions of parts of speech also occur, and often they are also accompanied by the replacement of sentence members, that is, a restructuring of the syntactic structure of the sentence.
c) Replacement of sentence members (restructuring of the syntactic structure of the sentence)
When replacing sentence members with words and groups of words in the translation text, a restructuring of the syntactic scheme of sentence construction occurs. The reasons for this kind of restructuring may be different.
The most common example of syntactic restructuring is the replacement of an English passive construction with a Russian active one, in which the English subject is replaced in a Russian sentence by an object at the beginning of the sentence; the English addition with the preposition by, when translated into Russian, becomes the subject or there is no subject at all (the so-called “indefinitely personal” construction); The passive voice form of the English verb is replaced by the active voice form of the Russian verb. When translating from Russian into English, the reverse substitution “active - passive” occurs. Quite common (although they are not described in standard grammars) are also cases when the English subject is replaced by an adverbial when translated into Russian. This transformation also requires replacement transitive verb English sentence with an intransitive verb (or, less commonly, a verb in the passive voice) in a Russian sentence. In many cases, the restructuring of the syntactic structure is determined not by grammatical, but by stylistic considerations.
In most cases, when translating from English into Russian, the Russian sentence does not overlap with the English one and does not coincide with it in structure. Often the structure of a Russian sentence in translation is completely different from the structure of an English sentence. It has a different word order, a different sequence of parts of a sentence, and often a different order of arrangement of the sentences themselves - main, subordinate and introductory. In a number of cases, the parts of speech that express members of an English sentence are conveyed accordingly by other parts of speech. All this explains the widespread use of grammatical transformations in translation.
Bibliographic link
Lisitsyna V.O., Arutyunov E.K. TYPES OF GRAMMATICAL TRANSFORMATIONS IN WRITTEN TRANSLATION // International Journal of Experimental Education. – 2014. – No. 10. – P. 165-167;URL: http://expeducation.ru/ru/article/view?id=6060 (date of access: 04/06/2019). We bring to your attention magazines published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural Sciences"
Course work on the topic
"Grammatical transformations in translation"
Introduction........................................................ ........................................................ ....... 3
Section I. The concept of translation transformation and classification of its types. 5
1.1. “Transformation” as a concept in translation studies.................................... 5
1.2.Overview of classifications of types of translation transformations................................. 7
Section II. The use of grammatical transformations in translation. 13
2.1. Syntactic assimilation (literal translation)................................... 13
2.2. Grammatical substitutions......................................................... ..................... 15
2.3. Division of proposals................................................................ ....................... 20
2.4. Combining proposals................................................................ ................. 25
Conclusion................................................. ........................................................ .27
List of used literature......................................................... ............ 29
Sources illustrative material...................................................... 31
The main task of the translator is to achieve adequacy of the translation to the original text. Moreover, an adequate translation must convey the meaning of the original as accurately as possible and comply with the linguistic norms of the language into which the text is being translated. To fulfill these two requirements, it is often not enough to simply convey all the linguistic forms of the original with analogues from the target language, since often such complete analogues simply do not exist. The difference in the grammatical structure of languages, semantic fields of lexemes and phraseological units, the presence of specific categories in the original language leads to the need to use special translation techniques, united by the concept of translation transformations.
Thus, the main task of the translator on the way to achieving the adequacy of the translation becomes the effective use of translation transformations, with the help of which the accuracy of the transmission of all information contained in the original text is achieved.
A comprehensive study of translation transformations as a way to achieve adequacy of translation, their classification, and determination of the principles of their application are important tasks of modern translation studies. This is due to relevance topics of our work.
Translation transformations have been studied by many linguists, specialists in the theory and practice of translation. Therefore, we are faced with the task, first of all, to summarize the available information about translation transformations and to identify the degree to which this phenomenon has been studied in modern translation studies.
Thus, purpose The work is to consider various types of grammatical translation transformations as a means of achieving translation adequacy.
This goal leads to the following tasks :
· Analyze the essence of the concept of “transformation” in translation studies and linguistics in general;
· Consider the most significant classifications of translation transformations developed by domestic and foreign scientists;
· Describe the main types of grammatical translation transformations.
