Àíàøåâà Ä.Ê., Èñêàêîâà À.Î. ÅÍÓ ã.Àñòàíà, Êàçàõñòàí
Stylistic aspect of
translation from English to Kazakh
The problem of translation equivalence is closely connected with the
stylistic aspect of translation – one cannot reach the required level of
equivalence if the stylistic peculiarities of the source text are neglected.
Full translation adequacy includes as an obligatory component the adequacy of
style, i.e. the right choice of stylistic means and devices of the target
language to substitute for those observed in the source text. This means that
in the translation one is to find proper stylistic variations of the original
meaning rather than only the meaning itself. The expression of stylistic
peculiarities of the source text in the translation is necessary to convey
fully the communication intent of the source text. Special language media
securing the desirable communication of the text are called stylistic devices
and expressive means.
First of all, a translator is to distinguish between neutral, bookish and
colloquial words and word-combinations, translating them by relevant units of
the target language. Usually it is a routine task. It is sometimes hard to determine the correct stylistic
variety of a translation equivalent. But, as in almost all instances of
translation, the final decision is taken on the basis of context, situation and
background information.
For example, it is hard to decide without further information, which of the
English words – disease, illness, or sickness –corresponds to the Kazakh words:
àóðó,
ñûðқàò, íàóқàñ. However, even such short contexts as “infectious
disease” and “social disease” already help to choose the appropriate
equivalents and translate the word “disease as “әëåóìåòò³ê àóðó” This example brings us to a very important
conclusion, that style is expressed in a proper combination of words rather
than only in the stylistic coloring of the individual words.
Stylistic devices are based on the comparison of primary (dictionary)
meaning and that dictated by the contextual environment; on the contradiction
between the meaning of the given word and the environment; on the association
between words in the minds of the language speakers and on the purposeful
deviation from accepted grammatical and phonetic standards.
The following stylistic devices and expressive means are most common and
frequently dealt with by the translators of publicistic style texts.
Metaphor is the transference of some quality from one object to another
based on resemblance, in other words, on a convert comparison: He is not a man,
he is just a machine; What an ass you
are - Cåí
қàíäàé åңáåêқîð åä³ң. Not only objects can be
compared in a metaphor, but also phenomena and actions: Some books are to be
tasted, others are swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested.
Metonymy denotes as a transference of meaning which is based on
contiguity of notions, not on likeness. It may be called “similarity by
association”. In metonymy, the name of one object is used instead of another,
closely connected with it, which may include:
1. The name of a part
instead of the name of a whole as in Washington and London ( = USA and UK)
agree on most issues; the word “colors” in the phrase “to defend the colors of
the University” denotes the organization itself.
2. The name of a
container instead of the contents as in “He drank a whole glass of whisky (=
the liquid contained in a glass – ñòàêàíäàғû ñұéûқòûқ); The whole town
was out in the streets ( = the people of the town - ...)
3. The name of a
characteristic feature of an object instead of the object as in “The massacre
of the innocents” (= children –áàëàëàð; this biblical phrase is related to the killing of
Jewish male children by King Herod in Bethlehem).
4. The name of an
instrument instead of an action or the doer of an action as in “All they that
live by the sword, shall perish by the sword ( = war, fighting – ñîғûñ)
Irony is based on the simultaneous realization of two opposite meanings:
the stable, direct meaning of the words and their contextual meaning. Usually
the direct meaning in such cases expresses a positive evaluation of the
situation, while the context contains the opposite, negative evaluation: e.g.
How delightful – to find yourself in a foreign country without a penny in your
pocket! Cases of irony do not present a
serious problem for translation and the approaches similar to those mentioned
above (semantic or pragmatic equivalence) are commonly used. For example, the
ironical expression “paper war” may be translated as “қàғàç ñîғûñ”
Zeugma is a stylistic device that plays upon two different meanings of
the word (the direct and transferred meanings). This comes from the use of a
word in the same formal (grammatical) relations, but in different semantic
relations with the surrounding words in the phrase or sentence, which is a
result of the simultaneous realization
of the literal and figurative meanings of a
word: e.g. A leopard changes his spots as often as he goes from one spot to
another (spot = 1. äàқ, қàñқà; 2. îðûí). Here the translator’s task is to try to render this
ironical comment either by finding a similar irregularity in the target
language or, failing to show a zeugma and irony of the author, stick to the
regular target language meaning (i.e. separate the two actions: Îë á³ð ðåò ñóðåòêå
òүñ³ðä³ äå, êåñåäåí á³ð æұòûì øәé ³øò³.
