Role of translation in the study of lexical-grammatical aspects of discourse

In the study of the article, comparative typological componential analyses of the language structure establishing discourses have been used.

Our Approach to the Determination of Discourse

We think that discourse is the result of realization of the cognitive panorama of the world in human conscious by the help of verbal and non-verbal means. In the expression of written means of discourse mainly language means operate, which may be divided into two groups - grammatical and lexical groups. They act to carry out the function of expressing and sending meanings in close unity. Discourse expresses the whole of concepts, formulating a certain thought, the cognitive panorama of the world and while carrying out this function completely, it seems to have done its duty. Let's consider such a situation: in the process of intercourse, the cognitive panorama of the world is realized in the discourse by the sender of the information, but deriving from the discourse, the initial “panorama” being directed to the cognitive space of the addressee, it is restored completely in the conscious of the addressee. As cognitive spaces of the sender of the information and the addressee are identical in no way, the cognitive panorama, rooted in the conscious of the sender of the information differs from the initial one. It can be demonstrated in such a simple example. In all the districts of Azerbaijan “tandir”¹ for baking bread is used, but it has its own self-belonging peculiarities in each district as to its construction and functions. For e. g. In the districts, located in lowlands “tandif' is built up from the ground which creates possibilities for baking bread, ensuring the family for some days. But the same object - “tandif' is constructed in a different way and creates possibilities for baking lavash². Namely, the speaker of the language of the lowland district, hearing the word “tandir”, in his/her conscious vivifies the concept of tandir which he/she has seen in his / her district, while in conscious of the people from other districts as Nakhchivan, vivifies the character of “tandir” which they have seen in their own districts.

Role of translation in discourse

Realization of the cognitive panorama of the world in discourse by the sender of the information, cognition of the same discourse by the addressee and the vivification of world panorama in a certain cognitive space is absolutely a complex process, and it is extremely difficult to follow its flow in the process of intercourse. To study these processes translation offers us valuable language materials. Thus, as a result of translation the code realized by one bearer of the language is revealed in the conscious of another bearer of the language (a translation language) and comparative analysis of the initial and newly created discourses give possibilities to observe the processes going on in the concept sphere of the person and the way, they are realized by the conscious of the speaker. By this time the difference from the interlingua cognition of the translation should be taken into consideration. So, we don't feel any need of searching for lexis, especially grammatical analogues when discourse is realized between the bearers of the same language, but during the translation from one language into another one, language means in all levels are subjected to transformation.

Discourse in comparison with an independent sentence from the hierarchic viewpoint is still more complex object and naturally we should keep to the representation of expressing means in the language (including functional and structural peculiarities of discursive units).

Each language, having its own self-belonging peculiarities, their comparative study, creates possibilities to learn this problem still deeply and all-rounded.

This comparative study (analysis), when being carried out by the way of comparison, gives us possibility to determine the suitability, partially suitability or having no suitability of different lexis units and grammatical categories and all of which causes great interest from the scientific approach to the problem. On the other hand, when comparison is made even between the speakers of one and the same language, the thought materialized by one party is cognized by the other speaker, namely it is accepted in the level which the other party is able to cognize.

1 Tandir is a special oven built up by clay and mud for baking bread.

2 Lavash - thinner layer of baked batter.

This process in itself is also in a certain sense of “translation”, but here takes place not a translation from one language into another language, but “translation” of language from one consciousness into another one takes place (Hereinafter we shall use the word “translation” just in this wider sense). Deriving from this process, the degree of suitability is valued. One of the stages, perhaps the most important stage in translation, is the restoration of the initial text and this gives a wider and richer material from the view of determination of suitability and differences in all the levels among the languages.

Lexical and grammatical features of any language creates certain problems before the “translator” and the translator in the process of translation is compelled to solve the problem of “restoration” of the lexical and grammatical units of the original language into the one which translation is made. But as the translator does not possess the only receipt, there is not only one approach to the process of translation either, and alongside the objective knowledge and skills of the translator, who carries out the process of translation, his/her subjective approaches also take place in this process.