· Illustrate with examples the use of grammatical translation transformations of various types in order to adequately convey the content of the original text.
Object of study Translation techniques come into play, united by the concept of grammatical translation transformations.
Subject of research In this work, there are prerequisites for the use of grammatical translation transformations, determined by intralinguistic factors (the specific grammatical structure of the original and target languages).
Material The research was based on the text of Somerset Maugham’s novel “The Moon and Sixpence” and its translation by Natalia Mann.
The work consists of an introduction, two sections, a conclusion and a list of references.
The term "transformation" is used in many areas of linguistics. To fully define the term “transformation” it is necessary to consult various dictionaries. For example, the dictionary of linguistic terms edited by O. S. Akhmanova contains the following definition: “Transformation (from the English Transformation):
1) one of the methods for generating secondary linguistic structures, consisting in a natural change in the basic models (or nuclear structures).
2) symbolically expressed morpho-syntactic correspondences between similar sentences and phrases found in a given corpus.”
In the dictionary of brief linguistic terms edited by N.V. Vasilyeva, the term “transformation” is considered as a syntactic transformation, i.e. transformation is any change in the formal structure of the original (basic) sentence or in its content, leading to the appearance of a derivative sentence synonymous basic in the sense that they both describe the same situation.
The linguistic encyclopedic dictionary edited by V. N. Yartseva says that transformations are transformations with the help of which more complex ones are derived from simple syntactic structures.
Despite the relatively young age of translation theory or translation studies as a science, there are currently many works devoted to translation transformations. And this is not surprising, since this aspect is one of the central ones, and knowledge of its theoretical foundations is extremely important in the work of any translator.
However, it should be noted that experts in the field of translation theory have not yet come to a common opinion regarding the very essence of the concept of transformation in translation.
First of all, it is important to clarify the meaning of the concept of “translation transformation”. There are definitions proposed by L.S. Barkhudarov, R.K. Minyar-Beloruchev, Ya.I. Retzker, A.D. Schweitzer, V.E. Shchetinkin, L.K. Latyshev, V.N. Komisarov, V. G. Gak and others. However, the definition of L.S. Barkhudarov is considered fundamental, since it most accurately reflects the essence of the issue. In general, based on the definitions, we conclude that translation transformations are interlingual transformations, restructuring of elements of the source text, operations of re-expressing meaning or paraphrasing in order to achieve a translation equivalent.
Thus, the concept of “transformation” in translation theory is interpreted differently than in various branches of linguistics. The main distinctive feature of translation transformation is its interlingual nature, as well as its focus on achieving adequacy of translation.
There are many different points of view, but most linguists share the opinion that all translation transformations are divided into lexical, grammatical and mixed (or complex).
Let's consider the classifications of translation transformations proposed by various scientists.
A.M. Fiterman and T.R. Levitskaya distinguish three types of translation transformations:
· Grammatical transformations. This includes the following techniques: rearrangements, deletions and additions, rearrangements and replacements of sentences.
· Stylistic transformations. This category includes techniques such as synonymous substitutions and descriptive translation, compensation and other types of substitutions.
· Lexical transformations. Here we need to talk about replacement and addition, specification and generalization of sentences, as well as omission.
The next scientist, A.D. Schweitzer, suggests dividing transformations into four groups:
· Transformations at the component level of semantic valence imply the use of various kinds of substitutions. For example, replacing morphological means with lexical, other morphological, syntactic or phraseological means, and others.
· Transformations at the pragmatic level consist of the following techniques: translation compensation, replacement of certain stylistic means others, replacing allusions (realities) with similar ones, as well as interpretive, explanatory translation and translation compensation.
· Transformations carried out at the referential level are concretization (or hyponymic transformation), generalization (hyperonymic transformation), replacement of realities (interhyponymous transformation), as well as translation using remetaphorization (synecdochic transformation), metonymic transformation, remetaphorization (replacing one metaphor with another ), demetaphorization (replacing a metaphor with its antipode - a non-metaphor). This also includes one or another combination of these transformations and complex transformations (for example, conversion).
