4. Sentence types.

A very common transformation is the replacement of a simple sentence by a complex one and vice versa. Thus while translating from English into Russian it often becomes necessary to render English structures with non-finite verbal forms by means of subordinate clauses thus turning a simple sentence into complex. For ex- I want you to speak English. Я хочу чтобы вы говорили по английский . Here is a book for you to read – вот книга ,которую мы должны прочитать.

The general is a good man to keep away from –генерал конечно хороший человек, но лучше от него держать подальше.

A subtype of this information is known as unification . or conversely division of sentences in translation. That is A replacement of two simple sentences by one complex or compound and vice versa.

Thousands of Algerians tonight flat from the dead city of Aurelian after a twelve second earthquake had ripped through central Algerians killing and estimation 1100 people.

Сегодня ночью в центральных районах Алжира произошло землетрясение , длившееся 12 секунд. Число жертв по предварительным подсчетам составляет 1100 человек. Тысячи жителей бежали из полного разрушенного города Орелания.

More rarely unification of two or more sentences into one complex or compound sentence takes place.

For ex: the only thing that worried was our front door. it cries like a bastard . одно меня беспокоило – наша парадная дверь очень скрипит.

E. REPLACEMENT OF THE TYPES SYNTACTIC RELATIONS.

Both English and Russian have such types of syntactic relations as coordination and subordination. However the former(первое) is more characteristic of spoken Russian. Hence it is often necessary or desirable to replace subordination sentences by coordination while translating from English into Russian. For ex:

He had a new father whose picture was imposed. – subordinate.у него новый папа – это он снят на карточке.

From a purely grammatical point of view this transformation is optional, not obligatory, but taking into account the relative frequency of grammatical forms such transformations are necessary if we want our translation to sound naturally. Both English and Russian make use of synthetic and asynthetic coordinate structures, but their relative frequencies differ. Russian, especially spoken Russian prefers asynthetic coordination in multy-member structures, where English often employs the synthetic type.

All I have in it is two dressed and my more costumes and my underwear and socks and some other things.

ADDITIONS are caused by various factors. Often they are necessitated by what may be called “lexical incompleteness” of certain word-groups in the source language. In English in many cases words are omitted that can be easily restored from the context, while in Russian their actual presence is necessary, which calls for additions in translation.

For example - Pay claim –требование о повышении зарплаты.

Gun-license –удостоверение на право ношения оружия.

Oil talks –переговоры по поводу нефти.

Solid- engine –двигатель на твердом топливе.

Sometimes additions are required to compensate for the lack of grammatical forms in the tagged language thus the lack of plural forms of the corresponding nouns in Russian calls for lexical additions in the following example:

Workers in all industries – рабочие всех отраслей промышленности.

Modern weapons – современные виды оружия.

Enemy defenses –оборонительные сооружения противника

Other philosophies –другие философкие направления, течения.

OMISSIONS .

They are the reverse of additions, and are used to ensure a greater degree of what is called compression, that is reusing the redundancy of the text by omitting words which can be easily restored from the context. For ex:

So I paid my check and all. Then I left the bar and went out where the telephone square.

Я расплатился и пошел к автоматам.

LEXICAL PROBLEMS

The semantic differences between languages.

Languages differ not only in their phonological and grammatical systems ,their systems of meanings are also different. Many is a property of a language. A source language text has a source language meaning and a tagged language text has a tagged language meaning.

Catford: “the semantic structures of correlated words of the source language and the tagged language can’t be co-extensive , they can never cover each other.” A careful analysis invariably shows that semantic relationship between correlated words especially polysemantic words is very complex. Therefore it is necessary first to consider the 3 types of lexical meaning, which can be distinguished and are to be rendered in translation:

• Referential. This meaning, also called logical, denotative, has direct reference to things or phenomena of objective reality, naming abstract notions and processes as well. It is also necessary to distinguish between primary and secondary referential meaning. Example: In his green years he was…. The board is green.

• Emotive. This meaning has reference not directly to things or phenomena of objective reality, but to the feelings and emotions associated with them. It’s a connotative meaning, created by connotations raised in the mind of the reader and the speaker. It’s inherent in a definite group of words, even when they are taken out of context. Example: small house, little house.

• Stylistic. This meaning is based on stylistic stratification of the English vocabulary and is formed by stylistic connotations. Stylistic and emotive meanings are closely connected. As a rule stylistically marked words that is words belonging to certain stylistic strata possess a considerable element of emotive meaning. Example: Mug phiz – this is a pejorative emotive meaning. Besides in addition to the emotive and stylistic meanings proper to the word as a linguistic unit some emotive connotations may be acquired in the context. Both are to be rendered in translation. Example: Gates is an admiral of the electronic world. The context affects the semantic structure of the word adding there an emotive connotation.

REFERENTIAL MEANING AND ITS RENDERING IN TRANSLATION

Causes of lexical transformations in the rendering of referential meaning:

1. Different vision of objects of reality and different usage;

2. Different semantic structure of a word in the source language and the tagged language;

3. Different valiancy, or collocability.