Pun, the so-called “play on words”, is considered to be the most arduous for translation. Pun is the
realization in one and the same word of two lexical meanings (direct and
figurative) simultaneously: e.g. May’s mother always stood on her gentility,
and Dot’s mother never stood on anything but her active little feet. A pun can
be translated only by a word in the target language with a similar capacity to
develop two meanings in a particular context. English is comparatively rich in
polysemantic words and homonyms, whereas in Kazakh these word types are rather
rare. Consider an example of a pun and
its Kazakh translation: What gear were you in at the moment of impact? - Ñîғûñқàí
ñәòòå ñ³ç қàé
æûëäàìäûқòà áîëäûíûç; Gucci’s sweets and Reeboks - Ñîңғû æàíàëûқ.
Periphrasis is another device. It denotes the process of renaming – the
use of different name instead of the traditionally used one. Its frequent use
is characteristic of the publicistic style.
A different, more gentle or favorable name may be used for an object or
phenomenon so as to avoid undesirable or unpleasant associations. This case of
renaming is represented by euphemisms. Thus the verb ‘die” may be replaced by
euphemisms like “expire, be no more, join the majority, be done, depart”; “a
madhouse” may be called “a lunatic asylum or a mental hospital”; euphemisms for
toilet, lavatory are ladies’ (men’s) room, restroom, bathroom. Periphrasis may
use a description instead of a person’s name, creating a kind of nickname:
Mister Know-all; Miss Today. On the other hand, a proper name may be used
instead of a common name: He is the Napoleon of crime (= a genius in crime as
great as Napoleon was in other things); You are a real Cicero (= a great orator
like Cicero). Some of the periphrasis
are borrowed from classical sources (myths and the Bible); others are
typically English.
The example from Shakespeare: salad days (= қàéòàð
құðûëûìû); at one fell swoop (=
êөçä³ àøûï æұìғàíøà); sound and fury (=
қàéғûëû æàғäàé); every inch a king (= øûíàéû); it’s neither
here nor there (= áұë ³ñêå
қàòûñû æîқ); cry havoc (=
áàéáàëàì ñàëó)
Typically English periphrasis
are: Lake country (=England); The Lord, Almighty, Goodness, Heavens, the Skies
(=God); a shield-bearer (=a soldier); a play of swords (= a battle). As a rule,
periphrasis don’t present difficulties for translation, however, their correct
translation strongly depends on the situation and appropriate background
information.
Special attention is to be paid by a translator to overt and covert
quotations. Whereas the former requires only a correct rendering of the source
quotation in the target language. Never suggest your own home-made translation
for a quotation of a popular author! The latter usually takes the shape of an
allusion and the pragmatic equivalence seems the most appropriate for the case.
For example: “the Trojan Horse raid” one may translate as «êàòûãåçä³ øàáóûë» (loosing the
meaning of the original quotation).
Allegory is a device by which
the names of objects or characters of an article are used figuratively,
representing some more general things, good or bad qualities. We often find allegory in parables, essays
and pamphlets. It is also a typical feature of proverbs containing
generalizations (expressing some moral truths): All is not gold that glitters (
= impressive words or people are not always really good. Kazakh translation: æûëòûðàғûííûң áәð³ àëòûí
åìåñ;
Every cloud has a silver lining (= even in bad situations there may be positive
elements. Kazakh: æàìàí àéòïàé æàқñû æîқ; Make the hay while the sun shines (= hurry
to achieve your aim while there is a suitable situation. Kazakh: òåì³ðä³
қûçғàí êåç³íäå ұð.
As a type of allegory we distinguish Personification, i.e. ascribing
human qualities to inanimate objects, phenomena or animals: e.g. Silent, like
sorrowing children, the birds have ceased their song ... , lit by pale stars,
reigns in stillness (Jerome). In English personification is often represented
grammatically by the choice of masculine or feminine pronouns for the names of
animals, inanimate objects or forces of nature. The pronoun “he” is used for
the Sun, The Wind for the names of animals that act as human beings. The
pronoun “she” is used for what is regarded as rather gentle (the Moon, Nature,
Silence, Beauty, Hope, Mercy, etc. While translating the cases of
personification and traditional use of personal and possessive pronouns, a
translator should render the English pronouns in accordance with the norms of
the target language (TL).
A translator faces constantly with the necessity to transfer diverse
expressive means, used in original text. Its translation requires transformations, which keep and
modify starting emotional-aesthetic information.
List of literature:
1. Ë.Ô.Äìèòðèåâà, Ñ.Å.Êóíöåâè÷, Êóðñ
ïåðåâîäà – Ì., 2005.
2. Í.À. ×èòàëèíà. « Ó÷èòåñü
ïåðåâîäèòü»-.ã. – Ìîñêâà, 1975 ã.
3.
À.×óæàêèí. Ìèð ïåðåâîäà – Ì., 2003ã.
4.
Ì.Ä. Ãóòíåð. Ïîñîáèå ïî ïåðåâîäó ñ àíãëèéñêîãî ÿçûêà íà ðóññêèé – Ì., 1982ã.
5. Қàçàқøà-îðûñøà
ñөçä³ê Àëìàòû,
2002
6. Êàçàõñêèå
ïîñëîâèöû è ïîãîâîðêè. Àëìàòû, 2003