· Transformations at the stylistic level – compression and expansion. Compression refers to ellipsis, semantic contraction, omission of redundant elements and lexical folding.
J.I. Retzker, on the contrary, names only two types of transformations. This linguist talks about such techniques for their implementation as:
· Grammatical transformations in the form of replacing parts of speech or members of a sentence.
· Lexical transformations, which consist of specification, generalization, differentiation of meanings, antonymic translation, compensation for losses arising in the translation process, as well as semantic development and holistic transformation.
An analysis of these linguistic views allows us to draw the following conclusion: each of the named scientists (both practitioners and theorists) has their own point of view on the issue of transformations. For example, Fiterman and Levitskaya see three types - stylistic, grammatical, lexical transformations. The linguist Schweitzer talks not about types, but about levels that make it possible to use transformation techniques. At the same time, he believes that at the stylistic level both grammatical and lexical transformations can take place. That is, different types of transformations can take place at the same level.
However, all researchers demonstrate the same set of techniques for implementing translation transformations. Thus, various substitutions - grammatical, realia, etc., generalization and compensation are found in all works. If you follow this specific examples, then it becomes obvious that Retzker, Fiterman, Levitskaya attribute the techniques of concretization and generalization to the lexical variety of transformations. Schweitzer gives concepts other names - hyponymic and hyperonymic transformations - and indicates that their level is referential. We believe that these are phenomena of lexical transformation. A.M. Fiterman and T.R. Levitskaya classify the method of compensation as a stylistic variety. Retzker - to the lexical level, and Schweitzer - to the pragmatic level.
The technique of grammatical replacement is a grammatical type of transformation (according to Ya.I. Retzker, T.R. Levitskaya, T.R. Fiterman). However, A.D. Schweitzer calls the component level in this case.
The above-mentioned discrepancies are adjacent to the obvious similarities of all the listed concepts. Thus, all linguists declare that the division of transformations into types and species is a convention. This is due to the fact that some transformations practically never occur outside of combination with other transformations, that is, not in their pure form. It is this point that makes these classifications similar.
But there are other points of view. For example, R.K. Minyar-Beloruchev named three types of transformations - lexical, grammatical, semantic. The first type included techniques of generalization and specification; to the second - passivization, replacement of parts of speech and members of a sentence, combining sentences or dividing them; to the third - metaphorical, synonymous, metaphorical substitutions, logical development of concepts, antonymic translation and compensation techniques.
V.N. Komissarov’s concept comes down to such types of transformations as lexical and grammatical, as well as complex. Speaking about lexical transformations, he names transliteration, translation transcription, tracing, and some lexical-semantic replacements. For example, modulation, specification and generalization. The grammatical transformations include literal translation (or syntactic assimilation), grammatical replacements (replacements of sentence members, word forms, parts of speech) and sentence division. Complex transformations can also be called lexico-grammatical. These include explication (in other words, descriptive translation), antonymic translation and compensation.
The famous linguist L.S. Barkhudarov named four types of transformations that take place during the work on translation. These are permutations, substitutions, deletions and additions.
The techniques used in rearrangement are changing the order of the components of a complex sentence, as well as changing the place of words and phrases. Barkhudarov included compensation, syntactic substitutions in the structure of a complex sentence, replacement of parts of speech, sentence components and word forms, specification and generalization, division and combination of sentences, replacement of cause with effect (and vice versa), and antonymic translation. Omissions and additions have corresponding types of transformations - omission and addition.
We are convinced that R.K. Minyar-Beloruchev divides translation transformations into three types - semantic, grammatical and lexical - depending on which plan of the source text should be translated: formal (external) or semantic (semantic). The nature of the elements of the source language, according to V.N. Komisarov, allows us to divide transformations into three types: grammatical, lexical and lexico-grammatical (complex).
· lexical transformations, to which they include such methods as compensation, antonymic translation, specification, replacement of cause with effect and generalization.
