Тranslation
Introduction.
Translation is a mean of
interlingual communication. The translator makes possible an exchange of
information between users of different languages by producing in the target
language a text which has an identical communicative value with the source
text. This target text is not fully identical with the source text as to its
form originality content due to the limitations imposed by the formal and
semantic differences between the source language and target text.
National coloring of the work is one
of examples of these differences. Now it is one of important themes to be studied/
During many years the USSR’s confines were closed and we had not much
opportunity to interact with many foreign countries. Of course, we had a great
number of foreign books but most of them were either classic books or books of
working class. So we had not opportunity to value all the literature of foreign
countries. the same case was in the foreign countries when they could not get
all the variety of Russian literature. They also preferred to read our
classics. The result of it was that they could know only archaic coloring of
the works and they had little information about national coloring of Russia.
And now then USSR does not exist any more every state that was a part of the
USSR can perform its own literature and hence national coloring.
The author of this course paper
considers that every literature work has its own national coloring. Every work
is written in the conditions of the country where the author lives. Therefore
the country with its language, mode of life, political, historical, economical
atmosphere and many other factors influence on the work and it acquires the
national coloring of the country even if the author does not think of creating
of any work that would be nationally colored.
The author of this course paper
considers the preservation of national coloring to be one of the most difficult
tasks for translator. National coloring is the property of the country or its
part. Every nation is proud of its history; traditions and it would consider an
offence if the translator does not manage to convey the national coloring or if
he conveys it wrong. That is why the translator must be very attentive and
careful with any kind of literary work.
Dialectics of
national coloring in the translation.
Any literary work appears on the
national ground, reflects national problems, features and at the same time the
problems common to all mankind. Passing from one nation to another literature
enriches and extends the notion of peoples about each other.
It is one of the most difficult
cases to convey national coloring. Owing to the translation very important
literary works were able to appear in many other countries and became available
for people speaking other languages. The translation helps mutual knowing and
peoples' enrichment.
National coloring must be reflected
adequately in the translation.
Dialectics of national coloring
reveals itself specifically in different fields of spiritual culture of people
and thus in various types of translation.
In the scientific and technique
literature the national psychological categories are less expressed. The
contents of such translations is valuable for all nations in spite of their
national specific.
Thus, for example, concerning
natural sciences Darwin's theory or classic physics of Newton or modern physics
of Einstein or Bore have the same meaning for all the countries and nations.
The original texts of natural-scientific works and their translations do not
differ much from this point of view.
Here there is another case in the
field of social-political literature. It is closely connected with the
ideological society of the country with its history and its historical
specifics and it can never be separated from country peculiarities and demands,
political conditions, the events of its time and it is changed by the factors
that reflect the notion development. National peculiarities, problems and
interests put impress both on the contents and style of any author. In general
the translation of social-political literature is more similar with scientific
literature.
Comparing the works of J. Steinbeck,
J. Austin and others we shall see the specific of author's personality and
country specific.
The national beginning of one or
another country reflected in its literature culture and in written culture that
is especially interesting for us from the translation point of view is the
aggregate of characteristic peculiarities and features that are specific for
this nation and the constant historical development of this nation.
It also has common to all mankind,
international character to which historical conditions give its own national
coloring, its self-expression. That is why we speak about national specific
character that was formed in the certain historical, social, geographic and
other conditions of this country. This specific character has enough concrete
expression where one or another sign is predominant and that is seen in one or
another nation form. There is national originality reflected in the literature
and other fields of social science and it has the more significance the more it
is rich in content, progressiveness, brightness: other nations are enriched
meeting with it discovering something new, interesting, useful and important
for them in this specific character.
The difficulties while translating
are connected most of all with conveyance of national character of one or
another work: the brighter it reflects national life the more illuminate
characteristic situations the more difficult for the translator to find
adequate functional figurative means.
It will be enough to recollect the
difficulties that the translator faced with translating wonderful works of
outstanding American writer John Steinbeck. Steinbeck is not only a deeply
national, original writer but also a modern writer. His creative work could
appear only in our days. Many translators mark out originality of his feature
world and that is why the originality of his language and style and the
specific usage of popular speech and dialectisms. For example: It’s the grapes!
