Grammatical transformations in translation Most writers on the subject distinguish between the following grammatical transformations in translation: 1. Transposition is a change in the order of words in phrases and sentences, which is often caused by the structural differences in expressing the theme and the rheme in different languages. E.g.: A girl entered the room Ð£ ÐºÑ–Ð¼Ð½Ð°Ñ‚Ñƒ ÑƒÐ²Ñ–Ð¹ÑˆÐ»Ð° Ð´Ñ–Ð²Ñ‡Ð¸Ð½Ð°.
An old man was sitting by the side of the road Ð‘Ñ–Ð»Ñ ÐºÑ€Ð°ÑŽ Ð´Ð¾Ñ€Ð¾Ð³Ð¸ ÑÐ¸Ð´Ñ–Ð² ÑÑ‚Ð°Ñ€Ð¸Ð¹. 2. Grammatical replacement is substitution of the word belonging to one part of speech by a word belonging to another part of speech (morphological replacement) or substitution of one syntactical construction by another one (syntactical replacement). E.g.: He is a good runner Bin Ð³Ð°Ñ€Ð½Ð¾ Ð±Ñ–Ð³Ð°Ñ”.
I saw her standing there Ð¯ Ð±Ð°Ñ‡Ð¸Ð², Ñ‰Ð¾ Ð²Ð¾Ð½Ð° Ñ‚Ð°Ð¼ ÑÑ‚Ð¾ÑÐ»Ð°. The Times wrote editorially (¦) Ð£ Ð¿ÐµÑ€ÐµÐ´Ð¾Ð²Ñ–Ð¹ ÑÑ‚Ð°Ñ‚Ñ‚Ñ– Ð³Ð°Ð·ÐµÑ‚Ð° Ð¢Ð°Ð¹Ð¼Ñ Ð¿Ð¸ÑÐ°Ð»Ð°.. 3. Addition is used to compensate for semantic or grammatical losses and often accompanies transposition and grammatical replacement. E.g.: His wife had been beautiful Ð™Ð¾Ð³Ð¾ Ð´Ñ€ÑƒÐ¶Ð¸Ð½Ð° ÐºÐ¾Ð»Ð¸ÑÑŒ( Ð°Ð±Ð¾ Ñƒ Ð¼Ð¾Ð»Ð¾Ð´Ð¾ÑÑ‚Ñ–) Ð±ÑƒÐ»Ð° ÐºÑ€Ð°ÑÑƒÐ½ÐµÑŽ. workers of all industries Ñ€Ð¾Ð±Ñ–Ñ‚Ð½Ð¸ÐºÐ¸ ÑƒÑÑ–Ñ… Ð³Ð°Ð»ÑƒÐ·ÐµÐ¹. 4. Omission is a transformation opposite to addition and is used with the aim to avoid redundant information.
E.g.: the right to rest and leisure Ð¿Ñ€Ð°Ð²Ð¾ Ð½Ð° Ð²Ñ–Ð´Ð¿Ð¾Ñ‡Ð¸Ð½Ð¾Ðº. equality in trade and commerce Ñ€Ñ–Ð²Ð½Ñ– Ð¿Ñ€Ð°Ð²Ð° Ñƒ Ð³Ð°Ð»ÑƒÐ·Ñ– Ñ‚Ð¾Ñ€Ð³Ñ–Ð²Ð»Ñ– (¦) regardless of age, education, experience or background Ð½ÐµÐ·Ð°Ð»ÐµÐ¶Ð½Ð¾ Ð²Ñ–Ð´ Ð²Ñ–ÐºÑƒ, Ð¾ÑÐ²Ñ–Ñ‚Ð¸ Ñ‚Ð° Ð´Ð¾ÑÐ²Ñ–Ð´Ñƒ Ñ€Ð¾Ð±Ð¾Ñ‚Ð¸. 10,3. Lexical and semantic transformations in translation The transformations listed below have been labelled as lexical and semantic because lexical changes often are caused by the need to adapt the meaning to the semantic peculiarities of the target culture. Most of the writers on the subject single out the following transformations of this kind:
1. Generalization of meanings, which is substitution of the source language words (phrases) of a narrow meaning by the target language words (phrases) of a genera] (broader) meaning. E.g. : My baby is 18 months ÐœÐ¾Ñ—Ð¹ Ð´Ð¸Ñ‚Ð¸Ð½Ñ– Ð¿Ñ–Ð²Ñ‚Ð¾Ñ€Ð° Ñ€Ð¾ÐºÑƒ. This car costs seventeen hundred pounds Ð¦Ñ Ð¼Ð°ÑˆÐ¸Ð½Ð° ÐºÐ¾ÑˆÑ‚ÑƒÑ” Ñ‚Ð¸ÑÑÑ‡Ñƒ ÑÑ–Ð¼ÑÐ¾Ñ‚ Ñ„ÑƒÐ½Ñ‚Ñ–Ð²; The soldiers walked in the ankle-deep dust Ð¡Ð¾Ð»Ð´Ð°Ñ‚Ð¸ Ð¹ÑˆÐ»Ð¸ no ÐºÐ¾Ð»Ñ–Ð½Ð¾ Ñƒ Ð¿Ð¸Ð»ÑŽÑ†Ñ–; wrist watch- Ð½Ð°Ñ€ÑƒÑ‡Ð½Ð¸Ð¹ Ð³Ð¾Ð´Ð¸Ð½Ð½Ð¸Ðº.
