Importance of lexical transformations in translation realities

The translation of the sentence can be considered adequate, since the metaphor and emotionally colored epithet are saved and synonymous pair is transferred as equivalent combination of a phrase consisting two elements.

Earlier we talked about the nature of precision in literary translation. Our definition of adequacy covers and literary translation, but does require some reservations.

It is appropriate to remember the statement of Belinski V.G. in article "About the life and works of Koltsova". It is about inextricable connection between form and content. "When the form is an expression of content, it is associated with it so closely that separate it from the content would to destroy the very content, and vice versa: separating the content from the form is to destroy the most form."

The form is a set of linguistic means of expression used by the author for full and vivid expressions to the content and imagery and emotional impact on the reader. The stylistic means of expression used by author are not random; they always play the role of artistic meaning. They are always intertwined, support and reinforce each other, forming a single system. This system of expression means is typical to the given author and it is that we call the author's personal style.

The following example may illustrate the interconnection used by Dickens to describe the evil and heartless woman - Miss Merdston, sister of the future stepfather, David Copperfield[33;p.324].

“When she paid the coachman she took her money out of a hard steel purse, and she kept the purse in a very jail of a bag which hung upon her arm by a heavy chain, and shut up like a bite.”

In this passage, all the stylistic devices used by Dickens - epithets: a hard steel purse, a very jail of a bag, a heavy chain and a comparison: like a bite is not the minor details, which the translator could not ignore. They have a deep semantic meaning and very vividly description of Miss Merdston. Describing such external accessories, Dickens actually reveals the inner face of the woman. And in the next sentence - “I had never, at that time, seen such a metallic lady altogether as Miss Murdstone was”- he summarizes what has been said, calling it "a metallic lady".

What is a stylistic transformation? Their essence is to change the stylistic coloring by translation units:

“When I could stand it no longer, I stopped translating the article.”

“Когда я почувствовал, что мне изменяют силы, я прекратил переводить статью.”

"So what?" - I said. Cold as hell. «Ну так что же?» - спросил я ледяным голосом.

"Well, well, perhaps they'll let me know later" - I said to myself.

«Не стоит волноваться, может быть, они дадут мне знать позже» - сказал я сам себе.

2.3 Lexical Transformations

Translation is a peculiar type of communication - a cross-lingual communication. The main concern of translation theory is to determine appropriate translation methods for the widest possible range of the texts and to give insight into the translation process, into the relations between main idea and language, culture and speech. In the process of translation it is often impossible to use the appropriate words and expressions which are given in dictionary. The content, that is, the referential meaning of the message with all its implications and the form of the message with all its emotive and stylistic connotations must be reproduced as fully as possible in the translation as they are to evoke a similar response. In such cases, the authors resort to the transformational translation, which is converting the internal form of a word or phrase; or its complete replacement into adequate transmission of the content of the utterance.

They say that translation starts where dictionaries end. Though somewhat exaggerated, this saying truly reflects the nature of translation. Dictionaries list all regular correspondences between elements of lexical systems of languages. Translation deals not so much with the system of language but with speech (or to be more exact - with a text, which is a product of speech). So in the process of translating one has to find it by himself which of the meanings of a polysemantic word is realized in a particular context, to see if under the influence of this context the word has acquired a slightly new shade of meaning and to decide how this new shade of meaning (not listed in any dictionary) can be rendered in TL. E.g. no dictionary ever translates the verb "to be" as "лежать", nevertheless it is the best way to translate it in the sentence "She was in hospital" - "Она лежала в больнице". Moreover, it has already been said that every language has its specific way of expressing things, a way that may be quite alien to other languages. That is why a literal (word-for-word) translation of a foreign text may turn out clumsy (if not ridiculous) in TL. To avoid it one has to resort to some special devices worked out by the theory of translation and known as lexical transformations (or contextual substitutions) (лексические трансформации, или контекстуальные замены).

A great contribution to the development problems of lexical transformations were made by linguists as Retsker I. Semenov A, B. Krupnov, Pivueva Yu B, Dvoynina E., L.K. Latyshev. In his paper "The Course of Translation" L.K. Latyshev defines lexical transformation as "a deviation from the lexical correspondences." In the lexical systems of English and Russian languages there are discrepancies that occur in the type of semantic structure of the word. Every word as L.S.Barkhudarov says is a lexical unit - is a part of the lexical system of the language. This explains the uniqueness of the semantic structure of words in different languages.

The goal of this work is to analyze lexical transformations in a literary text and to give the percentage of usage of all lexical transformations and find the best classification of it in translation. This research will try to explain the reason causing lexical transformations and also necessity of usage in particular situations.

So what are the reasons causing lexical transformations that occur during the process of translation? Well, there are many reasons, but we'll discuss some of the most important ones.

