2. The effect of the pragmatic

The 1^st type of relations amounts to the senders communicative intend or the pragmatic motivation of the original message. The translator in other words should be aware whether the message is a statement of fact, a request, a command, and entity a joke. Very often the speakers communicative intend differs from what the message seems to say. For ex – I don’t know may be not only the statement of fact, in which case in would be translated - я не знаю, but also an expression of hesitation - Да как вам сказать. Is smb there please - is not the question, but a disguised request.

4. The effect of the receptor

Pr. Neubert has proposed a classification of texts depending on their orientation towards different types of receptors:

-texts indeed the domestic consumption (local advertising legislation, home news) ;

-texts intended primarily for the source language receptors but having also a universal human appeal (bell letters, fiction, texts without any specific national addressee – scientific literature) typically in written translation the translator deals with texts not in intended for tagged language audiences and therefore they are subject to pragmatic adaptations. Allowances are maid for social cultural, psychological and other differences between source and tagged language receptors particularly differences in their background knowledge. According to Naida snow-white was translated into one of the African languages as white as the feathers of white heron (цапля). Pragmatic factors may affect the scope of semantic information conveyed in translating. Differences in background knowledge fall for addition or division of some information. Some cultural realia may be translated by their functional analogues.

Allowance should be made for the receptors professional states and his familiarity with the subject. In text intended for specialists source culture regalia are not frequently rendered by transcription or transliteration while in the texts for the laymen exclamatory or descriptive translation is preferred. It’s gained due to the pragmatic task imposed on the translator. Impeachment – привлечение к ответственности высших должностных лиц. Импичмент. Absenteeism –абсантизм – уклонения от участия в выборах. Abolitionist –сторонник отмены рабства.

?. The effect of the translator angle of view.

Another pragmatic factor relevant to translation is a socio-psychological and ideological orientation of the translator himself. In 1936 chukovsky wrote that every translator “translates himself, that is deliberately inadvertently reflects hic class affiliations, preferences. In doing so he does not necessarily set himself the task to falsify the original” this view may be oversimplified but it is true that also ideally the translator should identify himself with the author this is not always the case. Sometime it is even impossible, therefore classics are retranslated as each generation rereads them from its own point of view. The catching in the Rye. Три перевода на русский.

Uniqueness of the translators????

Translation is a process determined by quiet a number of factors, in addition to convey the semantic information contained in the text, the denotational meanings and emotive stylistic connotations the translator has to take into account the authors communicative intend, the type of audience for which the message is intended, its socio-psychological characteristics and background knowledge. A process governed by some many variants can not have a single outcome what is more the synonymic and paraphrasing potential of language is so high that there may be several ways of describing the same extra linguistic situation and even though there may be not quite identical the differences may be neutralized by the context. Remember- Translators’ decisions may vary depending on the receptor and the purpose of translation.

/////problem of translatability

Conflicting views have been expressed by linguists concerning the problem of translatability rending from an entirely negative stand typical of Vilgelm von Humbold, who considered each language an embodiment of national spirit and the nations’ world view and therefore regarded translation as an impossible task, to an unqualified positive attitude found in many contemporary writings on translation. The very fact that translation makes interlingual communication possible is an argument in favor of translatability yet it is an oversimplification to claim that every meaningful element of the text is translatable. In his preface to the adventures of the Huckleberry Finn mark twain said that he had reproduced in the book “pain speakingly and with the support of the personal familiarity” the shakings of numbers of dialects. The Missouri negro dialect. Naturally non of this fine distinctions can be reflected in the translations. Yet by using low colloquial and substandard forms the translator can give an adequate impression of the characters social and educational stators and will thus render the most essential functional characteristics of this dialect features. As compared to the determining semantic and functional properties of the text which are perfectly translatable the untranslatable elements are marginal and relatively unimportant.

Most of the losses can be to some extend compensated for So we may speak of sufficient translatability which permits effective inter lingual conversation and satisfactorily renders communicative relevant information.

LEVELS OF EQUIVALENTS AND THE CONCEPT OF ADEQUATE TRANSLATION.