|
Читайте также: |
It’s widely known that semantic systems of different languages and meanings of words comprising these systems don’t coincide. Every language has lexical units which don’t have equivalents in the other language: discrepancy in the set of semes constituting a polysemantic word used for nomination of similar objects can be easily traced in the process of translation. We deal with the discrepancy of content of lexical units in different languages which results in the following: 1) corresponding meanings can be differently grouped inside a polysemantic word in various languages; as a rule, polysemantic words are synonymic to each other in one meaning only and can be absolutely different in others (table – таблица; стол); in many cases a word is used in one of its meanings and the rest of them become irrelevant for this very act of communication; the words of the source language and target language must be equivalent only in the meanings they are used in the texts; 2) but there is another tendency: similar semes can be different in their number and can nominate various objects: the Russian verb носить can be used for nominating clothes, beard, mustache, hairdo etc., but it can’t be applied in Russian for perfume, make-up, though its English equivalent is widely used in these meanings (She was wearing a new kind of perfume); кипячёный (boiled) can be water and milk, both in English and in Russian, but we say “boiled eggs” in English and варёные яйца in Russian; Russian лошадь isn’t identical to English “horse” because there is also a word конь.
Very often the translator uses correlations in target language quite different from those in source language: She knew he had risked his neck to help her – рисковал головой; His life is hanging by a thread – на волоске; She slammed the door in his face – перед носом.
The contents of the original lexical units can be conveyed in translation in three ways. By means of 1) equivalents; 2) variational correspondences (dictionary correspondences); 3) all types of translation transformations. The first type of correlations refers to the level of the language and the other two – to the level of speech.
Equivalents are independent of the context they are used in and the translator doesn’t have an opportunity of any choice between the alternatives. Equivalents include: proper and geographical names and terms belonging to different spheres of knowledge. Equivalents are subdivided into the following types: complete and partial; absolute and relative; complete equivalence can be illustrated by the following examples: dog collar (ошейник), portal crane (портальный кран). But if we compare “crane” (кран), they are considered to be partial equivalents, because crane has one more meaning.
Absolute equivalents are the words which coincide both in referential and stylistic meanings. The words combination “the shadow of the gods” has an absolute equivalent in Russian translation – “сумерки богов”.
Relative equivalents coincide in referential meaning and differ in stylistic meaning. Absolute – partial: enemy – foe, policeman – cop, dollar – buck. Variational correspondences are established between the words when there are several meanings in translation to convey the original meaning. The English word “soldier” has at least 4 correspondences in Russian: солдат, рядовой, военнослужащий, военный. “Writing” – пишущий, письменный, писчий, писчебумажный (writing hand – пишущая рука, writing table – письменный стол, writing paper – писчая бумага, writing materials – писчебумажные принадлежности).
But such words as “writing”, “soldier”, “sincere” are not polysemantic words but the words having a number of variational correspondences among which the translator has to choose an appropriate one.
Lexical Transformations in Translation
Specification of contextual meanings in translation is subject to definite semantic and logical laws. Similarity of lexical meanings in source language and target language is based on the similarity of notions expressed by these words. Lexical transformations take place when a definite translated unit is substituted by a word having a different inner form (the equivalent in the target language has a set of semes different from those constituting a dictionary meaning). According to Retsker’s classification, there are the following types of lexical transformations:
1.Concretization and differentiation – the devices of concretization and differentiation are interrelated in the process of translation from English into Russian, especially when the translator deals with words of wide semantics which don’t have direct correlations in target language; words of wide semantics are expressed by nouns, adjectives, and verbs (thing, point, place; great, bad; to go, to say, to get); the meaning of such words can be properly rendered only in the context, no dictionary can cover all the variety of meanings arising in the context; translation of such words is very much dependent on the context (He ordered a drink – Он заказал виски; drink – питьё, спиртной напиток; the word “drink” is specified and rendered as виски; виски is a part of the notion спиртные напитки; and here in translation we can trace both differentiation and concretization; One of the flight attendants offered him a drink before they took off and he declined – Проходившая по салону стюардесса предложила Чарли вино, виски или шампанское, но он отказался; all the above mentioned examples confirm that this device is aimed at substituting general by particular in translation);