1. The meaning of a word in different languages is frequently provided by different features of the same phenomenon or concept, which reflects the vision of the world, characteristic of a given language, or rather, native speakers which inevitably creates difficulties in translation. Eg. iron - утюг. The name of the given subject in Russian language is determined by its purpose: ironing (утюжить), an English equivalent is the material used in its manufacture.

2. The next reason, which causes lexical transformation, is the difference in the amount of meaning of the word. There are not any absolutely identical words in SL and TL. More often, they coincide only with the first lexical-semantic variant (LSV) of such words, e.i. their main meaning and then followed by various LSV, because the development of the values of those words went on separate ways. This is due to the various operations of words in language, the difference in use, different compatibilities, but even the basic meaning of English words can be wider than the corresponding Russian words (of course, it could be otherwise). Eg. Word “spell” has very wide semantic structure and can be used with variety words. “Spell” as - 1) заклинание; 2) чары; 3) время 4) смена 5)заговор 6) короткая передышка 7) писать или произносить по буквам 8)означать 9) отдохнуть 10) влечь за собой

3. Another reason is the difference in compatibility. Words are defined for the specific language links. It is important to note that the compatibility of words could be used in case of the compatibility of concepts. This compatibility between languages, obviously, is different, and what is possible in one language is not acceptable in another. In every language there are own common standards of compatibilities. Also could be produced original clichйs, as ready-made formulas, words and word-combinations used by native speakers of the language. And in translation they use appropriate traditional compatibility or clichй of Russian language.

3. Practical usage of lexical transformations in the story of Agatha Christie “The Companion”

3.1 Stages in operation of lexical transformations

Translation is essentially a decision-making process that requires a combination of language ability, subject-specific knowledge, intuition, research skills, and judgment. A proper translation expresses the meaning behind the use of written words in one language in the written word usage of a second language. Although the translator appears to be dealing with words, in actual practice the translator is dealing with units of meaning that may or may not be expressed by the words appearing on paper. The translator must go beyond the "tatemae" (the appearance, or stated word) to the "honne" (the reality, or the true intent) of the document to be translated. Meaning is not contained in words, but is abstracted from words and interpreted within a context. The translator must rely not only on linguistic clues appearing in the document, but also on extra-linguistic knowledge. The translator must be able to understand and appreciate distinctions made in the "source language" of the document to be translated, and to make equivalent distinctions in the "target language" of the translation. This is not an easy task.

Table 10

In broad outline, the steps in the translation process are as follows: [Sandra Burns Thomson, p.3]
1.Text Analysis		Analyzing the structure of the text and its meaning
2.Research		Searching for meaningful "clues" within the text and outside of the text
3.Draft Translations		Preparing as many drafts as are needed, includingtentative translations
4.Accuracy Checking		Comparing the source and target texts
5.Editing		Reviewing the target language text for appropriate style and jargon
6.Formatting		Putting the final text in printed and/or electronic form

In the real world of translation, translators are constantly faced not only with typographical errors in the source text, but also with intermittent failure (errors) in grammar, rhetoric, and logic (trivial though they may be). A document must be analyzed not only for its linguistic structure, but also for its underlying meaning. Some documents are written under pressure, and sometimes by more than one author, which can result in internal inconsistencies.

In addition, highly sophisticated documents often contain ambiguities that are open to interpretation by the reader. The experienced and skilled translator will usually be able to convey this ambiguity in the translation. The decision whether or not to preserve ambiguity challenges the judgment of the translator.

Steps (1) and (2) will often be repeated several times as a translator gains familiarity with the source language text. In some cases, steps (1) and (2) may result in the creation of a glossary for a particular translation.

Thanks to computers, we can easily prepare and revise drafts (Step 3), making corrections as needed. The translator can prepare as many drafts as required to massage the translation so that it is as close a reflection of the original text as possible.

The accuracy checking of step (4) occurs when the translator steps back from the act of translation itself and compares the translation to the original text. It is absolutely essential that this be done. My policy is to print out the translation and do the accuracy checking with hard copy, even if the final translation is to be delivered electronically. It is very easy to miss things on the screen. And it is important to "step back" and indeed "step away" from the translation, and then go back to it. Ideally, it is best to set the translation aside for at least a few hours, do something else, and then come back to it with a fresh perspective. But we are continually facing deadlines, so this is not always practical. It is often useful to have a translation reviewed by a colleague for accuracy. After that, there is the need to edit the translation as a "target language" document.

Please note that steps (4) and (5) are two very different processes. Accuracy checking means comparing the "source language" document with the "target language" document for accuracy, while editing means evaluating the translation as a "target language" document appropriate in style and jargon for the intended reader. If the translation is for publication, it is best to have this done by a professional editor.

