The Role of Grammatical Transformations While Translating

THE MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF

THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

THE MOSCOW POWER ENGINEERING INSTITUTE

(TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY)

The Institute of Linguistics

Department of Applied Linguistics and Translation Techniques

DIPLOMA PAPER

Speciality: Translation and Translation Techniques

Subject: “The Role of Grammatical Transformations While Translating

(based on “For Whom The Bell Tolls” by Ernest Hemingway)”

Performedby: DruzhininNikita

Supervisor: DorohinaM. .

Moscow 2009

Abstract

The present thesis focuses on the Role of Grammatical Transformations on the basis of the novel “For Whom The Bell Tolls” by Ernest Hemingway. It comprises the introductory part, three subject chapters – lexical, morphological and grammatical transformations, and the conclusion.

Chapter 1 overviews basic terminology and aims of the thesis and refers to the works of such scholars as Matuzkova E.P., Shekhovtseva M.D., Frolov A.A., Shveitser L.D., Levitskaya T.R., Fiterman A.M., Barhudarov L.S., Komissarov V.K., Vinogradov V.S., and Arturo Pascual. The first chapter outlines the scheme of the following chapter defining levels of analysis in translation.

Chapter 2 begins with highlighting the importance of preserving the structure of the source text and induces explanation of the author’s literary style whose novel laid the basis of the thesis practical parts. The chapter involves practical research of three types of transformations. Each subdivision on transformation type points out the most typical transformations as in translation practice as in the understudied novel in particular. The chapter ends with the table containing the most typical transformation with certain examples.

The conclusion underlines the result of the research carried out. It defines the main role of transformations techniques and marks the reason for those transformations.

Introduction

Translation implies correct and comprehensive rendering what is expressed in one language by means of the other language. [4] The present work is focused on the grammatical transformations that are vital while converting linguistic units of the source text into the text of the target language.

According to the definition by V.N. Komissarov, literary translation is such a kind of translation, which is supposed to create a literary text in the target language and influence the reader emotionally and aesthetically. For this reason a lot of critics believe that the literary translation is a piece of art, which is dominated by masters only who follow only aesthetic criteria while making a translation. The reasons mentioned afore give the ground to consider the literary translation to be as a linguistic phenomenon as a literary one. Literary translation is not supposed to give exact translation of the original text but to render the meaning and the message in order to make the translated text more artistic. [5]

The present thesis is focused on the matter of grammatical transformations and in particular their role in translation of any text whether it be literary work or text of business and technical contents. Relevance of the thesis
concerns the fact that grammatical transformations are an inseparable part while translating a text of any complexity. While translation, the first mean that a translator employs is grammatical transformation, thus, converting the sentence of the source language into the sentence of the target language. Nowadays quality of translation faces high standards. That’s why analysis of different aspects of translation is vital in order to perfect translation techniques and mastering translator’s skills. The notion of Russian English
is rather well known among translators and people who deal with translation. Russian English is considered as a kind of translation drawback. As soon as polemics on Russian English
appeared, translators of the country started to pay more attention to the quality of translations and the ways of getting rid of Russian English manner of translating
, which implies overuse of Russian grammatical constructions while translating into English and few transformations. That is exactly the reason why consideration of all possible grammatical transformations is so vital to advance and perfect translator’s skills. But it is necessary to study out the essence and the notion of grammatical transformations and what aspects are associated with it.

The matter is that the internal structure of the original language and the target language may differ considerably. Thus, grammatical transformations are very crucial in this respect.
These differences of the languages are the main reason of grammatical transformations. Such differences can be partial or absolute. Absolute differences can be observed when the Russian language lacks a grammatical form, which is present in the English language, or on the contrary. There are cases when a grammatical category of one language is broader than that of the other. Sometimes when the principal parts of the sentence are replaced, the complete grammatical transformation takes place. When the subordinate parts of the sentence are replaced, here we have partial grammatical transformation. But more often these kinds of transformation take place simultaneously. It is worth mentioning that there are cases when one or another grammatical category is present in both languages but does not coincide in all forms.

According to Chernyakhovskaya L.A., different syntax of Russian and English is one of the major reasons for grammatical transformations. In addition, different linguistic means emphasize the communicative message of the sense-groups, which employ various parts of the sentence. So, the English subject, which is usually in the beginning of the sentence, confers less communicative message in comparison with that of the final parts of the sentence. This phenomenon is associated with theme and rheme
in terms of translation, in particular, in English-Russian translation. So, semantic word order coincides with syntactic division of the sentence into the subject and the predicate (the subject is theme, the predicate is rheme) concerning rise of the communicative message. It is the factor, which is the reason for syntactic transformations while translating from Russian into English and backwards. For instance, the Russian thematic group that has free syntax is translated as the subject into English; this transformation helps to keep the message of the sense group. While translating it is necessary to bear in mind that an English speaking reader intuitively perceives the beginning of the sentence as the nucleolus information.

