Using phraseological units and idioms

When one of the components of a word-group becomes archaic or drops out of the language altogether the whole word-group may become completely or partially non-motivated. For example, lack of motivation in the word-group kith and kin may be accounted for by the fact that the member-word kith dropped out of the language altogether except as the component of the phraseological unit under discussion. This is also observed in the phraseological unit under discussion.

When as a result of a change in the semantic structure of a polysemantic word some of its meanings disappear and can be found only in certain collocations. The noun mind, e.g., once meant 'purpose' or 'intention' and this meaning survives in the phrases to have a mind to do something, to change one's mind, etc.

When a free word-group used in professional speech penetrates into general literary usage, it is often felt as non-motivated. To pull (the) strings (wires), e.g., was originally used as a free word-group in its direct meaning by professional actors in puppet shows. In Modern English, however, it has lost all connection with puppet-shows and therefore cannot also be observed in the' phraseological unit to stick to one's guns, which can be traced back to military English, etc.

Sometimes extra-linguistic factors may account for the loss of motivation, to show the white feather - 'to act as a coward', e.g., can be traced back to the days when cock-fighting was popular. A white feather in a gamecock's plumage denoted bad breeding and was regarded as a sign of cowardice. Now that cock-fighting is no longer a popular sport, the phrase is felt as non-motivated. See sources of English idioms in: Logan Smith. Words and Idioms. London, 1928. As a matter of fact, a person who attended a university where Gamecock was the athletic symbol of the school did not know this phrase, therefore use of this phrase would only confuse the hearers, not convey proper communication.

When a word-group making up part of a proverb or saying begins to be used a self-contained unit it may gradually become non-motivated if its connection with the corresponding proverb or saying is not clearly perceived. A new broom, e.g., originates as a component of the saying new brooms sweep clean. New broom as a phraseological unit may be viewed as non-motivated because the meaning of the whole is not deducible from the meaning of the components. Moreover, it seems grammatically and functionally self-contained and inseparable too. In the saying quoted above the noun broom is always used in the plural; as a member-word of the phraseological unit it mostly used in the singular. The phraseological unit a new broom is characterized by functional inseparability. In the saying new brooms sweep clean the adjective new functions as an attribute to the noun brooms, in the phraseological unit a new broom (e.g. Well he is a new broom!) the whole word-group is functionally inseparable.

When part of a quotation from literary sources, mythology or the Bible begin to be used as a self-contained unit, it may also lose all connection with the original context and as a result of this become non-motivated. The phraseological unit the green-eyed monster (jealousy) can be easily found as a part of the quotation from Shakespeare "It is the green-eyed monster which doth mock the meat it feeds on" (Othello, II, i. 165). In Modern English, however, it functions as a non-motivated self-contained phraseological unit and is also used to denote the T.V. set. Achilles heel - 'the weak spot in a man's circumstances or character' can be traced back to mythology, but it seems that in Modern English this word-group functions as a phraseological unit largely because most English speakers do not connect it with the myth from which it was extracted.

The final criterion in the semantic approach is idiomaticity whereas in the functional approach syntactic inseparability is viewed as the final test, and in the contextual approach it is stability of context combined with idiomaticity of word-groups.

The concept of idiomaticity is not strictly defined. The judgments as to idiomaticity are passed sometimes within the framework of the English language and sometimes from the outside - from the point of view of the mother tongue of the investigator.

It is suggested here that the term idiomaticity should be interpreted as an interlingual notion and also that the degree of idiomaticity should be taken into consideration since between the extreme of complete motivation and lack of motivation there are numerous intermediate group.

Each of the three approaches has its merits and demerits. The traditional semantic approach points out the essential features of all kinds of idiomatic phrases as opposed to completely motivated free word-groups. The functional approach puts forward an objective criterion for singling out a small group of word-equivalents possessing all the basic features of words as lexical items. The contextual approach makes the criterion of stability more exact.

All the three approaches are sufficient to single out the extreme cases: highly idiomatic phraseological units and free word-groups. The status of the bulk of word-groups possessing different degrees of idiomaticity cannot be decided with certainty by applying the criteria available in linguistic science.

The distinguishing feature of the new approach is that phraseology is regarded as a self-contained branch of linguistics and not as a part of lexicology.