As to the art of translation two approaches distinguish themselves: linguistic approach and literary approach. Essentially these approaches can be valued as to the importance of which of them, a text or a discourse must be dispatched first. Some scientists call them “letter” or “spirit” [2]. Not depending on how they are named, the main problem is the problem of choice, namely, the main problem facing translation is, revelation of the contents form unity, existing in one language, and looking for the component parts, being equivalent to them in the other language and using more or less suitable elements, to create new unity of form and contents, repeating the initial unity of the form and contents in the maximum degree.

In the linguistic approach restoration of the text and all its lexical-grammatical elements are highlighted but in the literary approach dispatching the main contents - its “spirit” is taken as the main principle. Despite the fact that these two approaches stood opposing each-other for a long period of time, at present it is necessary to agree with the thought that these two approaches complete each- other, because a text exists only in a context; though a text is established by the help of language means (lexical, grammatical) each of its element exits in a context as a whole and this context is not simply the whole of lexical-grammatical means, is a wider notion than a text. Approaching from this view point, it is necessary to agree, as we have already mentioned, that discourse does not only reflect a text and a context, it contains verbal and non-verbal means of expression and that in the process of translation, a discourse, existing in one language must be vivified in the other language, into which it is being translated. In each concrete case this kind of “vivification”, truly speaking, the “restoration” has its self-belonging features in one language, it is possible to distinguish its common features, characterizing the translation as a whole and determine its main principles as a process of translation.

The environment of the concept of “translation” is extremely wide. From one language into the other one poems, literary pieces, publisistic works, scientific-popular writings belonging to different fields of knowledge, diplomatic documents, business documents, articles of political figures and their reports, reports of the speakers, newspaper materials, talks of persons speaking in different languages and appealing for the translation of their oral speech is translated, films are dubbed.

Though the word “translation” is widely known, it is necessary to specify it as a special type of human activity and as a notion, denoting its result. When we say translation we mean: 1) recreation of a speech work (a text or an oral utterance) taking place as a psychological act (in the initial language), and its expression in another language in the form of translation; 2) the result of this process, namely a new speech work created in the translated language is understood [4].

Though these two understandings do not deny each other, each of them has got its own specific features. Studying translation as a process, taking place in the human consciousness, essentially demands psychological or psycholinguistic approach. Acting from this approach we may speak about discourse, as a whole of units establishing concrete cognitive space, existing in the consciousness in the form of concepts, reflecting the modern panorama of the world and realizing it in the language in the present-day level of the linguistic science.

Any notion, thought, events and other small or big cognitions become “objectified”, visualized only then, when they are realized, namely, they go beyond the border of the consciousness in which they exist and become to be cognized by the others. But this kind of cognition itself possesses its own difficulties and it is conditioned by the subjectivity of the process of cognition. Any individually-taken entity may cognize the sent information, depending on his / her level of preparedness, world outlook, on the degree of how his / her concept in his/her consciousness overlaps with the “concept to be cognized by him / her. That's why the act of complete cognition does not take place. As discourse, created by the bearer of the language is cognized by different bearers of the language differently, expression of discourse created in one language in the other person's mind is also different. In the cognition of translation these features increase still more and this is more influenced by linguocultural factors.

When the works of translation are investigated, newly-created works on the basis of language of the translation first of all are compared in the language level. During the analysis, investigators do not take psychological acts into consideration and they act only as to the texts, having been turned to objective reality on the account of only language means. Nevertheless language means themselves are the means reflecting the concepts. For the vivification of them in the language of translation as completely as it is possible, form and contents unity of the translated language must be adequately cognized in the space of concepts of the translator, they must be discovered, be divided into their constituent parts, their adequate equivalents in this psychological level must be found as definitely as it is possible, only after that these “discovered” concepts must be realized by the means of the language of the translation.