· grammatical transformations, to which they include deletions, permutations, additions and transpositions.
In contrast, L.K. Latyshev identifies six types of translation transformations:
· Lexical transformations. The scientist considers this type to be the replacement of lexemes with synonyms that depend on the context.
· Stylistic transformations. In this case, there is a transformation of the stylistic coloring of the word being translated.
· Morphological transformations. This includes transforming one part of speech into another or replacing it with several parts of speech.
· Syntactic transformations. The researcher includes the transformation of syntactic structures (words, phrases and sentences), changes in the type of subordinate clauses, changes in the type of syntactic connection, transformation of sentences into phrases and rearrangement of subordinate clauses in complex and complex sentences.
· Semantic transformations. In textbooks and monographs on translation theory, this phenomenon is also referred to as “semantic development.” In this column Latyshev L.K. enters replacements of feature parts.
· Transformations of a mixed type are a converse transformation and an antonymic translation, according to L. K. Latyshev.
After considering the points of view of various researchers - domestic and foreign - we can draw the following conclusion: the authors have a common view on identifying certain types of translation transformations. Most attention is paid to lexical transformations by V. E. Shchetinkin, L. K. Latyshev, A. B. Shevnin, N. P. Serov. Grammatical transformations take place in the works and studies of Serov, Shchetinkin and Shevnin.
It should be noted that modern works on the issue of translation transformations and the theory and practice of translation in general, for example the works of such authors as Y.P. Solodub, A.A. Tikhonov, A.A. Utrobina and others, are mainly based on the above concepts of classification of types of translation transformations.
Summing up the analysis of various classifications of translation transformations by Soviet, Russian and foreign researchers, we can conclude that there is no single classification of types of translation transformations in modern linguistic science. It should also be noted that the creation of a unified classification is complicated by the fact that different linguists identify different numbers of translation transformation techniques.
Syntactic assimilation (literal translation) is a translation method in which the syntactic structure of the original is transformed into a similar structure of the receiving language. This type of "null" transformation is used in cases where parallel syntactic structures exist in the source language and the target language. Syntactic assimilation can lead to complete correspondence of the number of linguistic units and the order of their arrangement in the original and translation:
I was very young when I wrote my first book.
I was very young when I wrote my first book.
Rose Waterford was a cynic.
Rose Waterford was a cynic.
As a rule, however, the use of syntactic assimilation is accompanied by some changes in structural components. When translating from English into Russian, for example, articles, linking verbs, and other auxiliary elements may be omitted, as well as changes in morphological forms and some lexical units.
Mrs. Strickland asked me for my address, and a few days later I received an invitation to luncheon.
Mrs. Strickland asked for my address, and a few days later I received an invitation to lunch.
In this example the pronoun is omitted me , lexical replacement made luncheon (lunch, dinner) – breakfast, however, the sentence structure is completely preserved.
The subject was exhausted, and we began to talk of other things.
The topic was exhausted, and we started talking about something else.
In this example, the structure of a complex sentence is preserved, although there are certain differences: the phrase began to talk corresponds to Russian started talking, and the meaning of the phrase other things conveyed in one word other .
We took a fancy to one another
We sincerely sympathized with each other.
In this sentence, when translated, the meaning of the phrase took a fancy conveyed in one word sympathized, however, another lexeme was introduced sincerely, a preposition is also omitted, which is not necessary in the Russian text. However, the syntactic structure remained unchanged.
Thus, although literal translation is a fairly common method of translation, it is rare in its pure form. In most cases, although the structure of the sentence is preserved, certain changes are still present: auxiliary parts of speech are omitted, some lexical units are changed.