Grammatical features of linguistic units involve a range of linguistic phenomena: word form, word combination, sentence, word order, grammatical meaning of forms, context functions of forms and meanings. When translating, one should take into account not only the message that a linguistic unit communicates but also its grammatical features, which can influence considerably the structure of the whole sentence being translated.

One should consider all the factors, which can influence the use of grammatical transformations:

· Syntactic function of the sentence;

· Lexical background, and lexical contents:

· The way of implying the message:

· Context (background) of the sentence;

· Expressive and stylistic function.

Due to the logical structure of the sentence, a translator should not only change but also sometimes keep the foreign construction when it concerns exact rendering of the logical stress of the message. Contextual background of the sentence may also require its grammatical transformation. Such examples can be observed mostly while translating English period and a range of sentences beginning with one and the same personal pronoun.

Translation transformations are subdivided into lexical and grammatical ones according to units of the source language that are considered as initial units in the process of transformation.

A translator very often starts translation with a word, in particular, with changing its form that is why the issues of word formation, creation of new words, are of special importance for the process of translation.

The necessity or importance of grammatical transformations has certain consequences. Abundant transformation causes free translation resulting in misinterpretation, incomprehensibility and artificial style. On the other hand, lack of translation transformations results in over-literal rendering. L.K. Latyshev defined the subject as follows: “ A translator who does not have enough experience in translating may carry to excess in two ways: the first is literal copying of the source text stemmed from unclear understanding of what is exact translation; and the second is extremely free translation with great number of unreasoned transformations as a result of avoiding literalism. In terms of Grammar understanding the sentence is to identify it with an appropriate pattern or a model. In other words, it means understanding the way that sentence is made up”. [17]

The matter of word-formation techniques and transformations is considered in linguistics concerning translations of scientific and socio-political texts. It mostly concerns the fact that new formations are typical of the above listed genres (different types of neologisms, for instance). In this regard there is not much attention paid to the peculiarities of word building transformations while translating a literary work.

The subject of the research
is the role of grammatical transformations, classification of the basic word-building, morphological and syntactical transformations in translation from the Source language (English) into the Target Language (Russian), pointing out typical difficulties to achieve equivalent translation and, if possible, finding the ways of achieving it, frequency of using certain grammatical transformations and defining their role in translation, in particular, in the literary text to render the author’s style and emotional background of the literary work
, etc.

The main way of solving the problem set
is comparative and contrastive method and analysis of translator’s decisions with contextual background taken into account. The basic material of the present thesis
is the novel “For Whom the Bell Tolls” by Ernest Hemingway.

The purposes determined the structure of the thesis. It includes the introductory part, three chapters with thematic sections and the conclusion.

Chapter 1

1.1. Overview of Basic Terminology and Aims

Prior to discussing any problem or aspect, it is necessary to define clearly the subject itself and a range of means, which describe this particular subject. Translation is not an exception and always has to be defined according to the aims, which a researcher persuades. The present work is focused on the grammatical means of translation, which also have their diversity and peculiarities.

Nowadays there is a number of linguistic theories concerning translation and interpreting as activity of transforming lingual units of one language into lingual units of the other language. Various scholars suggest different ways of understanding translation. Some suggest considering translation as a kind of psychological process, others think it to be based on grammar rules and norms of linguistics interlaced with cultural peculiarities of the source and the target language. Worksandinvestigationsofthefollowingscholarswereusedforthepresentthesis: Матузкова Е.П., Шеховцева М.Д., Фролов А.А. «Перераспределение границ предложения и сверхфразовых единств в переводе»; Швейцер Л.Д. «Теория перевода: статус, проблемы, аспекты»; Левицкая Т.Р., Фитерман А.М. «Пособие по переводу с английского языка на русский»; Бархударов Л.С. «Язык и перевод»; Мизецкая В.Я. «Некоторые особенности перевода англоязычного драматургического текста»; Комиссаров В.К. «Теория перевода»; Виноградов В.С. «Перевод. Общие и лексические вопросы»; Артуро Паскуаль «Эрнест Хемингуэй» - биография и творчество.

Comparative analysis is the most frequent method of studying translation, its quality and pointing out some typical features of translation and estimates the techniques a translator used to reach the target of translation. The present work suggests the following investigation: overviewing the subject of translation, translation techniques, pointing out the principle grammatical transformations – lexical, morphological and syntactical and explaining on particular examples which role this or that type of transformation employed plays there. Thus, it will create the foundation to define the transformation role for each concrete example and then generalize it as a conclusion. All the theoretical material and terminology which precede the practical part of the thesis will be used for commenting each particular example.