Despite the demands directed to the translation of this or that material, the self belonging character of the talent and creative initiative of the translator, the level of knowledge which he / she has to possess, there are two important considerations for all the types of translation activity:

1) The aim of translation; to make the reader, who doesn't know the initial language, acquainted with the contents of the text (by the contents of oral speech);

2) To translate - to express the text created by one language truly and correctly into another language.

For the practice of translation, here derives such a thought that the original language should be expressed in another language in such a way, that the reader should receive the information with utter completion and clearness, which can be achieved by the suitability of the norms of the language of the translation.

The contents of the translated original language are directly linked with the language forms of the created (translated) language. For the reader, whose native language is another language, or for reader understanding the language, but not knowing it well enough, willingly or unwillingly all the created characters transfer onto the basis of his/her native language. Besides, not depending on the level of his language knowledge, a translator has always to transfer from one language into another one.

The process of translation conditionally is divided into two stages. In the first stage, the translator must understand the translated material (cognitive panorama of the world realized in discourse), must cognize it, analyze it and value it. In the second stage he/she must find proper means of expression for the translation of the translation language so, the process of translation envisages the determination of relativity between the original and translation languages.

At present great attention is paid to machine (computer) translation. Despite the fact that the quality of computer translation may increase day-by-day, such translations must still pass through human editorship. This is linked with the fact that “a machine” translates words, but a human being translates “characters” and “understands” them and expresses them.

Any wordy expressed work (literary and scientific, publicist and business like work etc.) being the product of original creativity is the product of labor of the person, knowing the language perfectly well and this product must find its very level in translation. Any attempt made to translate this or that text, or a part of that text by the way of word-by-word translation, though is not resulted with complete misunderstanding, it still finally spoils the style of the translation which brings to misunderstanding of the translated text or a part of it, which can be accepted as an indication of non-fulfillment of the task, put before the translation.

The differences between two stylistic compositions of the two different languages-create a number of difficulties during the translation, but this does not mean that finding functional equivalent is impossible. Nevertheless, during the process of translation while liquidating these difficulties, at the same time, it creates possibilities to determine some self-belonging features of speech of different languages.

Translation materials devoted to the general problems of translation are usually divided into three groups: 1) newspaper text of predicative character, documentary and special scientific texts, 2) publicist works: 3) literary (artistic) texts. Materials, which are included into this or that group can be as well divided into still smaller groups. For e. g. In the publicist style there can be news, analytic, literary and genres which can be divided into smaller groups, each of which has possessed self-belonging peculiarities. “Specific feature of publicist texts lie in the fact that they are purely of propagandist orientation. Conditioned by not meeting the demands of exactness, and the fact that publicist translation is not purely understandable... makes it not an exact translation, And at last, “the basis of the translation of business-like work or work of technical character composes of terminology. Here too, word-by-word translation is not an exception” [1].

The classification, which we have considered mainly, overlaps with the division as to styles, and in this case we deal with a text and discourse and it is clear that the problem of context remains beyond the focus of attention. Here we take the role which plays linked with the expression of general contents of this or that language category, into consideration.

Certainly each sort of material has possessed its own features and they require special approach to their translation by the translators. Comparison of the types of translation creates possibilities to discover each of their peculiarities. This is more like opposing the types of translation materials than their comparison.

Commonly-used lexis naturally is represented in all types of literary, written and oral materials and creates for the possibility of understanding the material. It creates the ground for certain attitude of different elements of the vocabulary fund of the language, representing different layers of the language. In this case participation of terms for special newspaper, scientific and documentary texts, rich with factual materials are characteristic. They are chosen on the ground of commonly-used words. Here, often usage of special nouns for newspaper materials and for a number of scientific texts (history, geography, economy etc.) is characteristic as well. In the narrow sense of meaning, among the special nouns stand the names of organizations, social structures, positions etc. Different from the terms they are established by the combination of a number of words. In comparison with scientific materials in scientific-popular texts the quantity of terms are less. For all the materials of this kind, belonging of clearly understandable words of vocabulary stock to this or that lexis layer is characteristic.