Step (6) is, in many ways, the simplest of the steps, but if done improperly, it can annual of the work done in steps (1) through (5).

The quality of a translation depends primarily upon:

v The quality of the "source language" document;

v The degree of subject-specific knowledge acquired by the translator;

v The level of "source language" and "target language" proficiency of the translator;

v The translator's diligence and attention to detail.

Description of the translating process is one of the major tasks of the translation theory. Here we deal with the dynamic aspects of translation trying to understand how the translator performs the transfer operation from ST to TT.

Psychologically viewed, the translating process must need to include two mental processes - understanding and verbalization. First, the translator understands the contents of ST, that is, reduce the information it contains to his own mental program, and then he develops this program into TT. The problem is that these mental processes are not directly observable and we do not know much of what that program is and how the reduction and development operations are performed. That is why the translating process has to be described in some indirect way. The translation theory achieves this aim by postulating a number of translation models.

A model may describe the translating process either in a general form or by listing a number of specific operations (or transformations) through which the process can, in part, be realized. Translation models can be oriented either toward the situation reflected in the ST contents or toward the meaningful components of the ST contents.

The existing models of the translating process are, in fact, based on the situational (or referential) model and the semantic-transformational model. These models are supposed to explain the dynamic aspects of translation. In other words, it is presumed that the translator actually makes a mental travel from the original to some cross-lingual level of equivalence and then further on to the text of translation.

In the situational model this intermediate level is extra-linguistic. It is the described reality, the facts of life that are represented by the verbal description. The process of translating presumably consists in the translator getting beyond the original text to the actual situation described in it. This is the first step of the process, i.e. the break-through to the situation. The second step is for the translator to describe this situation in the target language. Thus the process goes from the text in one language through the extra-linguistic situation to the text in another language. The translator first understands what the original is about and then says “the same things” in TL.

For instance, the translator reads in A. Cronin's “Citadel” the description of the main character coming by train to a new place of work: “Manson walked quickly down the platform, searching eagerly for some signs of welcome“. He tries to understand what reality lies behind the words “searching eagerly for some signs of welcome”. The man was alone in a strange place and couldn't expect any welcome committee or deputation. Obviously, he just wanted to see whether anyone was there to meet him. So, the translator describes the situation in Russian in the following way: «Мэнсон быстро прошел по перрону, оглядываясь, не встречает ли его кто-нибудь».

A different approach was used by E. Nida who suggested that the translating process may be described as a series of transformations. The transformational model postulates that in any two languages there are a number of nuclear structures which are fully equivalent to each other. Each language has an area of equivalence in respect to the other language. It is presumed that the translator does the translating in three transformational stages. [34, p.39]

First -- the stage of analysis -- he transforms the original structures into the nuclear structures, i.e. he performs transformation within SL.

Second --the stage of translation proper --he replaces the SL nuclear structures with the equivalent nuclear structures in TL. And third --the stage of synthesis -- he develops the latter into the terminal structures in the text of translation.

Thus if the English sentence “It is very strange this domination of our intellect by our digestive organs” (J.K. Jerome) is translated into Russian as «Странно, до какой степени пищеварительные органы властвуют над нашим рассудком» we presume that the structures “domination of our intellect” and “domination by our digestive organs” were first reduced to the nuclear structures “organs dominate” and “they dominate intellect”, respectively. Then they were replaced by the equivalent Russian structures «органы властвуют/ organele dominг» and «они властвуют над рассудком/ ele dominг asupra raюiunii», after which the nuclear structures were transformed into the final Russian/Romanian variant.

A similar approach can be used to describe the translation of semantic units. The semantic model postulates the existence of the “deep” semantic categories common to SL and TL. It is presumed that the translator first reduces the semantic units of the original to these basic semantic categories and then expresses the appropriate notions by the semantic units of TL.

Thus if he comes across the sentence “John is the proud owner of a new car“, he is first to realize that it actually means that “John has a new car” and that “he is proud because of that'. After transferring these basic ideas to Russian/Romanian and converting them to the semantically acceptable phrases he will get the translation «У Джона (есть) новая машина, которой он очень гордится / John are o maєinг cu care el se mоndreєte».

Training translators we may teach them to use these models as practical tools. Coming across a specific problem in ST the translator should classify it as situational, structural or semantic and try to solve it by resorting to the appropriate procedure. If, for instance, in the sentence “He is a poor sleeper” the translator sees that the attributive group cannot be directly transferred into Russian/ Romanian, he can find that the transformational model will do the trick for him here and transform the attributive group into a verb-adverb phrase: «Он плохо спит / El doarme rгu/ El are insomnie».

Another approach to the description of the process of translating consists in the identification of different types of operations performed by the translator. The type of operation is identified by comparing the initial and the final texts.