2.Generalization – generalizational meaning in translation is just the opposite of the previous two, it’s aim is to substitute particular by general; this device is less frequent in use, taking into account PECULIARITIES of English and Russian vocabulary; English words have a more abstract character than Russian words referring to the same notion; sometimes generalization is applied in accordance with stylistic norms of the Russian language and literature, for instance, it is not PECULIAR to translation of fiction from English into Russian to specify the character’s weight and height, if in the original it is very precise, in translation we have an approximate formula giving the main idea: A young man of 6 fit 2 inches – Молодой человек выше среднего роста; She was letting her temper go by inches – Она потихоньку теряла терпение; There were dozens of articles about them – Писали о нём многие и много; is aimed at rendering from particular to general;
3.Modulation (смысловое развитие) – involves the creation in translation of an equivalent by replacing a unit in source language by a target language unit, the meaning of which can be logically deduced from it and which is just another way of referring to the same situation or the same object, in such cases the substitute often has a cause and effect relationship with the original; this type of relationship results in metonymic or metaphoric transfer of meaning: She recognized Tom’s neat commercial hand and tore the envelope over – Она узнала аккуратный чёткий почерк Тома и разорвала конверт (metonymic transfer of meaning); The window was full of clothes I wouldn’t want to be seen dead in – В витрине были выставлены платья, в которых я не хотела бы даже лежать в гробу (metaphoric + metonymic transfer of meaning); A stage which till then she had known only from the other side of the footlights – Ей стало казаться, что она попала на сцену, которую прежде видела только из зрительного зала (metonymic); the examples illustrate metonymic and metaphoric transfer of meaning in translation being the basis of modulation (logical development);
4.Antonymous (antonymic) translation – is mainly based on the logical category of contradictoriness, it means replacement of some notion in the original by the opposite notion in translation involving rearrangement of the whole utterance; in most cases usage of opposite notions results in replacement of an affirmative source language structure by a negative TL one and vice versa; the main idea is to keep the contents unchanged: Julia did not wake up till after eleven – Когда Джулия проснулась, был двенадцатый час; this example shows that the translator resorts to 2 kinds of transformations, lexical and grammatical; antonymous translation is accompanied by the change of the sentence type: a simple sentence is substituted in translation by a complex one: The chief left the cell with no protest – Вождь покинул камеру без воплей; They spoke in the native language of which I had learnt but half a dozen words – Они кричали на туземном языке, я знал на нём не больше десятка слов; It is long since I frequented it – Давно я уже не бывал в Лондоне; the given examples show the change of sentence structures by grammar and lexical means;
5.Compensation – one more specific procedure which may come handy to the translator is called compensation technique, it is defined as a deliberate introduction of some additional elements in translation to make up for the loss of similar elements at the same or an earlier stage; semantic compensation is characteristic of non-equivalent vocabulary (realia), first of all, to define relations, PECULIAR to the country of source language and alien to that of TL, it emphasizes differences in background knowledge: I’ve bought a Christmas present for dad – Это папе новогодний подарок; I took Strickland’s temperature – it was a hundred and four – Я измерила Стриклэнду температуру – градусник показал 40,3; He puffed luxuriously at the long Corona he was smoking – Он с удовольствием затянулся дорогой сигарой; I packed my two Gladstones (?) – Я упаковал два своих саквояжа; compensation technique is sometimes used by very experienced translators to render the speech of illiterate people, for instance, Eliza in Bernard Shaw’s “Pygmalion” being a cockney makes mistakes typical of the speech of an uneducated person (cockney): “I’m nothing to you, not so much as them slippers”, and Higgins corrects her saying “these slippers”; the linguistic error in this episode is at first sight untranslatable, but the translator finds a good solution to the problem, in translation he doesn’t make emphasis on the wrong English pronoun, he renders the mistake by changing the noun ending (making it wrong): Я для вас ничего, вот хуже этих туфлей; the communicative effect upon the reader is similar to that of the original;
6.Contextual modification (целостное преобразование) – contextual modification is a universal means of conveying phraseological units, there is no semantic proximity between the original lexical units and translated ones: Even the most perfunctory account of the plain facts would blow the myths sky-high – Даже беглое рассмотрение ФАКТОВ не оставит камня на камне от созданного историками мифа; it is not very frequent in use as it may come handy only for translation of proverbs, idioms and set expressions.
С днём рождения Depeche Mode!
Дата добавления: 2015-04-12; просмотров: 302 | Поможем написать вашу работу | Нарушение авторских прав |