1st trend is translation history

Adequate translation, into V. Komysarova's idea, translation which provides pragmatically problems of the translational certificate on greatest possible for achievement of this purpose equal equivalence refers to, not supposing infringement of norms of the use of words and their forms which was fixed in language of translation, adhering to tasks – stylistic requirements to texts of the given type and answering socially – the recognized conventional norm of translation. V. Komysarov's equivalent translation names translation which recreates the contents of the speaking another language original on one levels of equivalence. By definition any adequate translation, counts V. Komysarov, should be equivalent (on this or that equal equivalence), but not any equivalent translation admits adequate, and what answers, except for norm of equivalence, and to other normative requirements which have been mentioned above.
The information conveyed by linguistic signs alone, i.e. the meaning overtly expressed in text, would not be sufficient for adequate translation. Some linguists distinguish between what they call translation, based solely on the meanings expressed by linguistic signs and interpretation, involving recourse to extralinguistic information. In fact, the two are very closely intertwined, and in most cases effective translation is impossible without adequate knowledge of the speech-act situation and the situation described in the text( two on the aisle – два места ближе к проходу) - would hardly make much sense unless it is known that the conversation takes place at a box-office(speech-act situation). The translation of technical and scientific text requires a certain amount of technical and scientific knowledge. A successful translator is always a bit of an ethnographer, historian, politician.
A good example could be brought from C. P. Snow's novel "Time of Hope" "Gaping at some dirty tea leaves, reading the cards and looking at each other's silly hands and..." - let the sentence have been translated word-to-word in any other language - the language community of which is totally unaware that in Britain clairvoyance experience admits fortunetelling on tea leaves, - it would have lost sense.
There are also word-realias that are not translatable and as V. S. Vinogradov points out, many of them turn into borrowings. Such a word-realia may be an exotism, which in general, is transcribed in translation.
Misrepresentation and ambivalency in the TL text arise due to the selection of semantically inadequate lexical unit for the pragmatic meaning of the SL lexical unit.


8. Ways of achieving adequacy in translation
Adequate translation, into V. Komisarov's idea, translation which provides pragmatically problems of the translational certificate on greatest possible for achievement of this purpose equal equivalence refers to, not supposing infringement of norms of the use of words and their forms which was fixed in language of translation, adhering to tasks – stylistic requirements to texts of the given type and answering socially – the recognized conventional norm of translation.
The information conveyed by linguistic signs alone, i.e. the meaning overtly expressed in text, would not be sufficient for adequate translation. Some linguists distinguish between what they call translation, based solely on the meanings expressed by linguistic signs and interpretation, involving recourse to extralinguistic information. In fact, the two are very closely intertwined, and in most cases effective translation is impossible without adequate knowledge of the speech-act situation and the situation described in the text( two on the aisle – два места ближе к проходу)- would hardly make much sense unless it is known that the conversation takes place at a box-office(speech-act situation). The translation of technical and scientific text requires a certain amount of technical and scientific knowledge. A successful translator is always a bit of an ethnographer, historian, politician.
Both semantic and pragmatic inadequacies are flaws which can pose a recipient reader to the problem or cultural misunderstanding and adequate comprehension of the TL text.
A good example could be brought from C. P. Snow's novel "Time of Hope" "Gaping at some dirty tea leaves, reading the cards and looking at each other's silly hands and..." - let the sentence have been translated word-to-word in any other language - the language community of which is totally unaware that in Britain clairvoyance experience admits fortunetelling on tea leaves, - it would have lost sense.
There are also word-realias that are not translatable and as V. S. Vinogradov points out, many of them turn into borrowings. Such a word-realia may be an exotism, which in general, is transcribed in translation.
Realias, which are markers of solidarity and bear national colouring should be transcribed or transliterated, but supplied with comments in the footnotes.
Realias which are markers of either solidarity or distance in the language community other than of the SL text native reader and are represented in the SL text as foreignisms, should be transcribed or transliterated, but be also supplied with comments in the footnotes to the TL reader.
Misrepresentation and ambivalency in the TL text arise due to the selection of semantically inadequate lexical unit for the pragmatic meaning of the SL lexical unit.