The most productive in Modem English is the formation of phraseological units by means of transferring the meaning of terminological word-groups, e.g. in cosmic technique we ran point out the following phrases: «launching pad» in its terminological meaning is «стартовая площадка», in its transferred meaning - «отправной пункт», «to link up» - «стыковка космических кораблей, соединение»,in its tranformed meaning it means - «знакомиться»;a large group of phraseological units was formed from free word groups by transforming their meaning, e.g. «granny farm» - «пансионат для старых людей», «Trojan horse» - «компьютерная програма предварительносоставленная для повреждения компьютера», phraseological units can be formed by means of alliteration , e.g. «a sad sack» - «несчастный случай», «culture vulture» - « человек интересующийся искусством», «fudge and nudge» - «уклончивость ».they can be formed by means of expressiveness, especially it is characteristic for forming interjections, e.g. «Make hay while the sun shines» is transferred into a verbal phrase - «to make hay while the sun shines»;analogy, e.g. «Curiosity killed the cat» was transferred into «Care killed the cat»;contrast, e.g. «cold surgery» - «a planned before operation» was formed by contrasting it with «acute surgery», «.thin cat» - «a poor person» was formed by contrasting it with «fat cat»;shortening of proverbs or sayings e.g. from the proverb «You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear» by means of clipping the middle of it the phraseological unit «to make a sow's ear» was formed with the meaning «помилятись».borrowing phraseological units from other languages, either as translation loans, e.g. « living space» (German), « to take the bull by the horns» (Latin) or by means of phonetic borrowings «meche blanche» (French), «corpse d'elite» (French), «sotto voce» (Italian) etc.



2. ENGLISH PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS AND THEIR FUNCTION

Phraseological units (PUs) have a definite 'programme' of functioning which is predetermined by their essence itself, as Alexander V. Kunin puts it [Kunin 1996: 111]. Some PU functions are constant, i.e. inherent in all phraseological units in any case of their realization, other PU functions are variable, characteristic only of some classes of phraseological units. We maintain, after A.V. Kunin, that communicative, cognitive and nominative functions are constant functions of phraseological units.

The communicative function of phraseological units consists in their ability to serve as a communicative or message means. Communication presupposes a mutual exchange of statements, and message presupposes the transfer of information without a feedback with the reader or the listener. The communicative PU function is usually connected with the cultural identity of the utterance [Glдser 2009:87].

The nominative function of phraseological units is their relation to objects of the real world, including situations, and also replacement of these objects in speech activity by their phraseological denominations. The filling of lacunas in the lexical system of the language is characteristic of the nominative function of phraseological units. This function is peculiar to the overwhelming majority of phraseological units, as they do not usually have lexical synonyms. The nominative function embraces neutrally-nominal and nominal function [Kunin 1996: 112]. The neutrally-nominal function is the basic one for phraseological units, e.g. In realization of such phrases in communication the fact of a designation of the object is important, and not the stylistic use of the phrase. The nominal function is also characteristic of semantically transferred phraseological units, such as idiomatisms and idiophraseomatisms, but it is not neutral, it is stylistically marked, e.g.:, etc.

The function which is closely connected with the nominative one is the cognitive function, i.e. the socially-determined reflection of objects of the real world mediated by consciousness, promoting their cognition. The social determinacy is shown in the fact that, though potential phraseological units are created by separate individuals, these individuals are part of the society, and the realization of the cognitive function by them is possible only on the basis of previous/ background knowledge. Cognitive and nominative functions are realized within the limits of the communicative function, forming a dialectic unity, and all the other functions are realized within the limits of the given functions. The hierarchy of the functional aspect of the phraseological system is seen in it.

2.1 The peculiarities of translating

Idiom is a phrase or expression whose total meaning differs from the meaning of the individual words. For example, to blow one's top (get angry) and behind the eight ball (in trouble) are English - language idioms. Idioms come from language and generally cannot be translated literally (word for word). Foreign language speakers must learn them just as they would learn vocabulary words.

Idiomatic or phraseological expressions are structurally, lexically and semantically fixed phrases or sentences having mostly the meaning, which is not made up by the sum of meanings of their component parts. An indispensable feature of idiomatic (phraseological) expressions is their figurative, i. e., metaphorical nature and usage. It is this nature that makes them distinguishable from structurally identical free combinations of words Cf.: red tape (free word-comb.) - red tape (idiom) .

On rare occasions the lexical meaning of idiomatically bound expressions can coincide with their direct, i. e., not transferred meaning, which facilitates their understanding as in the examples like: to make way дорогу; to die a dog's death; to receive a hero's welcome; wait a minute/ один момент; to tell (you) the truth; to dust one's coat (idiom).

Some proper names can also be endowed with figurative meaning and possess the necessary expressiveness which are the distinguishing features of idioms²: Croesus, Tommy (Tommy Atkins), Yankee, Mrs. Grundy, Jack Ketch, etc. These proper names have acquired their constant meaning and can not be confused with usual (common) proper names of people. As a result their transferred meaning is conveyed in a descriptive way. So Mrs. Grundy means люди, мораль; Jack Ketch кат; Croesus Крез,; Tommy Atkins солдат; Yankee (in Europe) etc.

Idiomatic/phraseological expressions should not be mixed up with different fixed/set prepositional, adjectival, verbal and adverbial phrases the meaning of which is not an actual sum of meanings made up by their constituent parts either: by George, by and by, for all of, for the sake of, cut short, make believe; or compounds like: topsyturvy, higledy-piggledy; coordinate combinations like: high and dry, cut and run, touch and go; Tom, Dick and Harry, etc. These and a lot of other stable expressions can very often be treated as standardized collocations. Their meaning can be rendered in a descriptive way too, like that of genuine idiomatic expressions: fifty-fifty .