The first group of operations (or transformations) is characterized by imitation of the form of a word or of a collocation. In the first case the translator tries to represent the pronunciation or the spelling of the foreign word with the TL letters. Thus we get such translations as «битник», «биология», «эскалация», etc.

In the second case the translator creates a blueprint collocation in TL by using a loan translation. This results in such forms as «люди доброй воли» (people of good will/ oameni de bunг voinюг/ credinюг).

The second group of operations includes all types of lexical transformations involving certain semantic changes. As a result, the meaning of a word or word combination in ST may be made more specific, more general or somewhat modified as a way to discovering an appropriate equivalent in TL.

Another type of lexical transformations is often called “modulation”. It involves the creation of an equivalent by replacing a unit in SL with a TL unit the meaning of which can be logically deduced from it and which is just another way of referring to the same object or an aspect of the same situation.

The third group of translating procedures comprises all types of transformations involving units of SL grammar. The translator may solve his problems by preserving the syntactic structure of the source text and using the analogous TL grammatical forms or “a word-for-word translation”. This may be called “a zero transformation” and can be easily exemplified, e.g.:

John took Mary by the hand. Джон взял Мери за руку.

In other cases the translator may resort to various types of grammatical substitutes.

First, we may mention two types of transformations which change the number of sentences in TT as compared to ST.

As a rule, the translator renders the original text sentence by sentence and the number of sentences remains the same. However, it may so happen that the structural and semantic problems of a translation event can be best solved by breaking an original sentence into two parts, i.e. translating it with two sentences in TL. Another type of such partitioning is to replace a simple sentence in the original with a complex one in the translation, comprising one or several subordinate clauses.

The problems that can be solved through this technique are varied. First of all it may come handy in dealing with the English syntactic complexes which pack in two subject-predicate units, each unit making up a sentence or a clause in the Russian translation, e.g.:

- I want you to speak English. - Я хочу, чтобы вы говорили по-английски.

- She hates his behaving in this way.- Ей очень не нравится, что он так себя ведет.

The partitioning of sentences in translation can also be used to overcome the difficulties caused by the idiomatic semantic structure of the original text, e.g.:

- This was a man to be seen to be understood. -Чтобы понять этого человека, надо было его увидеть.

Sometimes the translator can prefer partitioning to the other possible methods of translation, as producing a variant more suitable stylistically or emotionally.

The opposite procedure means integrating two or more original sentences into one or compressing a complex sentence into a simple one. This technique is also used both for structural and semantic reasons.

Sometimes one of the sentences is grammatically too incomplete to warrant its separate reproduction in translation:

- It is not possible to do the work in two days. Nor is it necessary. Выполнить эту работу за два дня нет ни возможности, ни необходимости.

The integration procedure may be necessitated by close semantic ties between adjacent sentences:

- We did not want scenery. We wanted to have our supper and go to bed. Мы не хотели красивых пейзажей --мы хотели поужинать и лечь спать.

The partitioning and integration procedures may be used together, resulting in a kind of syntactic and semantic reshuffle of sentences in translation.

Finally, there is a group of transformations which ensure the required degree of equivalence by a number of changes of both lexical and grammatical nature. They involve a different arrangement of ideas, a different point of view and other semantic modifications whenever a direct translation of a SL unit proves impossible. A typical example of such a procedure is the so-called antonymous translation describing the situation, as it were, from the opposite point of view and rendering an affirmative SL structure by a negative TL one or vice versa:

The door was not unbolted. Дверь была на засове.

A complex change also occurs in explicatory translations in which a SL unit is replaced by a TL word combination describing or defining its meaning:

A demonstration of British conservationists was held in Trafalgar Square yesterday. Вчера на Трафальгар-сквер состоялась демонстрация английских сторонников охраны окружающей среды[35;p.543].

Combination of different types of lexical transformations in a sentence complicates their identification and classification. There are many types of lexical transformations suggested by various linguists. Nevertheless, let us discuss some of them.

Komissarov V.N. gives his own classification of lexical transformations as follows:



Table 11

Another classification of lexical transformations proposed by

L.S. Barkhudarov:

Table12

Y.I. Retsker identifies seven types of lexical transformations:



Table13

Many different linguists try to give their own classifications of transformation. But it isn't capable to use during the translation, since they make you confused to identify the real category of translation. In turn to get the finest classification of lexical transformations in translation it was considered to take a story written by Agatha Christie and its translation in Russian; and try to make another available and more distinctive classification in order to use them in future translation process. For this purpose it was considered to collect other given classifications, combine them all together and compare. Because there is not any clear borderline between grammatical and lexical transformations. In one case the grammatical transformation could be lexical. Parallel to Komissarov V.N., Barkhudarov L.S. and Y.I.Retsker's classifications it will be done an analysis; and the real percentage of transformation usage in translation of the given story.