9. Adequacy and equivalence in the theory of translation
The notion of “adequacy” is closely connected with that of “equivalence”. Some scholars identify these terms and use them as completely interchangeable notions. For example, Catford’s notion of “translation equivalence” is treated as “adequacy of translation” by R.Levitsky in his article “On the principle of functional adequacy of translation”.
Most scholars, such as Komisarov, Reiss, Vermeer, regard “equivalence and adequacy” as different and at the same time closely connected notions. Komisarov, for instance, thinks that “adequate translation” has a broad meaning and is used as a synonym for a “good translation” that guarantees sufficient interlinguistic communication. “Equivalence” is regarded as semantic similarity of the SL and TL and speech units. In Reiss and Vermeer’s opinion, “equivalence” is based on the reproduction of the communicative effect and “adequacy” stresses adaptation to factors arising from the secondary situation. While “equivalence” regards translation as a result, “adequacy” tends to view it as a process.
Adequate translation is the translation performed on the level sufficient and necessary to convey the information and preserve the norms of the TL, while equivalent translation is one that has a constant correspondence that exist independently upon the context. Thus, we may state that adequate translation may be non-equivalent and equivalent translation can be inadequate.
There are several types of equivalence in the theory of translation:
-Literal equivalence - the case when everything is translated literally, omitting the parts which are impossible to translate, used in draft poetry or technical translation.
-Contextual equivalence - the author renders every single unit of the contents and preserves the norms of the target language).
-Adequate equivalence - the author renders all the meaningful units and preserves the original language means (units of translation)
-Functional/dynamic equivalence - trying to achieve the same reaction of the public. It may be denotative, syntactic, connotative, and pragmatic.
-Absolute equivalents (names, terminology, clichés) - pairs of language unites which correspond in most cases, not depending on the context. E.g. London, chemistry, how do you do, but: air resistance, strength of the metal (сопротивление воздуха, сопротивление металла)
- Relative equivalents - pairs of language unites which correspond in most cases in dependence on the contextual situation.
-Full equivalents - pairs of language unites with similar usage
-Partial equivalents - pairs of language unites with different combinatory possibilities.
- Zero equivalents - language units that lack an analogue in the target language: idiomatic units, slang words, realia and terminology.


11. Aspects of translation
Modern semiotics dealing with the problem of sign determines three types of relations peculiar to every natural sign. They are as follows:
1. semantic relations that reflect the relations between a sign and its object
2. syntactic relations that connect a sign with other signs of a system
3. pragmatic relations that determine the relations between a sign and persons who use it in the process of communication.
Linguists has borrowed the theory of three types of relationship between the natural sign and its surroundings with regard to the problem of the language sign. As a result scholars differentiate between:
1. semantic meaning (denotative, referential)
2. syntactic meaning (interlinguistic)
3. pragmatic meaning.
Thus, scholars distinguish tree aspects of translation which deal with three types of meanings: semantic, syntactic and pragmatic.


12. Pragmatic aspects of Translation
The people who use the language are not impartial to it. And their subjective attitudes are stuck to the linguistic units and through them to objects and phenomena described and constitute a permanent component of their semantic structure. The translator must strive to create not only linguistically but also pragmatically relevant TL texts.
Pragmatics of translation is a wide notion which covers not only pragmatic meaning of a word, but some problems connected with various levels of understanding by speech acts communicants of certain meanings or messages, depending on linguistic or paralinguistic factors, that is, background knowledge.
The term pragmatic meaning of a word is not yet fully investigated. But some linguists point out that the pragmatic component of the word meaning, which is realized in various kinds of emotive and stylistic connotations, is individually-occasional or collectively used meanings. They reflect the conditions of a language unit use, such as situation and place of communication, subject and purpose of communication; social, ethnic, and individual peculiarities of communicants, their attitude towards one another. Irrespective of the fact whether pragmatic aspects are singled out into a certain type of a word meaning or whether it is considered among other components of its meaning, pragmatic meaning, which is fixed in a word, plays an important role and its retention ensures complete communicative adequacy of translation to the original.
Pragmatics as a linguistic term means the analysis of language in terms of the situational context, within which utterances are made, including the knowledge and beliefs of the speaker and the relation between speaker and listener.