Such and the like stable expressions, like most of other standardized collocations, have usually a transparent meaning and are easier to translate than regular idioms (the so-called phraseological fusions). Meanwhile it is next to impossible to guess, for example, the meaning of the English idiom Hobson's choiceirom the seemingly transparent meanings of its componental parts. Only a philological inquiry helps establish the meaning of the name and the real sense of the idiom - "no choice whatsoever", "acceptance of what is offered.

Many other English and Ukrainian picturesque idioms, proverbs and sayings, which have national literary images must also be similarly treated and they also reflect the traditions, customs, the way of conduct or the mode of life of a nation. Their meaning, due to absence of similar idioms in the target language, can be rendered descriptively, i. e. through a regular explication. The latter, depending on the semantic structure of the source language idiom, may be sometimes achieved in the target language with the help of a single word. Cf.: English: an odd/queer fish дивак; Canterbury tale; blue bonnet crammed;be chilled. Most often, however, the meaning of this kind of idioms is conveyed with the help of free word-combinations: to dine with Duke Humphrey to cut off with a shilling Similarly in Ukrainian: ноги на to go quickly (or very quickly) on one's feet; to have great experience in something; to run away quickly/hurriedly.

It goes without saying that none of the phraseologisms above can be translated word-for-word since their constituent images would lose their connotative, i. e., metaphorical meaning in the target language. So or could be understood by the Ukrainian language speakers in their literal meaning. The same can be said about our idiom, i. e., * with one's legs on the shoulders which would never be understood, when translated literally, by the English language native speakers. Therefore, the componental images, when mechanically transplanted to the target language, may often bring about a complete destruction of the idiomatic expression.

The choice of the way of translation of this kind of idioms may be predetermined by the source language context or by the existence/absence of contextual equivalents for the idiomatic/stable expression in the target language. Thus, in the examples below units of this kind can be translated into Ukrainian either with the help of a single word or with the help of a standardized phraseological expression: to give a start.

Not infrequently the meaning of a standardized collocation (after Acad. V. V. Vinigradov) like that of a regular idiom may have synonymous single word equivalents in the target language. The choice of the equivalent is predetermined then by the meaning of the standardized collocation/phraseologism and by the style of the sentence where it is used: to make sure to make comfort; to take place; the world and his wife yci.Similarly treated are also traditional combinations which have in the target language several stylistically neutral free equivalents (words or word-combinations) as: to run a risk.Faithful translating of a large number of picturesque idiomatic/ phraseological expressions, on the other hand, can be achieved only by a thorough selection of variants having in the target language a similar to the original lexical meaning, and also their picturesqueness and expressiveness. This similarity can be based on common in the source language and in the target language componental images as well as on the structural form of them. As a result, the meaning of such idioms is mostly guessed by the students, which generally facilitates their translation.

2.2 Ways of forming phraseological units

A.V. Koonin classified phraseological units according to the way they are formed. He pointed out primary and secondary ways of forming phraseological units.

Primary ways of forming phraseological units are those when a unit is formed on the basis of a free word-group:

Most productive in Modern English is the formation of phraseological units by means of transferring the meaning of terminological word-groups, e.g. in cosmic technique we can point out the following phrases: «launching pad» in its terminological meaning is «стартовая площадка», in its transferred meaning - «отправной пункт», «to link up» - «стыковать космические корабли» in its transformed meaning it means - «знакомиться».

A large group of phraseological units was formed from free word groups by transforming their meaning, e.g. «granny farm» - «пансионат для престарелых», «Trojan horse» - «компьютерная программа»;

Phraseological units can be formed by means of alliteration, e.g. «a sad sack» - «несчачтный случай», «culture vulture» - «человек, увлекающийся культурой», «fudge and nudge» - «уклончивость».

They can be formed by means of expressiveness, especially it is characteristic for forming interjections, e.g. «My aunt!)), « Hear, hear!» etc

They can be formed by means of distorting a word group, e.g. «odds and ends» was formed from «odd ends»;

They can be formed by using archaisms, e.g. «in brown study» means «in gloomy meditation» where both components preserve their archaic meanings,

They can be formed by using a sentence in a different sphere of life, e.g. «that cock won't fight» can be used as a free word-group when it is used in sports (cock fighting), it becomes a phraseological unit when it is used in everyday life, because it is used metaphorically;

They can be formed when we use some unreal image, e.g. «to have butterflies in the stomach» - «испытывать волнение», «to have green fingers» - «преуспевать как цветовод - любитель» etc.