– Вот это жизнь! Got to blow town. – Mне пора сматываться из города. Steinbeck often uses parallel
literary words and its dialect synonyms. For example: dish also translated into
Russian as красотка, деваха, jazz is translated as болтовня, брехня, болтология.Therefore, the translator must determine
national peculiarities of the contents and the form (that is language
peculiarities, melodies, rhyme and so on) and substitute national figurative
means (realias, poetic images) for others that are equivalents to the firsts in
their national determination to convey its national contents. The task of the
translator is to find and rail the essence of national peculiarities and
specific character. Correct conveying of these nationality elements opens the
way to reveal internationality in the work. The popular speech, dialectisms,
social coloring, realias in Steinbeck’s works do not only total the basing of
his original stylistics but also express certain over-text or behind-the-text
peculiarities of his work, modern feelings system, the exclusive rich fantasy,
deep thoughts, piercing visible and spiritual words, plastic gift and ability
of transformation. All of these are united into complete combination of
original artistic picture of life together with unique intellectual
foreshortening of views on it. For example: Don’t you have a silly bone in your
body? - Неужели у вас
нет ни капли юмора?
Therefore it is not possible to
create only conveying realias, social coloring and so on to display of national
character while translating. It can be got only if the translator is able to
create the combination of varied forms of national character in the creative
work of one author or another in his works. National coloring is not an
appendix in the work but it is one of its main parts that total the work
structure.
Originality and specific character
do not show that the work cannot be translated but they show the creative
character of the translation process. World literature knows many examples when
translators managed to convey all the originality of works and these
translations became masterpieces as their originals. Originality, national
coloring of the work is not lost in the succeed translations and that is one of
the main principals of creative translation activity. National coloring like
everything in the world is in the constant movement. Here the translation ‘s
role is enriched with one positive moment. His task is to carry this constantly
changing stability to readers of other nations. It is interesting that for some
works this process lasts more than ten years till the form is adopted and
reconstructed.
Reconstruction of national coloring
in the translation very often depends on the prevailing methods used in
different literary schools.
The volume of the translation is not
underlining of national specifics of origin text but it is the creation of its
truly wholeness, finding of adequate concrete form that is to help to show the
unity of national and common to all mankind coloring in the origin.
Translator must convey adequately
the national character connected with the real representation of life. It means
that he must know social conditions and nation development whose literature he
translates, he must know and understand the specific spiritual way of life,
find explanations of problems caused with peculiarities of this nation and
originality of his development. For example, the figure of Marullo in John
Steinbeck’s novel The winter of our discontent is a collective figure of one of
the representatives of Italian emigrant in America who became rich in the
period of 20-s years. Such figures were in many other works of that period and
like them Marullo is the bearer of common for native Americans problems but at
Steinbeck’s work this figure differs with his national and artistic
originality, caused by peculiarities of American emigrants development at that
period.
What does every translator imply and
what kind of tasks are in front of him? Why does he begin to translate works
from another national literature?
At first he must know and understand
the individuality, unique of figures. Every artistic figure is unique according
to its nature and irrespective of its national origin.
Secondly he must know and understand
the essence of figures and ideas of works of social class.
Thirdly he must take into account
the national originality reflected in the work: its plot, form, images, style,
language etc.
Fourthly he must reveal
international coloring of the work that is significant for different countries,
states and nations elements.
Fifthly he must reveal elements
common to all mankind irrespective of their belonging to any country, epoch,
and nation.
National and international, folk and
common to all mankind activities are tightly connected with each other and
perform the complicate dialectic unity.
Translation is not only outward form
of these mutual relations; it is also dialectic unity of the national and
international coloring of its essence.
The point of the translation is a
bridge between national and international coloring. That is why its main
function is the turning of spiritual values of one nation into the property of
other nations; translation is transmission assisting to mutual penetration and
influence of national cultures. In our days we can be witnesses of the powerful
aspiration to mutual knowing, intellectual and spiritual communication. Every
nation culture goes out the limits of its own country. Its relations with
cultures of other nations development on multilateral basis, they become more
and more all embracing, acquiring bigger significance.
It is easy to note that major part
of themes and problems in the different national literature coincide. But
treatment to these themes and solutions of these problems are various and
original in the works of different cultures. For example the theme of
Motherland in three poems of A. Block, R. Burns and I. R. Beher.
Common to all mankind theme of
Motherland these three poets express in different ways: their lyrical
characters express their feelings differently and have different notions of
Motherland. Ideal of Motherland in these poets' minds was formed in the
different nations and spiritual environment. Originality of their attitude and
artistic representation, originality of expressive means are the result of
environment and other factors.