The text represents thorough research in the field of translation, which combines crucial elements of this process. Here is formed new concepts from existing theories, i.e. why are some definitions as they are, and is it really correct? It is put together many different opinions and on that basis created a new approach. His methodology is very logical and clear - one thing results from another, and there are plenty of examples for a better understanding. This very practical attitude makes the text legible, without losing anything of its importance.

3.2 Use of Concretization

The story by Agatha Christie: "The Companion." from the “Complete Short Stories of Miss Marple” was chosen to analyze the features of lexical transformations.

Lexical transformations are also caused by necessity to concretize a word while translating. It is characteristic to English language the availability of words with wide spread meaning. They can be nouns, adjectives and verbs, for instance: thing, point, stiff; nice, fine bad; to say, to go, to come, to get.

Translation of these words depends on the context, which helps to identify their concrete meaning. Usually they are translated by various Russian words that have concrete meaning (importance). Concrete lexical meaning (importance), this or that the lexical-semantic variant of a verb depends on structure and lexical meaning of words that distribute them.

Among nouns of wide meaning a special group comprises abstract nouns that frequently demand concrete definitions in translation. So, for instance, despite the presence of a word «президентство» in Russian-English word presidency usually refers to the words «пост президента или президентская власть».

“An ageing Speaker cannot take on the burdens of the presidency.”

Престарелый спикер не может взять на себя бремя президентской власти (в случае смерти президента)

The use of words of abstract meaning strongly differs in various languages. Therefore follows the necessity of concrete definition in translation[36;p.543].

Sometimes it is necessary to concretize some words due to different qualitative distinctions in languages. The following words belong to them: «meal» and «трапеза» that usually illustrates this phenomenon.

The next problem which demands careful consideration in lexical transformations of translation is problem of word combinability. The concept of norm is relative, on the one hand with the system of language and on the other hand it is closely connected with speech, in which the originality of speech formation is displayed. Each language can form uncountable number of new word combinations that will be understood by its native speakers. In any language there are generally accepted traditions of word combinations, which do not coincide with the corresponding tradition of word combinations in the other languages.

And it makes look for similarity accepted word combinations in the target language. The main part combined words usually coincides in translation, but the second one is frequently translated by a word possessing other logical meaning, but performing the same function, as for instance, trains run-поезда ходят, rich feeding - обильная пища.

The wider is the semantic meaning of a word, the wider its combinability, thus due to this feature it can interact with various word forms and word combinations. And this features enables the translator to use his creativity in translation.

Along with traditional combinations in languages unexpected combinations are also possible, but they are quite clear, for they follow generally accepted semantic models of word combinability. This phenomenon - the connection of words with completely various semantic features - is peculiar to all languages, but in each language it has various rules and traditions. In English language such unexpected word combinations are formed very easily. It probably caused by conversion and easiness in formation of new words in various ways, heterogeneity of languages vocabulary and some other reasons. Not only poets and writers, but also journalists frequently create unexpected word combination that makes their statements significantly vivid and original. The unexpectedness of word usage is closely connected with expressiveness of the statement.

In the beginning of the story “The Companion”, the word "said" can be highlighted as a specific and frequently used form of lexical transformation - concretization. Since the word has a very diverse form of transformation in the translation. During the reading of the Russian translation of the story we can select a variety of transferring, such as - “проговорить, произнесла, сказал, поддержал, подала голос, выдавил из себя, вмешался, начал, заметил, возразил, добавил, потребовала, изумилась, повторил, возмутилась, ответил, вырвалось, капризно заявила, живо откликнулась, восхитился, согласилась, протянула”.

Concretization is replacement of the source language word or word-combination with wide subject-logic meaning by the target language word or word-combination with narrow meaning. As the result, the created correspondence and source language unit turned out to be in logical relations of inclusion: the source language unit expresses aspectual notion, while the target language unit expresses aspectual notions combined in it. [37, p.685 ]