They can be formed by using expressions of writers or politicians in everyday life, e.g. «corridors of power» (Snow), «American dream» (Alby) «locust years» (Churchil), «the winds of change» (Mс Millan). Secondary ways of forming phraseological units are those when a phraseological unit is formed on the basis of another phraseological unit; they are:

Contrast, e.g. «cold surgery» - «a planned before operation» was formed by contrasting it with «acute surgery», «thin cat» - «a poor person» was formed by contrasting it with «fat cat»;Shortening of proverbs or sayings e.g. from the proverb «You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear» by means of clipping the middle of it the phraseological unit «to make a sow's ear».f) Borrowing phraseological units from other languages, either as translation loans, e.g. «living space» (German), « to take the bull by the horns» (Latin) or by means of phoneticborrowings «meche blanche» (French), «corpse d'elite» (French), «sotto voce» (Italian) etc.Phonetic borrowings among phraseological units refer to the bookish style and are not used very often.

2.3 Resultative function, pragmatic, stylistic, cumulative, directive, valuative, summarizing and other functions

The communicative function of phraseological units consists in their ability to serve as a communicative or message means. Communication presupposes a information without a feedback with the reader or the listener. The communicative PU function is usually connected with the cultural identity of the utterance.

The nominative function of phraseological units is their relation to objects of the real world, including situations, and also replacement of these objects in speech activity by their phraseological denominations. The filling of lacunas in the lexical system of the language is characteristic of the nominative function of phraseological units. This function is peculiar to the overwhelming majority of phraseological units, as they do not usually have lexical synonyms. The nominative function embraces neutrally-nominal and nominal function [Kunin 1996: 112].

The neutrally-nominal function is the basic one for phraseological units. In realization of such phrases in communication the fact of a designation of the object is important, and not the stylistic use of the phrase. The nominal function is also characteristic of semantically transferred phraseological units, such as idiomatisms and idiophraseomatisms, but it is not neutral, it is stylistically marked, broom, desperate remedies, tales out of school, crocodile tears, Pandora's box.

The function which is closely connected with the nominative one is the cognitive function, i.e. the socially-determined reflection of objects of the real world mediated by consciousness, promoting their cognition. The social determinacy is shown in the fact that, though potential phraseological units are created by separate individuals, these individuals are part of the society, and the realization of the cognitive function by them is possible only on the basis of previous/ background knowledge. Cognitive and nominative functions are realized within the limits of the communicative function, forming a dialectic unity, and all the other functions are realized within the limits of the given functions. The hierarchy of the functional aspect of the phraseological system is seen in it.

Among the semantic functions voluntative (from Latin voluntas - will), deictic, resultative, etc. functions are found out.

The voluntative function is the function of will expression, e.g.: wish smb well with the meaning of 'to wish good luck, success to smb, to treat smb benevolently': I wish Jane Fairfax very well; but she tires me to death (J. Austen).

The deictic function consists in an indication of spatial or time localization of the action, phenomenon, event which is relative to the reference point, relevant within the limits of one or another speech situation. Besides, personal deixis exists: a person, a place or time can be the reference point. According to this fact three types of deixis are singled out: personal, spatial and time ones, e.g.: Time and tide wait for no man; It is too late to lock the stable door when the horse is stolen; Don't swap horses when crossing a stream; Strike while the iron is hot.

The resultative function consists in a designation of the reason which has caused an action or a condition expressed by a phraseological unit, e.g.: come a cropper with the meaning of 'to fail, to get to a trouble': Gerald: I may as well tell you at once that I've had very bad luck. I wanted to make money and I've come an absolute cropper (W.S. Maugham).

The major function of any unit of language including the phraseological unit is the pragmatic function, i.e. purposeful influence of a language sign on the addressee. The pragmatic orientation is peculiar to any text which influences phraseological units used in the text, and that is promoted by their considerable pragmatic potential. Phraseological units strengthen the pragmatic orientation of the text or of its part - a context. From this point of view the sub-types of the pragmatic function are stylistic, cumulative, directive, evaluative and summarizing functions.

The stylistic function is a special, in comparison with the neutral way of expression, purposefulness of language means to achieve a stylistic effect with preservation of the general intellectual content of the statement. The stylistic function realizes connotative features of a phraseological unit in speech [Fedulenkova 2001: 15]. In the language there is only stylistic colouring. The idea about it is given by marks and comments in stylistic dictionaries which, unfortunately, are still far from being perfect. Comparison of a phraseological unit with its variable prototypical combination of words also helps to reveal stylistic colouring.

Developing, on the Russian material, the phraseological theory in its functional-semantic aspect, S.G. Gavrin singles out some functions of phraseological units [Gavrin 1974: 99]. These functions are also characteristic of English phraseological units: a) the expressively-figurative function (pull one's leg; put the cart before the horse); b) the emotionally-expressive function the function of speech concision by omitting some components .