For Russian poet Alexander Block his
Motherland is the most desirable dream, hope that it will be the place of his
last rest. In his poem Russia embodies its beautiful nature; for Robert Burns
Motherland is associated with the figure of the mother's sadness missing her
sons who fight for the freedom and will never come back; in Beher's poem we do
not hear cry but anger and appeal to revenge for the outraged and ashamed
Motherland. Grief, ache, anger and love are lyrical moods common to these three
poets.
But for this specific feature in the
expression of common to all people feeling of love to Motherland these poems
would lose their concrete character.
International character in spiritual
literature does not exist abstractly; in every national culture it acquires
concrete forms. It is this dialect that must become ruling principle in the
translating activity. The translator must convey truly both components on this
unity keeping in his mind the frequent absence of confines between national and
international coloring because they interlace with each other.
The translator only conventionally
finds and marks out national, social, individual, international, common to all
mankind coloring.
They cannot be separated in any
artistic work. Their separating leads to the art destroying. if the translator
does not manage to convey this floating it means that he has not able to create
high-quality authentic translation.
Coloring and
erasure of coloring.
The notion of coloring appeared in
the literary criticism terminology and meant a special quality of literary
work, speech characteristic of personage, a special emotional or linguistic
look of separate literary work or an writer’s works, that is all peculiarities
and originalities. Coloring of a word shows its belonging to a certain people,
country, concrete historical epoch.
National (local) and historical
coloring of realia is a new additional meaning to its main signification. A.S.
Pushkin uses realias евнух, гарем, гяур, чубук, щербет in Bahchisaray’s fountain; their specific
coloring gives an oriental coloring to the poem. According to dictionaries щербет is an oriental fruit soft drink and
it differs from lemonade by its regional belonging and it is considered as a
coloring. This neutral word turns into realia owing to relation with this
region. But if an inhabitant of this region who works in the West faces with
this word it gives him an association connected with his motherland, his
recollections and feelings.
It makes us consider coloring a part
of connotative meaning of a realia.
It is appropriate to compare realias
– words with specific national and historical coloring – connotative lexis –
with words deprived of such coloring. We may use two words – bird cherry and
rook. They are only details of nature: bird cherry is a tree that grows in
Northern America, Europe and Asia; and rook is specie of birds from crown
family. These words are not realias because of their wide-spreadness and they
are not connected with people or country. However associations connected with
bird cherry (the height of spring) and rook (expectation of spring) make a
heart of Russian man quicken. He connects their connotatively with realia not
turning them into realia.
Another example touches up some
difficulties translating of the title of famous Russian film Летят журавли into the French language: the French word grue
also means silly girl and a woman of easy virtue.
So they had to substitute the word
“crane” for the word “stork”.
In these examples connotative words
in contradiction to realia have full and significant equivalents.
“Inconvenient” word is often
substituted for its functional analogies. Foe example, bird cherry can be
substituted for early blooming tree or bush – for England it can be substituted
for plum or cherry-tree or even for lilac; instead of rook they can use any
convenient bird. The main idea is to evoke a reader of translated text the same
associations that has a reader of origin text.
The transmission of connotative word
by means of devices that are characteristic feature for the transmission of
realia usually leads to an undesirable results: a corresponding word must evoke
a definite reaction.
Classifying the realia we noted that
realias were allocated according to their place or/and time. It is often happens
that realia that means the same or close material notions can be from different
places and historical rubric: that is, they differ from each other according to
connotative meaning, coloring. For example, supreme organ is called seim in
Poland, Supreme Court in Russia, cortes in Spain and Portugal, Public Meeting
in Bulgaria, bundestag in Germany, rikstaf in Swiss, storting in Norway,
folketing in Denmark, knesset in Israel. All these words mean Parliament and
they do not differ much from each other but their traditional names represent
characteristic national realia. Each of them has its own features that belong
only to it. However, but for these distinctions, national and historical
coloring would not allow substitution for another word in translation. Such
substitution would destroy all coloring, to be more exact; it would lead to
anachronisms and analogisms that can destroy the harmony, so called truth of
life.
It is clearly seen when such close
in meaning word like хайдутин and клефт are
compared. Both of them mean peasant-partisans who fought against Turkish
ruling; both of them mainly attacked local Turkish feudalists and
representatives of Turkish Administration, and also their landowners who called
them “thieves” or “bandits”; both of them acted in the same historical epoch
(the time of Osman Dominion on the Balkans). These dates about клефт are related with хайдутин; the only difference is that хайдутин is Bulgarian and клефт is Greek. But it is enough to be
impossible to translate хайдутин as клефт.