2.Differentiation of meanings is caused by the fact that many English words with broad semantics do not have direct equivalents in Ukrainian. In such cases dictionaries give a number of meanings that only partially cover the meaning of the source language word and translators have to choose one of the variants, which suits the context best of all.
Thus affection may be rendered as Ñ‰Ð¸Ñ€Ð¾ÑÐµÑ€Ð´Ñ biit not obligatory as Ð»ÑŽÐ±Ð¾Ð², Ð¿Ñ€Ð¸Ñ…Ð¸Ð»ÑŒÐ½Ñ–ÑÑ‚ÑŒ, ÑÐ¸Ð¼Ð¿Ð°Ñ‚Ñ–Ñ; challenge as Ð¿Ñ€Ð¾Ð±Ð»ÐµÐ¼Ð°, Ð½Ð°Ð³Ð°Ð»ÑŒÐ½Ðµ Ð·Ð°Ð²Ð´Ð°Ð½Ð½Ñ (Ð¿Ð¸Ñ‚Ð°Ð½Ð½Ñ) but not only as Ð²Ð¸ÐºÐ»Ð¸Ðº, sustainable as Ð±ÐµÐ·Ð¿ÐµÑ€ÐµÑ€Ð²Ð½Ð¸Ð¹, Ð½ÐµÐ¿Ð¾Ñ…Ð¸Ñ‚Ð½Ð¸Ð¹, Ð¿Ñ€Ð¸Ð´Ð°Ñ‚Ð½Ð¸Ð¹; Ð¾Ð±Ð³Ñ€ÑƒÐ½Ñ‚Ð¾Ð²Ð°Ð½Ð¸Ð¹, Ð¾ÑÑ‚Ð°Ñ‚Ð¾Ñ‡Ð½Ð¾ Ð²Ð¸Ð·Ð½Ð°Ñ‡ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ð¹ but not only as as ÑÑ‚Ð°Ð»Ð¸Ð¹,ÑƒÑÑ‚Ð°Ð»ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ð¹, ÑÑ‚Ñ–Ð¹ÐºÐ¸Ð¹, etc. 2. Concretization (substantiation) of meanings is substitution of theso¹rce language words (phrases) with a generic meaning by the target language words (phrases) with a more specific (narrow) meaning. Concretization is always combined with differentiation. E.g.: Run for the presidency Ð—Ð¼Ð°Ð³Ð°Ð½Ð½Ñ Ð·Ð° Ð¿Ð¾ÑÐ°Ð´Ñƒ Ð¿Ñ€ÐµÐ·Ð¸Ð´ÐµÐ½Ñ‚Ð°: networking ÑÐ¿Ñ–Ð»ÐºÑƒÐ²Ð°Ð½Ð½Ñ:
student not only ÑÑ‚ÑƒÐ´ÐµÐ½Ñ‚ but abo ÑƒÑ‡ÐµÐ½ÑŒ, ÑÐ»ÑƒÑ…Ð°Ñ‡ (dependingupon the context).
A. Logical (or sense) development is the substitution in translation of th dictionary equivalent by the contextual one, which is logically connected with the first. The Liverpool by-election was an acid test for the Labour candidate which can be hardly transla ted as Ð”Ð¾Ð²Ð¸Ð±Ð¾Ñ€Ð¸ Ñƒ Ð›Ñ–Ð²ÐµÑ€Ð¿ÑƒÐ»Ñ– Ð±Ð¸Ð»Ð¸ Ð²Ð¸Ð¿Ñ€Ð¾Ð±Ð¸Ð²Ð°Ð½Ð½ÑÐ¼ Ð½Ð° ÐºÐ¸ÑÐ»Ð¾Ñ‚Ð½Ñ–ÑÑ‚ÑŒ Ð´Ð»Ñ ÐºÐ°Ð½Ð´Ð¸Ð´Ð°Ñ‚Ð° Ð²Ñ–Ð´ Ð»ÐµÐ¹Ð±Ð¾Ñ€Ð¸ÑÑ‚Ñ–Ð².