Grammatical substitutions are a method of translation in which a grammatical unit in the original is transformed into a unit of the source language with a different grammatical meaning. A grammatical unit of the source language at any level can be replaced: a word form, a part of speech, a member of a sentence, a sentence of a certain type. It is clear that during translation there is always a replacement of the forms of the source language with the forms of the receiving language. Grammatical replacement as a special method of translation implies not just the use of forms of the source language in translation, but the refusal to use forms of the source language that are similar to the original ones, the replacement of such forms with others that differ from them in the expressed content (grammatical meaning). Thus, in English and Russian there are singular and plural forms, and, as a rule, related nouns in the original and in the translation are used in the same number, except for cases when the singular form in English corresponds to the plural form in Russian ( money - money; ink - ink, etc.) or vice versa, the English plural corresponds to the Russian singular (struggles - struggle; outskirts - outskirts, etc.). But under certain conditions, replacing the form of a number during the translation process can be used as a means of creating occasional correspondence:
There are bosoms on which so many tears have been shed that I cannot bedew them with mine.
To another breast So many tears have already been shed that I would not dare to moisten her with more of my own.
In this example in the English text the word is used in the plural bosoms , and in the Russian translation - in the only one: breast.
I pictured them lives, troubled by no untoward adventure, honest, decent, and, by reason of those two upstanding, pleasant children, so obviously destined to carry on the normal traditions of their race and station, not without significance.
I imagined how it flows life, unclouded, honest, peaceful and, thanks to the growing lovely children destined to continue the healthy traditions of their race and class, filled with content.
A similar replacement is present in this example: the plural form lives translation corresponds to the singular form life.
When at last we were all assembled, waiting for dinner to be announced, I reflected, while I chatted with the woman I had been asked to "take in," that civilized man practices a strange ingenuity in wasting on tedious exercises the brief span of his life.
When everyone was already gathered and I was engaging in conversation with the lady whom I was assigned to lead to the table, I couldn’t help but think that civilized People incredibly inventive in ways to spend their short lives on boring ceremonies.
It meant that she had heard some scandal about one of her friends, and the instinct of the literary woman was all alert.
I understood the reason immediately: she found out about a scandalous incident that happened to one of her friends, and that’s all. feelings This literary lady became agitated.
In these examples, the replacement is the opposite: the singular number in the English text corresponds to the plural in the translation.
A very common type of grammatical replacement in the translation process is the replacement of a part of speech. For English-Russian translations, it is most common to replace a noun with a verb and an adjective with a noun, for example:
"What explanation did he give?"
What is he? explained?(replacing a noun with a verb)
I had no warning–nothing.
I'm nobody didn't warn, I didn’t suspect anything. (replacing a noun with a verb).
Not a word of explanation or regret .
He's nothing explains, about nothing regrets. (replacing a noun with a verb)
I "m a broadminded woman.
I am a woman open-minded. (replacing an adjective with a phrase of an adjective and a noun)
Other replacement options are also possible, for example:
I felt so shy that I could think of nothing to say, but Mrs. Strickland came to my rescue.
I just confused, that I couldn’t find words, but Mrs. Strickland hastened to my rescue. (replacing an adjective with a verb).
Replacing the members of a sentence leads to a restructuring of its syntactic structure. This kind of restructuring also occurs in a number of cases when replacing a part of speech. For example, in the examples above, the replacement of a noun with a verb was accompanied by the replacement of the definition with an adverbial circumstance. A more significant restructuring of the syntactic structure is associated with the replacement of the main members of the sentence, especially the subject. In English-Russian translations, the use of such substitutions is largely due to the fact that in English more often than in Russian, the subject performs functions other than designating the subject of an action, for example:
She looked upon life as an opportunity for writing novels and the public as her raw material.
Life seemed to her an opportunity for writing novels, and people - necessary raw materials. (subject and object changed functions during translation).
My engagements were few , and I was glad to accept .
I rarely received invitations and therefore accepted it with pleasure. (When the subject is replaced, it becomes an addition).
She accepted the rules with which they played the game of life as valid for them, but never for a moment thought of regulating her own conduct in accordance with them.
Rules , according to which they played their life game, did not bother her, but she was not for a moment going to subordinate her own life to them. (Subject and object exchanged functions during translation).
You"ll meet him if you dine there.
You'll see him if she invites you you for lunch. (in the translation a new subject is introduced, and the subject of the original acquires the function of an addition).