Connotations and coloring are part
of meaning that means they can be translated equal with semantic content of a
word. If a translator managed to convey only a semantic lexical unit the
translated text lost its coloring for the reader.
But there are cases when connotation
of a realia dies down, erasures. Such erasure logically leads to the turning of
realia into common, uncolored word.
To distinguish this phenomenon from
loss of coloring in a translation we use a term “erasure” of coloring or
connotation (erased reality).
Some exotic words can be adopted by
language and lose their exotic character.
To lose its status realia must lose
quality that differs it from a common word, that is loss of coloring. Here are
some examples.
1. It will take much time to turn
proper realia such as Russian пирожок into national uncolored, neutral word entered in the kitchens and
languages of many countries and to make people forget its strange origin.
Related to a strange realia it will
also take much time to adopt it into a language. It can turn into usual
borrowing in the result of intensive usage of this object in private life
depriving it both original national coloring and a kind of alliance.
It seems that international and
regional realias are to lose their status of realia at first owing to their
wide-spreadness. Many international realias go around the world without losing
their national originality. For example, the names of money. There is another
case with regional realias. Their national coloring is almost equal to national
but it is limited by its regional belonging. For example, “the eastern
coloring” is close to Syrian, Turkish and Egyptian etc. All above-mentioned
regarding to proper realias is equal for national and regional realias.
2. These are the general
considerations about coloring erasure or color keeping that depends on peoples
and countries. But there are positions where color erasure depends on proper
realia and its function in speech.
Often the realias can have an
extended meaning in the context.
3. Sometimes a realia can be used in
a text not in the direct but in the figurative meaning. For example щербет can be used in Bulgarian language
as an adjective in the meaning of something oversweet and it is almost similar
with Russian сироп.
In general we may say about realia
using in the figurative meaning in all cases of their usage as tropes, metaphor
and comparison. When an author says about mushroom’s cap “about two kopecks
size” he does not mean a kopeck as a kind of money but only its two signs: its
size and its round form, so the kopeck here has only word cover.
For example, when an author
describes land that is flat like a pan-cake he takes only one characteristics
of a pan-cake: its flatness and plane and Russian reader even does not think
about pan-cake as a food but it is only an image that author promoted with the
help of trope.
The same with “stone jungles” and
“cowboys of cold war” etc.
Some adjectives derived from
mentioned realias can be literary comparisons and metaphors. Using such words
as богатырский, стопудовый, аршинный, саженный at first we look at their figurative meaning,
certain signs but not on their sign as a realia: for example, пудовый means very heavy, грошовый means very unimportant, cheap.
4. Among these examples there were
phraseological units and set expressions as well, where realias lose their
status more often than in the mentioned cases.
In these four cases realias are to
lose their coloring that is the status of ralia is to turn into common language
unit. However, if we look more attentively we shall see that a total erasure is
not possible. If it happens it will be an exception.
For example, macaroni (international
realia) and tyubeteyka (regional realia). Macaroni, also spaghetti entered in the
languages by way of transcription. These words appeared in the languages having
kept the meaning of national Italian dish. The best example is Italian scornful
nickname baked macaroni pudding. Tyubeteyka also did not lose its oriental
coloring in spite of its wide-spreadness in the USSR and even on Gorky’s and
Kuprin’s heads reminds East.
One should take into account all
above-mentioned choosing a translation style in these cases.
The transcription is usual way of
translation of such words. Ruble, macaroni, tyubeteyka keep their form after
translation.
Another case when realia is wrong
used or when it is a part of phraseologism. Right translation is stipulated
with finding the most concordant and equivalent words that is usually deprived
of coloring in the translation as a usual lexical unit. For example, вершок in Goncharov’s story is translated
into the English language as a miserable part. Дюйм translated from English inch is a realia but
it also may have an extended meaning.
Realia preservation in trope
function (comparison, juxtaposition, metaphor etc.) could mean the volume
definition of one thing unknown by author. If, for example, an English faces
with two kopecks coin with the help of that we define a size of mushroom cap in
Russian translation he would never know the mushroom size. Here a realia almost
totally lost its natural coloring: in one language a reader almost does not
understand its meaning, seeing only the given quality indicator. Transcription
is possible in two languages only as an exception, for example, international
realia that indicator is known in both languages. But it is easier to translate
a realia as a neutral function equivalent because in the original text realia
is used without connotative meaning.
But even in the third and fourth
positions realia is kept. For example, translating comparison we usually
substitute a strange realia for ours: it is not always convenient to use such
phrases as как блин. The same is with a realia that
forms phraseologism.