Evidently it is necessary to substitute the process by its attribute Ð±ÑƒÐ»Ð¸ Ð»Ð°ÐºÐ¼ÑƒÑÐ¾Ð²Ð¸Ð¼ Ð¿Ð°Ð¿Ñ–Ñ€Ñ†ÐµÐ¼. This logical development substitution of the process by the object occurs within the framework of intersection because Ð»Ð°ÐºÐ¼ÑƒÑÐ¾Ð²Ð¸Ð¹ Ð¿Ð°Ð¿Ñ–Ñ€ÐµÑ†ÑŒ is only a part of Ð²Ð¸Ð¿Ñ€Ð¾Ð±ÑƒÐ²Ð°Ð½Ð½Ñ Ð½Ð° ÐºÐ¸ÑÐ»Ð¾Ñ‚Ð½Ñ–ÑÑ‚ÑŒ. When logical development is applied to translation of verb combinations there can be established clear interrelationships between processes (actions or states), causes and effects (consequences).
Thus the theory of permutations allows singling out six possible variants of logical development [see ibid.]: a) substitution of the process by its cause, b) substitution of the process by its effect, c) substitution of the cause by the process, d) substitution of the cause by its effect, e) substitution of the effect be its cause, f) substitution of the effect by the process. To illustrate one of these transformations Ya.I. Retsker [Ð ÐµÑ†ÐºÐµÑ€ 2004: 53] gives quite a straightforward example from A. Christies book: I dont think shes living here at the moment. Her bed wasnt slept in».
It is quite appropriate in translation to substitute the process by its effect: instead of Ð²Ð¾Ð½Ð° Ð½Ðµ ÑÐ¿Ð°Ð»Ð° Ð¸ ÑÐ²Ð¾ÐµÐ¼Ñƒ Ð»Ñ–Ð¶ÐºÑƒ to use Ñ—Ñ— Ð»Ñ–Ð¶ÐºÐ¾ Ð½Ðµ Ð·Ñ–Ð¼ÑÑ‚Ðµ. 5. Antonymous translation is the substitution of the source language notion by its opposite in translation with the relevant restructuring of the utterance aimed at faithful rendering of its content Here belong such techniques as the use of an affirmative construction instead of a negative one or the use of semantic antonyms. E.g.: Let, a sleeping dog lie He Ñ‡Ñ–Ð¿Ð°Ð¹ Ð»Ð¸Ñ…Ð°, ÐºÐ¾Ð»Ð¸ Ð²Ð¾Ð½Ð¾ ÑÐ¿Ð¸Ñ‚ÑŒ: 6. Full rearrangement of the text segment.
This transformation rearranges the inner form of any segment of text: starting with a word, a phrase and ending up with a complete sentence. Such reorganization is of an integral nature so that visible structural relationships between the inner form of the source and target languages segments cannot be traced any more. However full rearrangement does not mean that logical and semantic relationships between the two segments disappear. If it were so, translation would not be faithful.
On the contrary full rearrangement presumes that equivalence of the content is retained in translation, though it is achieved by different means. Full rearrangement is very often used in rendering colloquial set expressions and idioms. Examples are: be my guest Ð»Ð°ÑÐºÐ°Ð²Ð¾ Ð¿Ñ€Ð¾ÑˆÑƒ; bottleneck Ð²ÑƒÐ·ÑŒÐºÐµ (ÑÐ»Ð°Ð±ÐºÐµ) Ð¼Ñ–ÑÑ†Ðµ; dont move!, freeze! Ð°Ð½Ñ– Ñ€ÑƒÑˆ!; Ill be damned! * Ð¿Ñ€Ð¾Ð²Ð°Ð»Ð¸Ñ‚Ð¸ÑÑ Ð¼ÐµÐ½Ñ– Ð½Ð° Ñ†ÑŒÐ¾Ð¼Ñƒ Ð¼Ñ–ÑÑ†Ñ–, Ñ…Ð°Ð¹ Ð¹Ð¾Ð¼Ñƒ Ñ‡Ð¾Ñ€Ñ‚!; out of the blue Ð½ÐµÑÐ¿Ð¾Ð´Ñ–Ð²Ð°Ð½Ð¾, Ñ€Ð°Ð¿Ñ‚Ð¾Ð¼, ÑÐº Ð³Ñ€Ñ–Ð¼ ÑÐµÑ€ÐµÐ´ ÑÑÐ½Ð¾Ð³Ð¾ Ð½ÐµÐ±Ð°, ÑÐº ÑÐ½Ñ–Ð³ Ð½Ð° Ð³Ð¾Ð»Ð¾Ð²Ñƒ; shut up! * Ð—Ð°Ñ‚ÐºÐ½Ð¸ Ñ€Ð¾Ñ‚Ð°!; to sort things out ÑÑ‚Ð°Ð²Ð¸Ñ‚Ð¸ Ð½Ð° ÑÐ²Ð¾Ñ— Ð¼Ñ–ÑÑ†Ñ. 7. Compensation for losses in the course of translation.