Proverbs, especially short ones, even not of the reduced kind [Fedulenkova 2003: 11], carry out the function of speech laconization, e.g.: Give a dog a bad name and hang him meaning 'once someone has acquired a bad reputation, it is almost impossible for him to shake it off, and even his most innocent actions will be misunderstood' (DOEI). It is evident, that the definition is almost four times as long as the proverb itself. The semantic compression, characteristic of phraseological units, is one of the instances of language economy [Fedulenkova 2002: 24].

All those functions, and also the function of hyperbolization and intensity are sub-types of the stylistic function: make a mountain out of a mole hill. Especially active in the function of hyperbolization are the phraseological units with a somatic component in their structure: din into smb's ears, from ear to ear, under one's nose, up to the ears, over ears, over head and ears, up to the eyes, cry one's eyes out, set one's eyes at flow, pipe one's/ the eye, be all eyes, be all ears, with all the eyes in one's head, strain one's ears, have one's hands full, not to stir a finger, not to lift a hand, e.g.: I will not lift a finger to save this reptile (B. Shaw).

The cumulative function is highly peculiar to proverbs (which are regarded as communicative phraseological units [Fedulenkova 2000: 172]) as they are generalizing the life experience of the people. With the cumulative function 'one more function is closely connected - directly managing, directing, influencing, and, in a certain way, bringing up, forming a person.

We named it directive' [Vereshchagin, Kostomarov 1983: 98]. To exemplify the directive function the following proverbs can be given.

The summarizing function of a phraseological unit consists in the fact that it may serve as a short resume of the previous statement, e.g.: that's flat (coll.) meaning 'it is definitively solved, resolutely and irrevocably.

The pragmatic character is also revealed in the evaluative function. A kind of the pragmatic function is the contact-establishing function consisting in creation of an easy dialogue between the author and the reader or the listener, and also among the characters themselves, e.g.: Introducing a luxury car that will not take you for a ride (The New Yorker). The given advertising heading concerns a car, and two meanings of the phraseological unit 'take smb for a ride' are played up - 1) to kill, finish off smb; 2) to inflate, deceive smb.

English proverbs are often employed in the function of confirmation of a thought. It is also one of the sub-types of the pragmatic function, e.g.: It is an ill bird that fouls its own nest - meaning 'only the bad bird defiles the nest': Augustus: ...Do you mean to say, you scoundrel, that an Englishman is capable of selling his country to the enemy for gold? - The Clerk: Not as a general thing I would not say it, but there's men here who would sell their own mothers for two coppers if they got the chance. - Augustus:... It's an ill bird that fouls its own nest (G.B. Shaw).

Interjectional phraseological units can carry out the compensatory function which is realized in the description of strong sincere emotional experience, affect, when one's speech is complicated and an interjectional phraseological unit is the only content of the whole.

The text-building function / context-building function is characteristic of phraseological units in their context realizations. For the first time the question concerning text-building functions of phraseological units was raised by Irina

I. Chernysheva.



3. PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS AND THEIR TRANSLATION INTO ENGLISH

Some say, translation is art based on knowledge. Of course, an interpreter must have a good knowledge of the idioms of the two languages as well as take decisions to the best of his (her) knowledge and taste.

Suppose one has to interpret the idiom "метать громы и молнии (в чей-л. адрес)" which is rather frequently used in the Russian press. The interpreter who wants to make his translation idiomatic has to look up a dictionary of Russian idioms to be sure of the idiom's meaning, and then to find in a dictionary of English idioms an adequate English idiom. This process seems to be ideal but our interpreter soon realizes that translation begins where dictionaries end.

The interpreter would realize that the idiom "метать громы и молнии" may mean three things in one:

(1) быть в страшном гневе,

(2) выкрикивать бранные слова и

(3) что подобные действия "гнев" и "крик" дело напрасное или неразумное.

So, it seems impossible to find a single English equivalent for all contexts. At first glance, however, it appears quite possible to find several English idioms and translate the Russian idiomatically 'by parts', that is,

(1) "быть в страшном гневе" may be expressed by 'to be beside oneself with rage' or 'to go up into the air' (i.e. explode with rage) or 'to fly off the handle' (which may, sometimes, correspond to the Russian "он словно с цепи сорвался");

(2) "выкрикивать бранные слова" can be idiomatically expressed by 'to jump down smb's throat (i.e. shout angry words at smb though;

(3) “гнев и крик дело напрасное” it is needless and/or unwise to do or by 'to go off the deep end' (i.e. speak with unduly anger). However, the resulting combination of an idiom of 'rage' and of that 'of needless shouting' appears to be too long in time to suit interpretation purposes, e.g., 'Beside herself with rage, she was jumping down his throat' or even 'She went up into the air and off the deep end about it'. The latter we may note sounds particularly funny due to the zeugma's effect. (Recall Ch. Dickens' zeugma: 'She fell into a chair and a fainting fit simultaneously'.)