In conclusion one should notice that
translating a realia in one or another means it is wanted to lose a trope and
accordingly phraseologism. Trope should be transferred by tropes, phraseologism
by phraseologism; only “fulling” will differ from origin one.
5. There are many cases of realia
translation in the comparison when the realia not only loses its coloring but
also receives excessive connotation and they are wide-spread. An author
compares the contents of strange realia with his own realia. And in a
translation one notion is happened to be denoted with the two realias: internal
and external. What should a translator do to convey the content of realia
without coloring losing?
There are some theoretical variants.
At first a translator should
transcribe each separate realia. For example, we can face with such translation
from the Czech language: “In the evening a young teacher couple … invited us
for barbecue. It reminded us our evening by the camp fire where we did not do
shpekachkis.” These two words: barbecue and shpekachkis are explanations of one
unknown word by another.
At second place a translator can
substitute an internal realia for his proper realia. For example, he should
substitute shpekachkis - for a regional realia – Caucasus shashlik. As a result
a reader would be able to get more clear notion about Australian dish (barbecue
is a Haitian word that was taken by the English language from Spanish and then
was borrowed by Australian). But a reader would be astonished hearing from
Czech about “evenings with shashlik”. Theoretically this variant is more
vicious because it leads to mixture of different realias that belong to
different nations.
The third possibility is to refuse
transcription of both realias and to convey their contents with the help of
descriptive translation that approximately can sound so: “… in the evening we
were invited for a picnic that reminded us our evenings by a camp fire and we
ate meat grilled on a spit.” But this translation deprives the text of
Australian coloring.
And, at last, the fourth variant
consists in transcription of external realia and conveying internal realia with
its functional equivalent. And we shall have the next sentence: “In the evening
… a young teacher pair invited us for barbecue. It reminded us our evenings by
camp fire when we ate meat grilled on a spit.”
The last variant is considered to be
more successful because the translation is true and the translator managed to
keep coloring having transcribed main realia.
In Margaret Aliger’s notes “Chilean
summer” we face with more difficult case: “… it is possible to eat here, one
woman bakes pies – empanados. Empanados is something similar with chebureks,
they are very hot, tasty and big.” Here we have three realias: the main
external Spanish - empanados that is explained as Russian national pies and one
regional Caucasus – chebureks. In the translation one should keep the main
realia because it stands in the center of the author’s attention and other
realias should be substituted for neutral.
Analogisms and
anachronisms.
Let’s suggest that a translator
working at a novel about Indian life decides to use only means of his own
language, without admitting strange realias and he substitutes pagoda for
temple, sari for dress or national suit, akhoby he substitutes for man-launder,
etc. As a result of such national coloring extermination specific Indian
features of the novel will vanish: it will be possible to consider any place as
a place of act or this place is neutral, uncolored, nameless country. This
method leads to coloring losing that spoils very much any translation. The mark
of this translation is bad.
But it is worse when a translator
substitutes origin realias for realias from his own language. Doing it he also
substitutes coloring of the translated work for a strange coloring. If we wear
a Kazak in Bulgarian aba or anteria, tsarvulis, iamurluk, if we make him drink
a wine from buklista and to eat banitsa, a reader will recognize a Sofian shope
but not a Kazak.
And it will be the worst translation
when a translator conveys original means of motley words of different coloring
and when a mixture of realias takes place. For example, translated into Russia
novel For Freedom by St. Dichev. A redactor substitutes Bulgarian, Turkish,
Greek and other realias for regional and national realias of Soviet Union.
Historical realias he substitutes for modern words. Therefore Bulgarian gadulka
was turned into Ukraine bandura, gamurluk was turned into Caucasus burka,
pastarma was described as dried meat and Bulgarian banitsa was conveyed as
Russian pie. Several historical notions closely tied up with Bulgarian culture
have totally lost their national content. As a result of such vicious attitude
to the realias translation a reader gets unclear, contradictory notions about
described reality; the novel loses its cognitive meaning and bright national
coloring and considerable part of its literary merits. Here we speak about
distortion of original images in the result of substitution of national and
historical realias for not characteristic to it realias, in other words, about
leading to analogisms and anachronisms in a text. Analogisms and anachronisms
are realias that do not correspond to local and time surrounding of origin
text.