If English verbs mostly denote actions in rather a vague general way, Russian verbs are very concrete in denoting not only the action itself but also the manner of performing this action as well: "to go (on foot, by train, by plane, etc.)" - "идти пешком", "ехать. поездом", "лететь. самолетом", etc.; "to get out" - "выбираться","выходить", "вылезать", "высаживаться", etc. The choice of a particular Russian verb depends on the context. It does not mean, of course, that the verb "to go" changes its meaning under the influence of the context. The meaning of "to go" is the same, it always approximately corresponds to the Russian "перемещаться", but the norms of the Russian language demand a more specified nomination of the action. The same can be illustrated with the verb "to be": "The clock is on the wall", "The apple is on the plate and the plate is on the table" - "Часы висят. на стене", "яблоко лежит на тарелке, а тарелка стоит на столе", though in all those cases "to be" preserves its general meaning "находиться". The sentence "He's in Hollywood" in J.D. Salinger's "The Catcher in the Rye" should be translated as "Он работает в Голливуде", but if "Oxford" were substituted for "Hollywood" the translation would rather be "учится". This transformation is applicable not only to verbs but to all words of wide semantic volume, no matter to what part of speech they belong: adverbs, adjectives, nouns, etc. E.g. due to their most vague meaning such nouns as "a thing", "stuff", "a camp" are used to denote practically anything, often remaining neutral stylistically. In Russian, however, nouns with so general a meaning are less universal, besides, they sometimes belong to the colloquial register which often makes it impossible to use them in translation (cf. "a thing" - "вещь", "штука", "штуковина"). That is why in every case there should be found a word with a more concrete meaning denoting that particular "thing" or "stuff" which is meant by the author: "... this madman stuff that happened to me" - "идиотская история ,которая со мной случилась"; "... all the dispensary stuff" - "все медицинские препараты" or "лекарства"; "toilet things" - "туалетные принадлежности", "you have never done a single thing in all your life to be ashamed of" - "за всю свою жизнь ты не совершил ни одного постыдного поступка".

It is necessary to take into consideration not only denotative but connotative meanings as well. The verb "to employ" is usually translated as "нанимать, принимать на работу". But if Mark Twain's character is "accused of employing toothless and incompetent old relatives to prepare food for the foundling hospital", of which he is warden, the verb acquires a shade of negative meaning (he is said to have used his position in order to pay money to his relatives for the work which they could not do properly); so it should be translated by a less "general" verb - e.g. "пристроить".

The English pronoun "you" deserves special attention. It can be translated only with the help of differentiation, i.e. either "ты" or "вы". The choice depends on the character, age, the social position of the characters, their relations, and the situation in which they speak. One should remember that the wrong choice can ruin the whole atmosphere of the text.

Let's discuss another case:

1.

“{…} places where things happen!”	местах, где преступления действительно совершаются.

In this example it is clearly seen the replacement of a word “things” by “преступления” according to the context. Before this by other heroes were discussed about crime and criminals.

2.

“But the facts were really strange {…}”	Как бы то ни было, история весьма странная.

This example shows that here are used two different types of lexical transformations both concretization and addition. But it was considered to choose concretization. Since the underlying meaning shows suspicious idea in the context. And the addition of words are not so highly emphasized.

3.

{…} , and the Spanish woman's queer story.	- … и странное утверждение той женщины.

You also can find two types of lexical transformation: concretization and omission. Instead of “Spanish” the author replaced it with “утверждение”, concretizing that the woman was telling somebody about the accident.

3.3 Use of Generalization

Generalization is a replacement of the source language unit, which has narrow meaning, by the target language unit with wide range of meaning, i.e. transformation opposite to concretization. The created correspondence expresses the notion, which contains the initial meaning. [38, p. 750]

In many cases the norms of TL make it unnecessary or even undesirable to translate all the particulars expressed in SL. Englishmen usually name the exact height of a person: "He is six foot three tall". In Russian it would hardly seem natural to introduce a character saying "Он шести футов и трех дюймов росту"; substituting centimetres for feet and inches wouldn't make it much better: "Он 190,5 сантиметров росту". The best variant is to say: "Он очень большого роста".

Generalization is also used in those cases when a SL a word with differentiated meaning corresponds to a word with non-differentiated meaning in TL ("a hand" - "рука", "an arm" "рука", etc.).

The necessity to use generalization may be caused by purely pragmatic reasons. In the original text there may be many proper names informative for the native speakers of SL and absolutely uninformative for the readers in TL. They may be names of some firms, of the goods produced by those firms, of shops (often according to the name of the owner), etc.: Englishmen know that "Tonibell" is the name of various kinds of ice-cream produced by the firm Tonibell, while "Trebor" means sweets produced by Trebor Sharps LTD and "Tree Top" denotes fruit drinks produced by Unilever. Transcribed in the Russian text these names are absolutely senseless for the reader who would not see any difference between "Тонибелл", "Требор", "Три Топ" or even "Тоутал", which is not eatable since it is petrol. An English reader in his turn can hardly guess what they sell in "Динамо" shops (even if it is spelt "Dynamo") or in "Весна" (no matter whether it is rendered as "Vesna" or "Spring"). Hardly are more informative such names as "Снежинка" (a cafe or a laundry), "Байкал" (a drink), "Первоклассница"(sweets), "Осень"(a cake), etc. That is why it is recommended to substitute names (unless they are internationally known or play a special role in the context) by generic words denoting the whole class of similar objects: "Он сдает свои рубашки в "Снежинку" - "He has his shirts washed at the laundry", "Они ели "Осень", запивая ее "Байкалом" - "They were eating a cake washing it down with a tonic"; "... Domes of glass and aluminium which glittered like Chanel diamonds" -"купола из стекла и алюминия, которые сверкали, как искусственные бриллианты". To translate "Chanel diamonds" as "бриллианты фирмы "Шанель" would be a mistake since the majority of Russian readers do not know that this firm makes artificial diamonds. If the text permits a longer sentence it is possible to add this information ("искусственные бриллианты фирмы "Шанель"), which may be useful for the reader's scope but absolutely unnecessary for the text itself. However, the generalized translation "искусственные бриллианты" is quite necessary here.