On the other hand, the shortest way of translating the idiom "метать громы и молнии" maybe 'to hurl thunderbolts at smb', that is, by means of a metaphor devised by experienced translators. This metaphor does not exist in the English language but is well understood when the context helps. We realize, at the same time that the latter part of our combined equivalents, that is, 'to jump down smb's throat' and 'to go off the deep end' seem to be satisfactory for the purpose because their usage cannot be imagined beyond the scope of anger.

As one can see now, interpreters are not able to deal, in their work, only with the idioms (e.g., "Привычка-вторая натура") that may have, in English, their ready-made equivalents (e.g., 'Custom is second nature'). Interpreters have to be ready to create what we might call 'contextual equivalents' which do not exist in dictionaries.

We know the phrase "разводить руками" can be taken for a free word-combination and it would be an error, to do so. Secondly, I he idiom is in common with the language of gestures. "Он развел руками" is often translated as 'He shrugged his shoulders', for the Russian gesture is rarely employed in the English 'language of gestures'. And, thirdly, it is common knowledge that this and any gesture can mean different things and, thus, is to be understood accordingly. For instance, one may shrug one's shoulders as a sign of regret, astonishment, lack of understanding or information. And this is why this Russian phrase sometimes complicates the translators' life, and one would especially appreciate knowing that this phrase is frequently used both in the press and in colloquial speech. See how it is translated by our brothers-in-arms. Two examples:

(1) Папа-краб ходил, жаловатьcя капитану, тот только развел руками: «Жалуйтесь на них в Марселе, если угодно...» (А. Толcтой)

Papa crab went to complain to the captain but the latter only shrugged his shoulders: "You may complain about them in Marseilles if you wish..."

(2) Очень много богатства и очень мало настоящего искусства. В общем это то, что французские художники, безнадежно разводя руками, называют «стиль Триумф». (И. Ильф, Е. Петров)

There was much wealth but little real art. As a whole, it was what French artists, helplessly shrugging their shoulders, called "style triumphe."

Thus, one can see that the nut is not so hard to crack. It is most often enough to 'shrug one's shoulders' and add the words 'in bewilderment' or 'helplessly', or anything that the gesture may mean.

The phrase "ахиллесова пята" (tr.: 'the Achilles' heel') is easier to dial with, for it exists only as an idiom. The phrase means: 'the weak or vulnerable spot in a man's character or a state's (company's, etc.) affairs.' (According to the legend, Achilles, with the exception of one heel, was protected against every weapon his enemies might use.) And 'the Achilles' heel' as a phrase has the definite article and the apostrophe to be observed and not to be 'bruised'. Example:

Но увы! и у него была ахиллесова пята, и он имел слабости... Подсохин любил писать. (И. Ламечников)

But alas! He had the Achilles' heel, too. Yes, he also had his own weakness... Podsokhin was fond of writing.

The phrase "метать громы и молнии" exists only as an idiom but it happens to be misleading. This phrase does not necessarily mean 'to frighten smb' as one might wrongly guess. It means 'to be furious at smb.'

One can try and select a synonym (like 'to go off the deep end about smth') out of the group of English synonyms but... the Russian context may oppose it, for these English phrases may turn out to be too colloquial to be used, say, in the translation of a newspaper text.

It seems, therefore, that in most of the cases we may safely use the method of translating this Russian phrase, 'literally and metaphorically', for a metaphor itself shows its coloring and intention in a flexible way: it is understood from the context, and the stronger the language of the context is the stronger the metaphor will sound. And the suggested metaphor is 'to hurl thunderbolts at smb. (or smth.)'.

This metaphor seems sufficient but it requires a material object for the action, that is, for 'hurling thunderbolts' at something worth 'hurling thunderbolts' at. In other words, one cannot 'hurl thunderbolts', say, at a 'fact' or an 'idea'. One can always do so at a 'person' as well as at something which is a 'state', 'company', 'newspaper' or the like. And in such cases as when there is no material object for our metaphorical action, one may resort-to the idiom 'to blow one's top' and say, for example, 'He blew his top... at the fact that...' or '...when he heard that...', which would mean just 'to be fuming'. The phrase 'to blow one's top' is used in the English press and is not very negative though it is quite expressive.

The translation of the Russian idiomatic phrase "взять (брать) себя в руки" (or: "держать себя в руках") depends on the context, that is, on what the author means:

"Взять себя в руки" when one is under a moment's strain usually means 'to pull oneself together' and... stop crying or being panicky, or the like.

We have seen above that the phrase 'держать себя в руках' can be expressed by several English phrases in different contexts. Why is it so?

English words (e.g., "Нога" - 'leg' or 'foot', "палец'' - 'finger', 'thumb' or 'toe'). We would translate "Он держал в руках книгу" as 'He held a book in his hands' but "Она держала в руках ребенка" as 'She held a baby in her arms'. Firstly, one language makes it possible not to express the difference between certain notions whereas the other language makes it obligatory to express it. In other words, the difference between languages lies in not what they can express (any thought can be expressed in any language) but in what they cannot help expressing /7, 6-13/.