I was very young, and perhaps she liked the idea of guiding my virgin steps on the hard road of letters; while for me it was pleasant to have someone I could go to with my small troubles, certain of an attentive ear and reasonable counsel.
I was very young and maybe to her flattered thought, as if she was guiding my first steps in the difficult field of literature, but I was pleased to know that there was a person to whom I could always go with any of my concerns, confident that I would be listened to carefully and given reasonable advice. (subject and object exchanged functions during translation).
Rose Waterford had a blistering tongue
U Roses Waterford language was like a Spanish fly. .(subject and object exchanged functions during translation).
Other grammatical units, for example, types of sentences, can also be replaced. So, in the following example, the declarative sentence is replaced by an interrogative one:
When so much has been written about Charles Strickland, it may seem unnecessary that I should write more .
Since so much has been written about Charles Strickland, then is it worth it for me to write about him?
Thus, grammatical substitutions of various types are quite common in the process of translation from English into Russian due to significant differences in the grammatical structure of these languages.
Sentence division is a method of translation in which the syntactic structure of a sentence in the original is transformed into two or more predicative structures of the receiving language. Division transformation leads either to the transformation of a simple sentence of the source language into a complex sentence of the host language, or to the transformation of a simple or complex sentence of the source language into two or more independent sentences in the host language.
Analysis of the English text of Somerset Maugham's novel “The Moon and the Penny” and its translation into Russian revealed the use of different subtypes of sentence division. So, for example, in the text there is a transformation of a simple sentence into a complex one:
She looked upon life as an opportunity for writing novels and the public as her raw material.
Life seemed to her like an opportunity to write novels, and people were the necessary raw material. (transformation of a simple sentence complicated by homogeneous members into a complex one).
It was only neighborly to accept .
I decided that good neighborly relations commanded me to appear. (converting a simple sentence into a complex sentence by introducing another predicative part).
They met with indifference, and would part with relief
They met indifferently, and were to part with a sigh of relief. (transformation of a simple sentence, complicated by homogeneous members - predicates, into a complex one).
At last she rose and shepherded the ladies out of one room.
After dessert she rose, and the ladies followed her in single file into the drawing room. (transformation of a simple sentence, complicated by homogeneous members - predicates, into a complex one).
One would admire his excellent qualities , but avoid his company .
Some of his qualities may have deserved praise, but it was impossible to strive to communicate with him. (transformation of a simple sentence, complicated by homogeneous members - predicates, into a complex one).
She didn't say anything about his going with anyone?
She didn't say that he left with some woman? (transformation of a simple sentence into a complex sentence).
However, the most common subtype of sentence division in this text is the transformation of a simple or complex sentence in the original into two or more independent sentences in translation, for example:
It is still possible to discuss his place in art, and the adulation of his admirers is perhaps no less capricious than the disparagement of his detractors; but one thing can never be doubtful, and that is that he had genius. [ 22, 21]
True, there is still debate about the place of this artist in art, and it is very likely that the praises of his admirers are as groundless as the disparaging reviews of his detractors. One thing is certain - these are the creations of a genius. ( transformation complex offers V two independent offers ).
The most insignificant of Strickland's works suggests a personality which is strange, tormented, and complex; and it is this surely which prevents even those who do not like his pictures from being indifferent to them; it is this which has excited so curious an interest in his life and character.
The most insignificant of Strickland's works testifies to the artist's unique, complex, martyr's personality. This is what does not leave even those who do not like them indifferent to his paintings, and this also aroused such a keen interest in his life, in the peculiarities of his character. (transformation
It is a grotesque misapprehension which sees in art no more than a craft comprehensible perfectly only to the craftsman: art is a manifestation of emotion, and emotion speaks a language that all may understand. [ 22, 22]
It is the most absurd delusion to regard art as a craft, which only a craftsman can fully understand. Art is a manifestation of feelings, and feeling speaks in a generally accepted language. (transformation complex sentence into two independent clauses).
And when such as had come in contact with Strickland in the past, writers who had known him in London, painters who had met him in the cafes of Montmartre, discovered to their amazement that where they had seen but an unsuccessful artist, like another, authentic genius had rubbed shoulders with them there began to appear in the magazines of France and America a succession of articles, the reminiscences of one, the appreciation of another, which added to Strickland's notoriety, and fed without satisfying the curiosity of the public .