If in the scientific materials words are used in the initial, denotative meanings, and in special rare cases we appeal to the figurative meanings of the words, having no special stylistic role, in scientific- popular literature we happen to meet metaphoric expressions of stylistic colorings which do not play figurative role.

A person, expressing his / her thought by language means, in very cases form new words, and uses the words which already exist and are rooted in the vocabulary stock of the language. If a speaker or a writer forms a new word, he/she forms that word either on the basis of elements of existing words in the language, or on the basis of analogy of the already existing words. The translator, when realizing the translation, while choosing words from the vocabulary stock of the language fitting to the words in the original language, acts in the same way. By this time he / she takes suitability of those words in the sentences and in the context as a whole, into consideration. In the cases when formation of terms or neologisms of the author are necessary, the translator also uses lexis or morphological elements in the language of translation.

Word recourses of the translator depending on the vocabulary stock of the language usually are large. Besides, even in the cases, when there are no words fitting to the words in the translation language, there is always a chance of describing the notion in the translation language. Therefore, it is relatively easier to translate the language of people, residing quite in different material conditions into the still richer languages. It is true that the people whose vocabulary stock is relatively limited may have such fields of life, in which the word stock of the very language may be richer in comparison with other languages. For e. g. while a camel has about 40 names in the Kazakh language, in our Azerbaijani language we haven't got equivalents for all of them and in any case dispatching Kazakh concept sphere may be relative.

It is necessary to take into consideration that the vocabulary stock is not a simple whole of words, it is a system, creating possibilities for endless variety, and in this system, the separately-taken elements of vocabulary stock are in certain meaning and stylistic attitudes. This shows itself more apparently during the translation and in many cases it creates possibilities to use the nearest meaning of the original in the translation language.

One and the same polysemantic word in the context of translation demands its expression in different words, because in the translation language its different distinctive words suit the meaning of the words in the original language. For e. g. the word “estate” if in one context expresses “sarvat” (treasure), “maddi vasait” (material means) in the other context it denotes “mьlk” (property). Besides, these two meanings in the general sense are combined in the meaning of “amlak” (property). The word “maitre” in the French language in the concrete meaning denotes “mьallim” (a teacher), “aga” (a master), “canab” (a mister), and “usta” (a master) and these meanings as a rule become clear from the context. Nevertheless, when necessary variant is chosen, depending on the shades of meanings, additional conretization may be demanded.

It is necessary to note that in one line, finding one of the main oppositions (the main line and shade of meaning) conditions speeding up of the grammatic investigations. The fact that the grammatical mechanisms of a language is more sensible to the passage type, has been discovered by empiric method. That's why hyposis of usage of grammatic mechanisms of discoursive means aimed at discriminating different passages seems more convincing. Grammatical relevant classification of the structural elements of discourse, before everything must take this feature into consideration.

Being linked with objective laws of the structure of this or that language, the grammatical phenomena conditioned with this language as a whole is different from the language phenomena of the other language. Grammatical problems standing before the translation of both in the field of morphology and syntax derive from this condition.

Certainly preservation of the grammatical form of the original language cannot be the aim of translation. The main aim is conveying the thought (the cognitive panorama of the world, having found its reflection in the discourse). In the language of translation absolutely other means may suit for the realization of this purpose.

When only seperately-taken features of the grammatic form play certain stylistic role, this becomes the aim of translation and by the way of using analogical means of the translation language it is possible to vivify these lines.

During the translation from one language into another one grammatical reconstruction usually is limited with word combination. It is necessary to note that 1) the circle of such features for each language is always limited, and 2) In the use of such word combinations there can't be a standard, the only receipt.

From the formal grammatic view an exact translation is not possible when simply formal suitability is absent. It, very often in the translation language does not meet the requirement for the norm of combination of words, and in a number of cases it becomes impossible from stylistic view.

Especially in the translation of extended sentences the fact that the word order, number of words, grammatical categories and meanings of words in the original language overlap with the similar features in the translation language is a very rare occasion.

Conclusion