For example, we face with the word
guillotine in the Bulgarian translation of Sheakspear’s work: “Essex slowly
mounted the guillotine.” The mistake is not very grave from temporal point of
view. There already existed the machine for execution in XVI – XVII centuries
in Italy and Scotland and also in France where Duke de Monmorancy was beheaded
with the help of such machine. The mistake is that famous doctor Josef Ignak
Giyoten invented his machine that got his name only 200 years later. Here we
see the translator’s history unknowing. Of course, the word scaffold should be
used there. We can see it from the context: “ He slowly mounted…” One can never
mount the guillotine but only scaffold.
The reason of such mistakes
regarding national and historical coloring is connected with author’s or
translator’s personality, his unknowing of real facts and historical situation
and sometimes their unknowing of some principal positions of theory
translation, for example, about bad results of strange realia substitution for
a realia from translator’s native language.
Conclusion.
In 1827 Goethe wrote that
translating labor was and remains one of the most important and worthy matters
connecting the entire universe together. These words characterize translator as
creative person who carries works beyond the limits of one national culture and
who serves to people giving these fruits of this culture, created in new
language form or vice versa, including achievements of other nations in his
national science and culture. It is one of the evidences of the huge human role
of translation in the history of human civilization.
Every national culture solving its
problems carries its contribution in treasuring house of literature creating
something that belongs only to it, has significance for all nations and proves
that there are not small or big nations or inferior languages.
Extending of national culture
confines with the help of translation has a great positive and enriching
influence on the language. It is true that together with the translation many
new ideas, discoveries, notions and so on penetrate in the language and it
leads to the appearance of new language elements and figurative meanings. This
fact is very important while translating from literary language that is not
fully developed. Therefore the literary language enriches figurative
possibilities, national culture, and spiritual development of this nation.
Creative beginning of translation is premise of creative attitude to native
language, its source of faith in its possibilities and beauty. Concerning this
point the translator also has another task to defend his native speech from
borrowings-parasites that clog and make it ugly, from strange forms that
artificially could crowd out its own national coloring.
The task and mission of the
translator especially the translator of feature literature is defense of the
riches and beauty of the native language, its unlimited abilities to convey all
that is kept in the greatest masterpieces of world literature.
Translated literature can also be
the indicator of condition, degree of development of national language.
Poetical translation of Shakespeare’s works by Boris Pasternak that are very
rich, refined and expressive in language might not appear if Russian language of
his time remained on the same level of development. In this case concrete
condition of our national language at the times of B. Pasternak can be put as
condition and factor of development of poetical and translating talent and vice
versa Pasternak's works are great contribution in the development of Russian
language.
The level of translated literature,
the quality of translation also assists to the development of national
beginning in the literature of nation.
"National beginning of
literature, - I. R. Beher wrote, - is defined with the fact of preservation,
proceeding and creative development of other literatures. The choice of
elements that adopt it from literature of other nations shows its own character
and is judged if its indeed national originality no."
Список литературы
Влахов
С., Флорин С. Непереводимое в переводе. Реалии. "Министерство
Перевода". Сборник статей. 1969. М., "Советский писатель", 1970.
Лилова
А. Введение в общую теорию перевода. "Высшая школа" М., 1985.
Бархударов
Я. С., Рецкер Я. И. Курс лекций по теории перевода. М., Изд-во I МГПИПЯ, 1968.
Комиссаров
В. Н. Слово о переводе. М., "Международные отношнния". 1973.
Комиссаров
В., Рецкер Я., Тархов В. Пособие по переводу с английского языка на русский.
Часть I М., Изд-во литературы на иностранных языках, 1960; Часть II М.,
"Высшая школа", 1965.
Левицкая
Т.Р., Фитермян А. М. Пособие по переводу с английского языка на русский. М.,
"Высшая школа", 1973.
Толстой
С.С, Основы перевода английского языка на русский, М., 2957.
Фёдоров
А.В. Русские писатели и проблемы перевода. Л., 1960.
Левик
В. "Мастерство перевода", М., 1959.
Гачечиладзе
Т. Художественный перевод и литературные взаимосвязи. М., "Советский
писатель", 1972.
Бархударов
Л. С. Язык и перевод. М., 1975.
Комиссаров
В. Н. Теория перевода. М., "Высшая школа", 1990.
Фёдоров
А. В. Основы общей теории перевода. – М., 1983.
Швейцер
А.Д. Теория перевода. – М., 1988.
Латышев
Л.К. Курс перевода (эквивалентность перевода и способы её достижения). – М.,
1981.
Для
подготовки данной работы были использованы материалы с сайта http://www.monax.ru