13. The problem of conveying pragmatic meaning
A well-known linguist Komissarov points out that pragmatic aspect of translation should be considered from three points. One of them is conveying pragmatic meaning of words. This point chiefly pertains to the translation of national realia and equivalent lacking words that is, various names.
The term pragmatic meaning of a word is not yet fully investigated. But some linguists point out that the pragmatic component of the word meaning, which is realized in various kinds of emotive and stylistic connotations, is individually-occasional or collectively used meanings. They reflect the conditions of a language unit use, the conditions such as situation and place of communication, subject and purpose of communication; social, ethnic, and individual peculiarities of communicants, their attitude towards one another.
Pragmatic information is actualized in translating the equivalent–lacking lexical units, first of all personal names, geographical names, national realia by way of transcription and transliteration. But in some cases, while translating the names of states, boroughs, counties and provinces explication of their implicit information is needed. For example: Georgia – штат Джорджія (США) (In case the context indicates that the author writes or speaks about the USA)
Explication is also required in cases when one and the same name designates several notions: ALBANY – Олбані – поетична назва Шотландії; Олбані – чоловіча тюрма на острові Уайт (Англія); Олбані – річка у центральній частині Канадu; Олбані – порт і курортне місто у південно-західній частині Австралії.
As a rule, personal names are translated be means of transcription or transliteration (or both combined). But when a proper name acquires the connotation as an important pragmatic factor, it should be translated on a communicative but not on a semantic level. For example: MIDAS – 1) Багата людина; 2) Людина, яка постійно примножує багатство.
As to the meaning of national realia it is more often than not rendered by means of transcription or transliteration, but very often explication of their national meaning is also necessary. Thus, kulish, borsch are rendered by way of descriptive translation – thick meal cooked with grain.
While translating the names of national holidays the pragmatic approach is also required. For example, Easter Monday translated word-for-word does not give any notion of this holiday. Its interpretation as перший понеділок після Пасхи is more understandable for the Ukrainian recipient.
Some additions in the translation help to make it more accurate and exact.
There are cases when generalization is used for replacing the proper name, usually of shops, clubs, colleges, schools etc. For example: I could see my mother going in Warren’s Sports and Games – Я бачив, як моя мама заходила у спортивний магазин.
In some cases the word which designates national realia is not important in the semantic structure of the text. Then the translator may employ the method of omission.
Pragmatic task of the translation aims at ensuring maximal equivalency with the original. Pragmatic aspect of the translation is very important especially in translation of nationally-biased units of lexicon.


14. Pragmatic factors and the problem of translation (Shveitser’s approach)
Pragmatic meaning is the relation that exists between the user of the linguistic unit and through the linguistic unit to phenomena or reality of life. It includes all extralinguistic phenomena.
Shveitser starts from the point that the goal of translation remains the same in different situations – to convey the identity between the SL and the TL texts. Nevertheless the translation usually moves away from the close linguistic equivalency in order to try to achieve the same communicative (and artistic) effect.
The pragmatic factors according to Shveitser include:
1. the sender’s communicative intention
2. orientation towards the receptor
3. the translator’s personality
4. functional facet of the text
The transformations involved are replacement, addition, omission, explanatory translation and compensation.
In this respect we may speak of pragmatically adequate TL text but not semantically adequate.


15. Pragmatic adaptation and pragmatic reconstruction
Pragmatic meaning is the relation that exists between the user of the linguistic unit and through the linguistic unit to phenomena or reality of life. It includes all extralinguistic phenomena.
Pragmatic adequacy in translation is the process of finding similarities between the stylistic and emotional characteristics of the SL and TL text with the corresponding elements of the target language.
The investigation of the process of conveying pragmatic meaning is reduced to pragmatic adaptation that is to find similarity in pragmatic situations of the SL and TL text. E.g. “Brief Candles” – сборник Хаксли «Огарки»
Pragmatic reconstruction is the process of transference of stylistic and emotional characteristics of the text according to the general pattern but not to the exact items that constitute the text. E.g. Lords reject “opting out” Corporal Punishment Bill – Палата Лордов отказывается принимать закон об отмене телесных наказаний.


16. Pragmatic meaning and its constituent parts
The people who use the language are not impartial to it. And their subjective attitudes are stuck to the linguistic units and through them to objects and phenomena described and constitute a permanent component of their semantic structure. The translator must strive to create not only linguistically but also pragmatically relevant TL texts.
Pragmatic meaning is the relation that exists between the user of the linguistic unit and through the linguistic unit to phenomena or reality of life. It includes all extralinguistic phenomena.
The term pragmatic meaning of a word is not yet fully investigated. But some linguists point out that the pragmatic component of the word meaning, which is realized in various kinds of emotive and stylistic connotations, is individually-occasional or collectively used meanings. They reflect the conditions of a language unit use, such as situation and place of communication, subject and purpose of communication; social, ethnic, and individual peculiarities of communicants, their attitude towards one another.
The main components of pragmatic meaning:
1. stylistic characteristics of the word
2. register
3. emotional colouring
4. expressive components.


17. The problem of conveying intralinguistic meaning
Words influence each other and presuppose choice of their neighboring dependants. They cannot combine if they belong to different styles (*светлоокая девка, a boozy-woozy lady). Words do not combine if they do not match speech norms, i.e. their word combinability is beyond the norm. Thus, in Russian we say молодой картофель but we cannot say in English *young potatoes, as the word potatoes requires the adjective new (new potatoes). Words in their primary meaning cannot be combined together if their near context is not taken into consideration. The Russians say “Не пейте сырой воды”, which cannot be rendered by the phrase “Don’t drink *raw water.” because English-speaking people use in this case quite a different word combination: “unboiled water”. So in translation we have to substitute one word for another that naturally fits the context.