The problems of translating the realia of english-speaking countries in prose and poetic works
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.31548/philolog0(292).2018.0180-184
Abstract
The relevance of the study lies in the fact that the realia are particularly difficult to translate, due to the fact that they belong to the mismatched elements of speech and denote concepts that are not known and not understood by other cultures. The purpose and objectives of the study is to analyze the features and problems of rendering the realia or culture-bound terms of the English-speaking countries in the translations of prose and poetry. The methods of synthesis and generalization of information on the studied topic based on the analysis of theoretical sources were used in the article.
The article has reviewed and interpreted the concepts of realia, and identified the main challenges and techniques of translating English realia into Ukrainian. The classifications of a number of well-known linguists have been proposed and correlated. Thus, linguist-researcher J. Beardsley defines the concept of realias as objects of material culture, serving a basis for the nominative meaning of the word. As a linguistic phenomenon, realias are categorized as non-equivalent vocabulary. Many translators have different thoughts on this subject. E.M. Vereshchahin and V.H. Kostomarov call them "the words of the content which cannot be compared with any other language lexical concept." According to V.S. Alekseev, realities are tokens denoting the realias of life and social life, specific to any people, country or locality. R.K. Miniyar-Beloruchev believes that realias are the objects, events, traditions and customs that make up the specificity of the social community, an ethnic group. C. Vlakhov and S. Florin state that these words are called objects typical of one nation. According to H.D. Tomakhin the proper names could be the realias as well. Such researchers as O.D. Shveitser, V.M. Komisarov, L.K. Latyshev, S. Vlakhov, S. Florin and T.O. Kazakova offer various methods of translating the realias. Their cassifications state that the most common ways of translating realias are transliteration, transcription, calquing and descriptive translation.O.D. Shveitser believes that conveying the realias is provided by methods of transliteration, calquing and explanatory translation. V.M. Komisarov offers a peculiar classification of correspondences that are created by an interpreter in translating an equivocal vocabulary.
Based on the analysis of theoretical sources, we have presented our own definition of the concept of realia: these are lexical units that express the national characteristics of the people using realia, reflect the historical development and color, territorial structure, specific features of life, culture, and are difficult to translate due to the fact that they do not have the appropriate lexical units in the speech structures of other peoples. Realias, which represent the non-equivalent vocabulary, have no match in the language of translation, and therefore represent a translation problem. The main ways of translating the realias are the translation transformations, which include transcription and transliteration, calquing, lexical-semantic modification (narrowing – specification, expansion – generalization, emphasis – neutralization, functional substitution, descriptive translation, translation commentary. Resolving the issue of choosing a particular technique in translating realias directly depends on the task that the translator faces – to preserve the coloring of a language unit with possible loss of semantics or to convey the meaning of an unknown realia, while losing coloring. The examples discussed in the article show which techniques are most often used by translators, and reveal some of the shortcomings of certain techniques, as well as the proposed translation options.
Also, in the article the ways of translating the realia into Ukrainian have been proposed. The results obtained generalize the findings of the prior researchers, and can be used as a basis for further research on the topic.
Full Text:
PDF (Українська)References
Alekseeva, I.S. (2004). Vvedenie v perevodovedenie [Introduction to translation studies]: Ucheb. posobie dlya stud. filol. i lingv fak. vyssh. ucheb. Zavedenij / I.S. Alekseeva. Saint Petersburg: Philological faculty of SPbHU, 352.
Vereshchahin, E.M. (2005). Yazyk i kultura [Language and culture] / E.M. Vereshchahin, V.G. Kostomarov. Moscow: Indrik, 1038.
Vlakhov, S. (1986). Neperevodimoe v perevode [Untranslatable in translation]. Monografiya / S. Vlahov, S. Florin. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola, 384 p.
Kazakova, T.A. (2002). Prakticheskie osnovy perevoda [Practical foundations of translation] / T.A. Kazakova. – Saint Petersburg: Soyuz, 319.
Min'yar-Beloruchev, R.K. (1999). Kak stat' perevodchikom [How to become a translator] / R.K. Min'yar-Beloruchev. – M.: «Gotika», 176.
Tomakhin, H.D. (1988). Realii-amerikanizmy [Reality-Americanisms]: posobie po stranovede-niyu / G. D. Tomahin. – M.: Vysshaya shkola, 239.
Shveitser, A.D. (1988). Teoriya perevoda. Status, problemy, aspekty [Theory of translation. Status, problems, aspects]. / A.D. Shveitser. Moscow: Nauka, 212.
Beardsley, J. (1982). Translation as an activity and a profession [Translation as an activity and a profession] / J. Beardsley. Ann Arbour, 120.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.