And when those who had once met Strickland - writers who knew him in London, artists who sat side by side with him in a cafe in Montmartre - discovered to their surprise that the one who lived among them and whom they took for a pathetic failure , - a true genius, a stream of articles poured into magazines in France and America. These memories and praises, adding fuel to the fire, did not satisfy the curiosity of the public, but only inflamed it even more. (transformation complex sentence into two independent clauses).
It is not strange, then, that those who wrote of him should have eked out their scanty recollections with a lively fancy, and it is evident that there was enough in the little that was known of him to give the opportunity to the romantic scribe; there was much in his life which was strange and terrible, in his character something outrageous, and in his fate not a little that was pathetic.
Therefore, those who wrote about him tried to fill up their meager memories with all kinds of conjectures, although even in the little that was known about him, there would have been enough material for a romantic narrative. There was a lot in his life that was strange and scary, his nature was frantic, fate treated him mercilessly. ( transformation complex offers V two independent offers ).
It was a hazardous, though maybe a gallant thing to do, since it is probable that the legend commonly received had no small share in the growth of Strickland's reputation; for there are many who have been attracted to his art by the detestation in which they held his character or the compassion with which they regarded his death; and the son's well-meaning efforts threw a singular chill upon the father's admirers.
It was a bold, but risky undertaking. The legend contributed greatly to the growth of his father's fame, for some were attracted to Strickland's art by the disgust they felt for him as a person, others by the compassion that his death inspired in them, and therefore the well-intentioned efforts of the son strangely cooled the ardor of his father's admirers. (transformation complex sentence into two independent clauses).
It is true I knew him more intimately than most: I met him first before ever he became a painter, and I saw him not infrequently during the difficult years he spent in Paris; but I do not suppose I should ever have set down my recollections if the hazards of the war had not taken me to Tahiti.
True, I knew him better than many others: I first met him before he became an artist, and often saw him in Paris, where life was so difficult for him. And yet I would never have written memoirs about him if the accidents of the war had not thrown me to Tahiti. (transformation complex sentence into two independent clauses).
Thus, the division of sentences is a common translation technique in the analyzed text. The most common is the division of a complex multicomponent sentence into units of a simpler structure, which is caused by the characteristic features of the receiving and outgoing languages.
Sentence fusion is a method of translation in which the syntactic structure in the original is transformed by combining two simple sentences into one complex one. This transformation is the opposite of sentence division. Thus, the combination of sentences can be illustrated by the following examples:
When I arrived, a little late, because in my fear of being too early I had walked three times round the cathedral, I found the party already complete. Miss Waterford was there and Mrs. Jay, Richard Twining and George Road.
When I arrived a little late, having walked three times around the church for fear of being too early, the company was already assembled: Miss Waterford, Mrs. Jay, Richard Twining, and George Rhode.
But there is in my nature a strain of asceticism, and I have subjected my flesh each week to a more severe mortification. I have never failed to read the Literary Supplement of The Times
But being by nature inclined to asceticism, I exhaust my flesh every week in an even more cruel way, namely, by reading the literary supplement of the Times.
The spade was not invariably called a bloody shovel. Woman had not yet come into her own.
It was not considered obligatory for us to call a spade a spade, and women at that time had not yet learned to be independent .
Her dark hair was elaborately dressed. She was the only woman of the three whose face was free of make-up, and by contrast with the others she seemed simple and unaffected.
She carefully combed her dark hair, did not overuse makeup, and compared to the other two ladies, she looked simple and artless.
Mrs. Strickland used her advantage with tact. You felt that you obliged her by accepting her sympathy.
Mrs. Strickland did not abuse this gift, but by accepting her sympathy you clearly brought her joy.
In some cases, when combining sentences, not a complex, but a simple sentence is formed:
The dining-room was in the good taste of the period. It was very severe .
The decoration of her dining room was very strict, in accordance with the good taste of the time.