Secondly, one can see that the words "hands" and "arms" have their own (different) meaning. But they perform the same function in the action "держать в руках". Their meaning in this action comes to us from their function. The function (cause) is primary. The meaning (effect) is secondary. Thus, it is the function that has to be translated first thing and never mind by what means. Here, ends justify the means (lexical, grammatical, etc.).

In physics, mathematics and other exact sciences, two or more phenomena are considered equivalent when they have authentic indices, that is, when all their indices coincide.

The same can be said about two (Russian and English) idioms, except that interpreters are never able to deal only with absolute equivalents like "Привычка- вторая натура" = 'Custom is second nature'. We have to deal with relative equivalents whose indices, not all, but at least the main ones do coincide.

Idiomatic phrases have four main indices to their equivalency which are, to us, indiсеs for interpretation (переводческие показатели). They are: meaning (mng), conditions of usage (use), emotive overtones (o-t) and style (sty).

You can see that meaning, as an index for interpretation, describes the essence of the action (or event) whereas usage shows the conditions under which a given idiom may be used altogether, that is, the forms of the action, its aims, etc. For instance, in the phrase 'to pull the wool over smb's eyes' (mng: to deceive, to fool; use: when a person wants to do it by not letting smb. know smth.) the obligatory condition under which the phrase may be altogether used by a speaker, is 'by not letting smb know smth' (the form of the action).

If one takes, say, a number of synonyms (e.g., 'to throw dust in smb's eyes', 'to draw a red herring', 'to pull smb's leg', etc.) whose meaning is, naturally, the same (e.g., to deceive, to fool), one can see that most of them, if not all, differ by conditions of their usage. It is, then, the condition of the usage, the core of the idiom, that may and, often, should be considered first.

In case meaning indices coincide and usage indices do not, the job of the interpreter is not a bed of roses. One is expected to know the items (i.e., every condition) of the Russian phrase's usage and be prepared to translate them idiomatically. Then, a descriptive translation of the idiom's meaning can be added to our idiomatic translation of the usage and placed after it as an 'explanation' of the English idiom (like 'explanation' in a pair of cause-and-effect relation statements) if the meaning is not clear from the context itself.

For instance, the phrase "пускать пыль в глаза" (mng: to deceive, to hoodwink) has at least three permanent items of its usage.

3.1 Transformation of some idioms in the process of translating

We have not been able to avail ourselves, in this case, of the English phrase 'to throw dust in smb's eyes' though its dust-in-the-eyes image is similar to the "пыль в глаза" image of the Russian phrase. The usage of this English phrase differs from that of the Russian idiom: 'to throw dust in smb's eyes', use: to deceive by preventing a person from seeing the true state of affairs (as if by impairing a person's vision so that he cannot see things clearly).

Had one translated the phrase "пускать пыль в глаза" by means of `to throw dust in smb's eyes' (tr.: сбивать кого-л. с толку) it would have been an error which can be generally considered typical of inexperienced interpreters and translators.

Translators are faced with formidable problems. Many writers and poets thought it necessary to voice their opinion of how one should approach proverbs. V. A. Zhukovsky /8, 2/ stressed that translators "should produce the effect of the original." Not a few writers likewise opposed literal, word-for-word translations of proverbs (and we know this to be true), the question however remains: how should they be translated? V. G. Belinsky said that "the internal life of the translated expression should correspond to the internal life of the original" /9, 299/. This is true again. It seems therefore that we should do this, that and the other. We agree to do this, that and the other... But, apparently, we must focus our attention on figurativeness when translating proverbs /10, 172, 174/. Thus, our translation of a proverb must either be, in fact, an English proverb or an idiomatic sounding metaphor. And this seems to be the right answer to the question of what we must do above all, especially because "The corresponding image as well as the corresponding phrase does not always present a visible adequacy of words."

The translation difficulties usually arise in cases when (a) there happens to be no corresponding English proverb that we can use for our translation or (b) when the existing "ready-made" equivalent (e.g., an English proverb) cannot be used as it is because, for example, the Russian proverb is innovated in speeсh and, thus, may convey a specific additional meaning.

An analysis of translators' work shows that we may have the following means at our disposal in order to overcome these difficulties and to ensure the figurativeness of our translation: (1) use of rhymed and/or rhythmically arranged metaphors, (2) use of English phrases, proverbs and their components as a basis of one's translation, (3) utilization of the structures of English proverbs, (4) use of innovation as a means of adequacy, (5) use of colloquialisms and special introductions, etc. It is the соmplex use of these means which could guarantee the desired result.

A rhyme alone is a supplementary means. For instance, the rhymed words "Winston tastes good like a cigarette should" have a meaning which is in no way metaphorical. These cigarettes are real, and one cannot say the same of the words "Либо дождик, либо снег--либо будет, либо нет". Both "дождик" and "снег" are metaphorical. This Russian saying was once translated as "Who knows - maybe rain and maybe snow, maybe yes and maybe no."

