Problems Of Translating The Texts

This article discusses semantic and pragmatic problems of translation which include differences in categorization, grammatical differences, implicit categories and false friends of translators.

The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations (ISSN -2689-100x)

MAIN PART
When translating phraseological units, proverbs and sayings, the presence of an equivalent unit in the target language does not always provide an adequate result. In some cases, it is so important to preserve the figurative component of the original text that the literal translation of the corresponding phrase turns out to be a more successful solution than the search for a "normal" equivalent [2, p. 221]. When translated, the proverb is transmitted verbatim, or replaced by an equivalent proverb. When the translator does not take into account the lack of cognitive parallels between languages and the phraseological unit translates literally, the reader has serious problems understanding the text. Here is the example. Style differentiation is usually determined by the strategy of choosing an expression from the list of quasi-synonyms formed by the language system. For example, in the Russian language, from the sets of so-called synonyms "решить, принять решение", "сказать, заявить, выступить с заявлением, выразить мнение", "спросить, поставить вопрос, поднять вопрос" the newspaper style requires the choice of a more detailed version. This pragmatic feature of Russian newspaper style is by no means universal. In English or German newspaper style, the desire for expansion is expressed to a much lesser extent. [1, p. 153] In every linguistic community, there are systemically non-motivated preferences in the choice of the method of designating certain entities, for example, counting. As noted by A.N. Baranov, the expression " восемнадцать месяцев", native speakers of Russian in most cases prefer the expression " полтора года", on the contrary, in the German language the phrase "achtzehn Monate" is perceived as quite normal -stylistically neutral and quite frequent. Likewise, it is rare for a native Russian speaker to designate a sum of 1,500 rubles as "пятнадцать сотен рублей", while the English term "fifteen hundred roubles" is a fairly standard expression. Such preferences are especially important, since structurally similar Russian ways of expression (in our case -German "anderthalb Jahre", English "one thousand and five hundred roubles") are also not prohibited by the system. [5, p. 214] There are more pragmatic problems that are important for translation. It is known that the average length of a sentence varies from language to language. For the English text, for example, significantly shorter sentences are characteristic than for the Russian one. A translation that does not take into account these differences, even if it is adequate in all other parameters, is perceived by the addressee as not fully complying with the rules for constructing the text. [2, p. 159] Similarly, the presence of word-for-word repetitions in a text is assessed differently by different linguistic communities. If in the Russian text stylistic norms require the author to avoid the use of the same word within the framework of one sentence and even one paragraph as much as possible, then in an English scientific text, word-for-word repetitions are quite acceptable.
Another feature by which English scientific texts can be opposed to Russian ones is the use of the author's "мы". Thus, it would hardly be appropriate to literally translate the phrase "I claim that ...", typical for English scientific texts, as "Я утверждаю, что…". Pragmatically, "I claim that ..." rather corresponds to the Russian "по нашему мнению...".
Наконец, в каждом языке существуют определенные, узуально фиксированные способы выражения некоторых стандартных смыслов. Эти способы регулируются не системой языка, а исключительно прагматическими установками. [2, с. 177] Finally, in each language there are certain, conventionally fixed ways of expressing some standard meanings. These methods are regulated not by the language system, but exclusively by pragmatic attitudes. [2, p. 177] The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations (ISSN -2689-100x) Other main problem that translators face in the process of translating text from one language to another can be subdivided into semantic ones, which include differences in categorization, grammatical differences, implicit categories and false friends of the translator.
Semantics is all content, information transmitted by language or any of its units (word, grammatical form, phrase, sentence) [2, p. 153]. The following translation problems associated with the divergence of the semantics of languages can be distinguished: differences in categorization, grammatical differences, grammatical differences as a factor of metaphorization, hidden categories, "false friends of the translator".
In a theoretical sense, the problem of differences in categorization was actively developed in the works of representatives of European neo-Humboldtianism [3, p. 198]. So, the division of the day into time intervals, fixed in the Russian language, differs from the division of the day, adopted, for example, in the English and Uzbek languages, in which there is only an equivalent to denote the concept of day: day -24 (йигирма тўрт) соат or туну кун (Uzb.) -24 hours, day (English), moreover, in the Uzbek language, the designation of the time associated with the time of the prayer has recently been observed: бомдод (about 7.00 a.m.), пешин (about 13.00), аср (about 16.20), шом (about 18.00), хуфтон (about 19.35). Time indication -now, in an hour, etc. -also has differences: in English and Russian cultures it has approximate accuracy, while in Uzbek it is vague and has no definite boundaries -хозир (now) can mean an infinitely long process. Here, one should pay attention to spatial relations: Uzbek ана у ерда or у ерда, in contrast to Russian and English for a more accurate understanding of space, means the approximate location of the object.
Among the interlanguage differences caused by mismatches in the organization of the linguistic structure that are significant for the theory of translation, there may also be grammatical differences, for example, the gender category characteristic of the Russian language is absent in the Uzbek language, except for words such as котиб -котиба, and names such as Камол -Камола. In English, the gender category is reflected only in the pronouns he, she her, him, while in Russian not only pronouns, but also verbs in the past tense are able to express the gender category. The category of aspect, which is characteristic for Russian verbs, is also not clearly manifested in the English and Uzbek languages, and therefore, for an effective result of the perception of the text during translation, it is necessary to clarify or expand the context.
Purely grammatical categories can be conceptualized as meaningful and act as a factor in metaphorization. The potential significance of such differences is most evident in the translation of literary texts.
It is also important to mention the existence of such grammatical category as the definite and indefinite articles in the English language, which is absent in the Uzbek and Russian languages, that should also be taken into account when translating. It is necessary to say about the peculiarities of pronouns: in English, the same pronoun you can be used to mean ты and вы in Russian, сен and сиз in Uzbek. A similar situation is observed in possessive pronouns: the English your can be translated as твой and ваш, in the Uzbek and Russian languages there are differences -твой (сеники) and ваш (сизники),but in Russian, in One of the most traditional is the problem of the so-called "false friends of the translator", which include: 1) Words of the source language, consonant with the words of the target language, but diverging in meaning. For example, listсписок, not a sheet, accurate is точный, not neat. 2) Words of the source language, in which a part of the meaning coincides with the meaning of a similar word in the target language, and a part diverges. For example, banner -баннер, знамя, девиз. Such cases are well known and well described in dictionaries -both in special dictionaries of "false friends" and in ordinary bilingual dictionaries of a general nature.