Dauletbayeva
Alima
Taraz University of Innovation and Humanities, Kazakhstan
PROBLEMS OF TRANSLATING PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS
Phraseological
units, or idioms, as they are called by most western scholars, represent what can
probably be described as the most picturesque, colourful and expressive part of
the language's vocabulary. [1,225p.]
Academician V.V.Vinagradov spoke of the semantic change in phraseological units
as “a meaning resulting from a peculiar chemical combination of words”. A.V.Koonin offered that a phraseological
unit is a stable word –group characterized by a completely or partially
transferred meaning [1, 230-231p.].
One of the main
problems in the art of translation is phraseology. In this context, it is a
disheartening fact that most of the language-pair-related phraseological
dictionaries are unidirectional (source language to target language) and based
on a selection of the target language's phraseological units. The problem with
the unidirectional approach is the very important fact that phraseological
units cannot simply be reversed. It is necessary to make a new selection among
the idioms of the former target language in order to achieve a central,
adequate corpus of lexical units.
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) 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" may well be '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.
And it is not at
all enough to know the existing types of translation, that is, for example, to
know that Russian idiomatic phrases can be translated by means of
(1) an English
absolute monoequivalent ("складывать оружие" - 'to lay
down one's arms'),
(2) or by a relative
equivalent ("встречать
что-либо
в
штыки" - 'to meet smth. at dagger-point'),
(3) or by a
selected synonym ("метать
громы
и
молнии" might, depending on a context, be translated either as 'to jump
down smb.'s throat' or 'to go off the deep end' or 'to go up into the air',
etc., etc., etc.),
(4) or
metaphorically ("метать
громы
и
молнии"- ‘tо hurl thunder bolts at smb.'),
(5) or, the last
and the least, by a description ("встречать что-либо
в
штыки"- ‘tо give smth. a hostile reception' or 'to meet smth. With resistance', or
the like).
It is only
natural that this very classification (as any other) can and does show the
result of the translation, whereas the process of translation is really quite
different.
The choice of a
particular type of translation is secondary and subordinate to the requirements
that our translation should be (a) adequate and (b) idiomatic. Besides, the
choice also depends on (c) the circumstantial factors of the language.
NOTE: The use of
a descriptive translation may be justified, for one, if a certain idiom is
repeated twice in the same paragraph. To avoid tautо1оgу and present a better style of narration, it is acceptable to translate
one of the phrases descriptively.
One must learn
how to translate an idiom by an idiom (e.g., "встречать
в
штыки" by 'to meet at dagger-point') because descriptive translations
(e.g., 'to meet with resistance') almost always happen to be not only emotively
blank but also unable to serve as a basis for our application, in the process
of translation, such important and necessary stylistic means as puns (e.g.,
"Она
встретила
предложение
в
штыки, но
штыки
ее
оказались
тупыми".) or anti-idiomatic additions (e.g., "Они
встретили
наше
предложение
буквально
в
штыки".) and many others to be thoroughly considered by us in this book
later on.
The origin of
idioms is closely connected with people's mentality .The present day English
can't be considered full of value without idiomatic usage, as the use of idioms
is the first sign of a certain language's developing. Idiomatic sentences
enrich a language and the knowledge of idioms signal that the speaker knows the
language on the level of a native speaker. And we concluded that even languages
belonging to different families may have similar or hemi similar idioms and
those which differ dramatically can be guessed within the context. So idioms
are integral part of language which makes our speech more colourful and
authentically native.
Literature:
1. Г. Б. Антрушина, О. В.Афанасьева, Н.Н.Морозова «Лексикология английского
языка», - М.: Дрофа, 2008. - 287с.
2. Влахов С., Флорин С.
Непереводимое в переводе. – М., 1986.
3. Дубинец Э.М. Курс
лекций и планы семинарских занятий по лексикологии английского языка.
4. Жуков В.П. Семантика
фразеологических оборотов. - М., 1990.
5. MCRAE, J. (1996), “Representational language learning: from language
awareness to text awareness”, Language, Literature and the Learner: Creative
Classroom Practice, Ronald Carter and John McRae (eds.), London and New York,
Longman, 16-40.
6. PEER, W. Van (2000), “Hidden Meanings”, Contextualized Stylistics,
Tony Bex, Michael Burke and Peter Stockwell (eds.), Amsterdam-Atlanta GA,
Rodopi, pp. 39-47.
7. REBER, A. S.
(1995), The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology, London, Penguin Books [1985].
8. SHORT, M. (1995), “Understanding conversational undercurrents in ‘The
Ebony Tower’ by John Fowles”, Twentieth-Century Fiction: From Text to Context,
Peter Verdonk and Jean J. Weber (eds.), London and New York, Routledge, pp.
45-62.