1.

“The very next morning she was found to be missing from her room.”	- Однако на следующее утро мисс Бартон исчезла.

This example exposes clear use of generalization. The word combination “was found to be missing from her room” replaced by general short idea “исчезла.” But the author added one word “однако” to show character's disagreement in this situation.

2.

“It's the only natural way of thinking of it.”	- Это же единственное разумное предложение.

By this example author wanted to show how different types were used. First, the word “natural” is replaced by concretization transformation to “разумное”. Second, “way of thinking of it” is a word combination which is replaced by only word “предложение”, since after thinking an idea for a while in the end you come to conclusion and make suggestion. That's why this word was directly used by author.

3.

{…you will see people all races and nationalities…}	- {…можно встретить путешественников со всех концов света…}

It is obviously seen that word combination “people all races and nationalities” itself means that everyone came from all over the word. Thus it was translated as “со всех концов света”. You can also notice the word “people” was concretized by “путешественников”, because the words “all races and nationalities” hint they could be only travelers who came by ship.

3.4 Method of Compensation

Compensation is a way of translation, when the elements of sense were lost in the process of the source language unit translation and are covered in the target text by using other means of translation, but not necessarily in the same place of text as in original, i.e. the lost sense is revealed and the content of the original is reproduced more precisely. However, the grammatical means of the original are replaced by lexical ones and vice versa.

To be exact, it is not so much a transformation but rather a general principle of rendering stylistic peculiarities of a text when there is no direct correspondence between stylistic means of SL and TL. This transformation is widely used to render speech peculiarities of characters, to translate puns, rhyming words, etc. The essence of it is as follows: it is not always possible to find stylistic equivalents to every stylistically marked word of the original text or to every phonetic and grammatical irregularity purposefully used by the author. That is why there should be kept a general stylistic balance based on compensating some inevitable stylistic losses by introducing stylistically similar elements in some other utterances or by employing different linguistic means playing a similar role in TL. Suppose a character uses the word "fool-proof" which is certainly a sign of the colloquial register. In Russian there is no colloquial synonym of the word "надежный" or "безопасный". So the colloquial "fool-proof" is translated by the neutral "абсолютно надежный" and the speech of the character loses its stylistic coloring. This loss is inevitable, but it is necessary to find a way of compensation. It is quite possible to find a neutral utterance in the speech of the same character that can be translated colloquially, e.g. "I got nothing". Taken separately it should be translated "Я ничего не получил" or "Мне ничего не дали", but it allows to make up for the lost colloquial marker: "Я остался с носом (на бобах)". It results in getting one neutral and one colloquial utterance both in the original and in the translated texts.

There is another variety of compensation which consists in creating the same general effect in TL with the help of means different from those used in SL. A combination of phonetic and grammatical mistakes is used by G.B.Shaw to show that his character is an uneducated person: "Old uns like me is up in the world now". It is impossible to make the same mistakes in the corresponding Russian sentence: "Такие старики, как я, сейчас высоко ценятся". Nevertheless, speech characteristics are very important for creating the image of Beamish, so it is necessary to make him speak in an uneducated manner. In Russian mistakes in the category of number would hardly produce this effect, they would rather be taken for a foreign accent. One also can't omit sounds in any of the words in the sentence. That is why it is better to achieve the same result by lexical means, using words and their forms typical of popular speech (просторечие): "Старички-то навроде меня нынче в цене!". Another example: "You can't have no rolls" (G.B.Shaw) Since double negation is the literary norm in the Russian language it doesn't help to render the effect of illiterate speech; it is necessary to make a typical Russian grammatical mistake. The most widespread mistakes are connected with case formation in Russian, so something like "А булочков-то не будет" may serve the purpose.

1.

“I always thought so”	- Я всегда за

In this sentence the author compensates the words “thought so” by other lexical unit, preposition “за” which shows the character's constant participation in every event. This is considered from the context.

2.

“They all danced well and we looked on and admired.”	- Как они танцевали! Мы просто не могли отвести от них глаз.