And a rhymed metaphor made this sound proverbial.Of course, it is hardly possible to make a satisfactory rhymed metaphor in the process of interpretation (not translation). However, it is good to know a number of rhymed metaphors by heart so that they could be used as "ready-made" equivalents of some of the 'difficult' and frequently used Russian proverbs.Naturally translators must often translate Russian proverbs that do not have their "ready-made" English equivalents. Translations show that some of our colleagues seem to think that one should try to convey only the meaning of such proverbs. Thus, the proverb "Дело не медведь, в лес не убежит" was once translated as 'Business is no bear, to run away to the forest'. Yet, the process of this translation was actually terminated at the stage of 'transposition'. It could have been continued: "Дело не медведь, в лес не убежит" -»- (Transposition :) 'Business is no bear, to run away to the forest' (Idiomatization by way of making the metaphor rhymed and by means of grammatical restructuring :) 'Business is no bear, it won't go anywhere'. One can see that we have excluded the word 'forest' as an obviously redundant detail, and used the grammatical colloquialism "won't go anywhere" (double negation).



CONCLUSION

The vocabulary of a language is enriched not only by words but also by phraseological units. Phraseological units are word-groups that cannot be made in the process of speech; they exist in the language as ready-made units.

They are compiled in special dictionaries. The same as words phraseological units express a single notion and are used in a sentence as one part of it. American and British lexicographers call such units «idioms». We can mention such dictionaries as: L.Smith «Words and Idioms», V.Collins «А Book of English Idioms» etc In these dictionaries we can find words, peculiar in their semantics (idiomatic), side by side with word-groups and sentences. In these dictionaries they are arranged, as a rule, into different semantic groups.

Phraseological units can be classified according to the ways they are formed, according to the degree of the motivation of their meaning, according to their structure and according to their part-of-speech meaning.

A.V. Koonin classified phraseological units according to the way they are formed. He pointed out primary and secondary ways of forming phraseological units.

By the classification of Academician V.Vinogradov phraseological units are divided into three groups: phraseological combinations, phraseological unities and phraseological fusions.

The English language is full of idioms (over 15000). Native speakers of English use idioms all the time, often without realizing that they are doing so. Semantically idioms are divided into three classes:

Pure idioms

Semi idioms

Literal idioms

Pure idioms are those which can't be translated word by word, they are non-literal. For example: “spill the beans” has nothing to do with real beans.

Semi-idioms have one or more literal constituents and at least one with a non-literal subsense, usually special to that cooccurance relation no other. Catch has the meaning at their constituents. For example: “on foot Merry Christmas and happy New Year”. Besides idioms can undergo substitution for their parts the near synonyms. And the idioms which are flexible to some degree to such substitution are called idioms of restricted variance. For example: happy (merry) Christmas. The idioms which are inflexible to such change at all are called invariant and fixed idioms. For example: on the contrary; Happy New Year.

Literal idioms - in variant; on foot, one day, in sum, im the meantime, on the contrary arm in arm, very important person ( VIP ), potato chips: tall, darkand handsome; waste not, want not, happy New Year, etc. and set down.

Form irregular, meaning unclear, as in be at large, go great guns, be at daggers drawn.

Functional types of idioms:

Interpersonal idioms. This type of idioms occur in discourse in pragmatic function: greetings, farewells warnings, disclaims.Relational idioms. Relational is a general form for an attribute characterizing a diverse number of language forms all of which have a cohesive function in a discourse. Relational or textual idioms can accordingly be grouped along with conjunctions, for example “and but”, “or”, “and so because” “it then” etc, as having a textual function. They may be characterized into those which sequence information integrative.Translation has played a role throughout history any time there has been an intersection of two cultures and languages. And each time one culture has produced a written text, translators serve as the bridge that allows literate members of one culture to be exposed to the written material the other has produced. A lot of scholars and translators made their contribution in the progress and developing of translation, however, a lot of them, especially ancient translators, have often remained unknown or in the background and the credit due to them have not been acknowledged. They have done their job with painstaking efforts despite many violent conflicts that have dotted throughout history. Because of skilled translators and their ability to bridge two languages, today we have access to texts as varied as the richly detailed novels of Walter Scott, Victor Hugo and of others great writers, scholarly articles, instruction manuals, and pamphlets for non-native Romanian or other languages speakers about health resources. Each of these examples is made possible because of the craft of translation whose history dates back to the first intersection of two cultures with written texts. To sum up, translation history is rich in inventions and theories. Each era is characterized by the appearance of new theorists and fields of research in translation. It is true that the western history of translation is larger and rich in proportion to that of the Arabs, but we should not deny that the translation history of the latter started to develop year by year, especially with the great efforts of Arabic academia in the domain. So, translators have made important contribution over the centuries in dissemination of ideas and information to a larger audience, in shaping of cultures and in a sense helped unite the world.

Размещено на Allbest.ru

...