According to A. V. Fedorov [ Ð¤ÐµÐ´Ð¾Ñ€Ð¾Ð² 2002:169-170] in the practice of translation there are instances when a word or another element of the source text is not rendered at all or is substituted by a formally different one. However this omission does not contradict the principle of translatability because such elements belong to the text as a whole linguistic unit. These elements are essential forunder standing of the text as parts of system, which is formed by their interrelationships and links thus ensuring cohesion of the text. Within this coherent system there is a room for replacements and compensations.
Therefore if a separate element, which doesnt play a key role in text organization, is lost in translation, it may be of no importance for the text as a whole because this element is dissolved in the general context or substituted by other elements, which sometimes do not exist in the source text. ¢ The education of Mr. Jonas had been conducted on the strictest principles of the main chance. The very first word he learned to spell was gain, and the second (when he got into two syllables), money .[Ch.Dickens. Life and adventures of Martin Chuzzlewit].
Ð’Ð¸Ñ…Ð¾Ð²Ð°Ð½Ð½Ñ Ð¿Ð°Ð½Ð° Ð”Ð¶Ð¾Ð½Ð°ÑÐ° Ð±ÑƒÐ»Ð¾ ÑÐ°Ð¼Ðµ ÑÑƒÐ²Ð¾Ñ€Ðµ Ñ‚Ð° Ñ–Ð· Ð½Ð°Ñ€Ð¾Ð´Ð¶ÐµÐ½Ð½Ñ Ð¼Ð°Ð»Ð¾ Ð½Ð° ÑƒÐ²Ð°Ð·Ñ– Ð¿ÐµÑ€ÐµÐ´ÑƒÑÑ–Ð¼ ÐºÐ¾Ñ€Ð¸ÑÑ‚ÑŒ. ÐŸÐµÑ€ÑˆÐµ ÑÐ»Ð¾Ð²Ð¾, ÑÐºÐµ Ð²Ñ–Ð½ Ð½Ð°Ð²Ñ‡Ð¸Ð²ÑÑ ÑÐºÐ»Ð°Ð´Ð°Ñ‚Ð¸, Ð±ÑƒÐ»Ð¾ Ð³Ñ€Ð¾ÑˆÑ–, Ð° Ð´Ñ€ÑƒÐ³Ðµ (ÐºÐ¾Ð»Ð¸ Ð²Ñ–Ð½ Ð´Ñ–Ð¹ÑˆÐ¾Ð² Ð´Ð¾ Ñ‚Ñ€Ð¸ÑÐºÐ»Ð°Ð´Ð¾Ð²Ð¸Ñ… ÑÐ»Ñ–Ð²) Ð½Ð°Ð¶Ð¸Ð²Ð°. In the original Ch. Dickens writes not about the strictness of education as such but about the strictest principles of the main chance. i.e. about Ñ‡Ñ–Ñ‚ÐºÑ– Ð¿Ñ€Ð¸Ð½Ð¸Ð¸Ð¿Ð¸ Ð½Ðµ Ð²Ñ‚Ñ€Ð°Ñ‚Ð¸Ñ‚Ð¸ ÑÐ²Ñ–Ð¹ ÑˆÐ°Ð½ÑÐ¾Ñ— Ñ‡Ñ–Ñ‚ÐºÑ– Ð¿Ñ€Ð¸Ð½ÑˆÑ‚Ð¸ Ð¾Ñ‚Ñ€Ð¸Ð¼Ð°Ñ‚Ð¸ Ð½Ð°Ð¶Ð¸Ð²Ð¸.
Unfortunately this hypocritical idiomaticity has not been rendered in translation. However, the translator tries to compensate for this loss by increasing the level of irony further on in translation.
Translation of the words gain and money also illustrates the technique of compensation: in the source text the first word Jonas learned to spell is gain and the second -money. In the, Ukrainian translation Ð³Ñ€Ð¾ÑˆÑ– appears to be the first and Ð½Ð°Ð¶Ð¸Ð²Ð° the second due to the different number of syllables in the target language. Correspondingly the translator substitutes the phrase when he got into two syllables by ÐºÐ¾Ð»Ð¸ Ð²Ñ–Ð½ Ð´Ñ–Ð¹ÑˆÐ¾Ð² Ð´Ð¾ Ñ‚Ñ€Ð¸ÑÐºÐ»Ð°Ð´Ð¾Ð²Ð¸Ñ… ÑÐ»Ñ–Ð².