First, here you can notice the sentence division into two simple ones. Second, we have complex compensation. The word combination “They all danced well” expressed by more emotional phrases in translation “Как они танцевали”. It shows their admiration to dancers. And “we looked on and admired” transferred as “Мы просто не могли отвести от них глаз”, because when you admire someone you can barely talk. So here this physical condition is exposed.

3.

It sounds the most complicated and resourceful crime, - said Sir Henry.	- Весьма изобретательная особа, - согласился сэр Генри.

In this sample word combination “It sounds the most complicated and resourceful crime” is replaced by different lexical units and grammatical structure. The author identifies that character is astonished by the woman's actions. And as usual there is concretization of word “said” to “согласился” because of context.

3.5 Method of Modulation

Modulation or notional development is replacement of the source language word or word-combination by the target language unit, the meaning of which is logically worked out of the initial one. Most often, cause-effect relations connect the meanings of corresponded words in the source and target texts. They can often have wider character, but the logical connection between two notions is always kept.

1.

“Oh, Sir Henry! {…}”	- Господь с вами, сэр Генри, -{…}”

In this translation author shows character's disagreement by this sound “Oh!”, which indicates character's further feeling.

2.

“They were like thousands of their sisters.”	- Типичные представители своего класса.

This pattern explains translator's ideas that he wanted to say by the word combination “Типичные представители”, that there are many people like them and they are usually predictable.

3.

{One she had forgotten, …} -	…причем имя одного из поручателей вообще ничего ей не говорила…

This situation is very interesting. Because the translator wants to define the character's feeling with adding some extra words and putting the whole situation as she forgot the name and that's it. On this basis it is impossible to remember anything.

3.6 Use of Antonymic translation

Yes it is correct, we got used that antonymic translation is grammatical transformation. But in other hand it is replacement of language units which refers to lexical transformation. So it was decided to add it into this category.

Antonymous translation is a lexical-grammatical transformation, when the positive form in the original is changed into the negative one in the target text, and vice versa and accompanied by replacement of the source language unit by the target language unit with the opposite meaning.

The necessity to resort to antonymic translation may be caused by various peculiarities of SL and TL lexical systems: a) in Russian the negative prefix не coincides in its form with the negative particle не, while in English they differ (un-, in-, im-, etc. and the negative suffix -less on the one hand and the particle "not" on the other hand); so it is quite normal to say "not impossible" in English, while in Russian "не невозможно" is bad; b) groups of antonyms in SL and TL do not necessarily coincide: in English the word "advantage” has an antonym - “disadvantage," while in Russian the word "премущество” has no antonym, in English there are antonyms "to arrange - to disarrange", while in Russian there is only "систематизировать", etc.

Sometimes antonyms become the most adequate way of rendering the contextual meaning: "a murderer is only safe when he is in prison" - "убийца не опасен, только когда он в тюрьме". The word "safe" taken separately is easily translated as "безопасный", but in this context the variant "не опасен" is preferable since it is not "безопасность" of the murderer that is meant here but the fact that he is "не опасен" for the others. This shade of meaning is better rendered by the antonym[39;p.808].

In a particular context this transformation may help to render emotional and stylistic coloring of the text: "He's probably thirsty. Why don't you give him some milk?"- "Наверное, он хочет пить. Может, дать ему молока?". "Direct" translation "Почему бы не дать ему молока?" is not colloquial, while the characters of P.G. Wodehouse speak in a highly informal way.

1.

“It didn't strike me as anything unusual at the time.”	- Тогда я счел это вполне естественным.

In this sentence there is typical antonymic translation. The idea in translation is positive thinking compared to the original sentence.

2.

“Now I come to think back, …”	- Я как-то не задумывался…

In this pattern from the positive sentence in the original the author makes negative opinion by replacing some words with the help of compensation.

3.

“…, an answer began to shape itself in my mind”	- Одна мысль никак не давала мне покоя.

Here is again positive original sentence transmitted to the negative one. Negative sentence is made by concretization; the word “an answer” is modified as “Одна мысль ”. And modulation is made by the word combination “began to shape itself in my mind”. When you began thinking about something and keep it all the time in mind it starts interfere you and breaks your silence.

3.7 Use of Addition

Addition is used in that case when the degree of implicity or similarity in the initial and target language differs. Addition (добавление) - is a device intended for the compensation of structural elements implicitly present in the S text missing in the T language.

Semantic additions can occur when something in the SL is not included because it would be obvious to most readers of that language, but should be included in the TL because of the probability that the typical TL reader would not be aware of that information. This would be a case of explicitly laying out information in the TL which was implicit in the SL. A frequent example is the implicit information associated with common place names, political positions, tec.

...