At that time there must have been five hundred dining-rooms in London decorated in exactly the same manner. It was chaste , artistic , and dull .
In those days in London there would have been at least five hundred dining rooms decorated in the same style - modest, artistic and sad.
There was another thing I liked in Mrs. Strickland. She managed her surroundings with elegance.
Another thing I liked about Mrs. Strickland was her ability to live elegantly.
He doesn't pretend to be a genius. He doesn't even make much money on the Stock Exchange
He doesn't fancy himself a genius and doesn't even make much money on the stock market.
As the above examples indicate, the grammatical transformation of combining sentences is used mainly when translating small sentences that are closely related in meaning.
Analysis of the literature on translation theory allows us to summarize the existing views of scientists on the essence of translation transformations. From the point of view of modern translation studies, translation transformations are transformations that are used to move from the original language units to the target language units, that is, they are interlingual transformations. Translation transformations affect both the form and content of linguistic units, therefore they are transformations of a formal-semantic nature.
We examined the main classifications of types of translation transformations, and their analysis showed significant differences in the principles of classification of translation transformations by various scientists. At the same time, the types of translation transformations expressed in various translation techniques are similar in different classifications.
In the second section of our work, we examined the main translation techniques included in the group of grammatical translation transformations. Consideration of various types of grammatical translation transformations based on the material of S. Maugham’s novel “The Moon and a Penny” (translation by N. Mann) demonstrated that their use is a necessary means of achieving the adequacy of the translation and is caused by the specific features of the original language and the target language at the morphological and syntactic levels. Different kinds grammatical translation transformations are united by their focus on the most accurate transmission of semantics, pragmatics, and stylistics of the original text. Since semantic losses are inevitable during interlingual transformation, the translator is obliged to minimize them through the most effective use of translation transformations, that is, certain translation techniques aimed at achieving text equivalence.
1. Alekseeva I.S. Introduction to Translation Studies. – M., 2008. – 368s.
2. Alimov V.V. Translation theory. Translation in the field of professional communication. – M, 2006. – 160 p.
3. Barkhudarov L.S. Language and translation. – M.. 1972. – 240 p.
4. Vinogradov V. A., Vasilyeva N. V., Shakhnarovich A. M. A brief dictionary of linguistic terms. – M., 1995.
5. Komissarov V.N. Translation theory. – M., 1990. – 253 p.
6. Komissarov V.N., Koralova A.L. Workshop on translation from English into Russian. – M., 1990. – 127 p.
7. Latyshev L.K. Practical course translation. – M., 2000. – 232 p.
8. Latyshev L.K. Translation technology. – M., 2005. –317 p.
9. Linguistic encyclopedic Dictionary. / Ed. . V. N. Yartseva. – M., 1990.
10. Minyar-Beloruchev R.K. Theory and methods of translation. – M.. 1996. – 207 p.
11. Prozorov V. G. Fundamentals of the theory and practice of translation from English into Russian. – M., 1998. – 234 p.
12. Retsker Ya.I. Translation theory and translation practice: Essays on the linguistic theory of translation. – M., 2006. – 240 p.
13. Robinson D. How to become a translator: Introduction to the theory and practice of translation. – M., 2005. – 304 p.
14. Romanova S.P. A guide to translation from English into Russian. – M., 2006. – 172 p.
15. Sdobnikov V.V. Translation theory. – M., 2007. – 448 p.
16. Dictionary of linguistic terms / O. S. Akhmanova - M., 1968.
17. Solodub Yu.P. Theory and practice of literary translation. – M., 2005. – 304 p.
18. Tikhonov A.A. English language theory and practice of translation. – M., 2005. – 120 p.
19. Utrobina A.A. Fundamentals of translation theory: Lecture notes. – M., 2006. – 144 p.
20. Fedorov A.V. Fundamentals of the general theory of translation. – M., 1968. – 303 p.
21. Schweitzer A.D. Translation theory. – M., 1988. –114 p.
23. Maugham S. The Moon and the Penny / Translation by N. Mann. – M., 1982.