As a means of interlingual communication, translation is a transfer of meaning across cultures. More specifically, translation is the process and result of creating in a target, or translating, language (TL) a text, which approximately the same communicative value as the corresponding text in the source language (SL). The target text, or translation, that is created by the translator never perfectly reflects, either in meaning or tone, the original source text (ST). The form and content of the original and its translation differ. This is due to the constraints imposed on the translator by formal and semantic differences between the source language and the target language. Nevertheless, the users of the target language usually accept a translation as a functional, structural, and semantic equivalent of the original. Even a very simple translation illustrates formal and semantic difference between the original and its translation. Leaving aside considerations of context, the English sentence “The student is reading a book” can be translated as “Студентчитаеткнигу”. On a formal, or grammatical level, the Russian sentence is devoid of the meaning of the articles and the present continuous tense. The Russian sentence does not contain any explicit indication that a specific student is reading some unspecified book. Nor does it indicate that the process of reading is most likely taking place at the moment of speaking. However the Russian sentence carries some grammatical meaning which is absent in the English sentence. The verb “читает” is marked for person, number and conjugation while the noun “книгу” is feminine and is used in the accusative case. On a semantic level, the Russian sentence also contains some information absent from the English original. Some of the information lost or added in the process of translation may be irrelevant for effective communication and some of the information may be supplied or neutralized by context. It is important to understand that equivalence achieved in translation is relative.

1.2.
Levels of analysis and synthesis in translation

The words “analysis” is of Greek origin. It means “the process of separating something into its constituent parts”. The word “synthesis” is also of Greek origin and means the combination of components to form a connected whole”. The translator is constantly involved in analyzing and synthesizing meaning, both while understanding the source text and creating the target text.

The process of analysis and synthesis in which the translator is involved in takes place at least on 6 levels:

· Word level

· Phrase level

· Clause or sentence level

· Paragraph

· Text level

· Pragmatics, or sociocultural, level

A word is a single distinct meaningful element of speech or writing, used to form sentences with other similar elements. Words are the basic unit of language.

A phrase is a small group of words standing together as a conceptual unit and not containing a finite verb. A finite verb has a specific tense, voice, person and number. It is used in the predicate of a sentence.

A clause is a sentence which is used as part of a compound or complex sentence.

A paragraph is a distinct section of a piece of writing, indicated by a new line, indentation, or numbering.

A text is a written, printed or spoken piece of language regarded as a complete whole in terms of its form and content. A text may consist of one paragraph or, in rare cases, one sentence and word.

Pragmatics is the study of language as it is used in a sociocultural context, including its effect on the participants in the process of communication. The translator must be aware of the situational aspects of language usage in order to produce authentic, i.e. culturally adequate, translations. The translator has to work at all the six levels of text analysis and synthesis at the same time.

1.3. Preserving the meaning structure of the source text

This aspect is vital in terms of preserving the unique author’s style because sometimes the text is the result or a product of some specific author’s technique of writing. For example, Ernest Hemingway was an adept of simple plain style of narration and it would be a translation defect if his literary style was very grandiloquent and pompous in the target language. That’s why the translator must keep in mind the notion of the text structure. “Structure” means “the arrangement of and relations between the parts of something complex”. Any discourse is a complex structure of meaning which is realized at the levels of words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs, and complete texts in a particular sociocultural environment. The relationships between all the levels produce the ultimate effect of gestalt, which is an organized whole perceived as more than the sum of its parts. The ultimate challenge for any translator is to preserve as much of its complex meaning structure in the translation as possible. Sometimes while comparing the source text with the target text, a researcher can see that sometimes the whole passages are omitted. The reasons for such omission can be various but the most common one is that the translator didn’t succeed in finding linguistic means to reflect peculiar sociocultural aspect of the passage. These are usually jokes on politics, specific professional humor typical of a country etc. It is clear that after translation this joke can lose its specific colouring in the target language, but nevertheless it gives a valuable piece of information highlighting the idea to the reader.

In this respect some ways of making translation decisions can be suggested. At the sentence level, the most common transformations every translator makes are:

· Omission

· Addition

· Transposition

· Change of grammatical forms

· Loss compensation

· Concretization

· Generalization

· Antonymic translation

· Meaning extension

· Metonymic translation

· Sentence integration

· Sentence fragmentation.

The most relevant means of translation among the above listed are omission, addition, transposition, sentence integration and sentence fragmentation that are directly connected with the grammatical means of translation. All the rest means can be counted to the stylistic means of translation. The suggested method of investigation
is comparing the source text of Ernest Hemingway’s novel “For Whom the Bell Tolls” with the target translation made by E.Kalashnikova and pointing out cases of employing grammatical transformations.

1.4. Author’s Style and Its Significance for Translation

It is impossible to omit various text peculiarities of extra linguistic importance while translating any text or a literary work. The thesis is based on Ernest Hemingway’s novel “For Whom the Bell Tolls”. It is very important to take into consideration author’s individual literary techniques when a translator chooses any kind of transformation, because any author has his own individual vision of how to create the text and how the reader should interpret it. Ernest Hemingway is among such writers who consider grammatical pattern of the sentence as a part of his artistic design. That is the reason why a translator should get to know the rules which Hemingway intended to imply in his works and the aims he tried to persuade. Otherwise a translator will mislead the reader and fail to preserve the unique style of the author.

Ernest Miller Hemingway (July 21, 1899 — July 2, 1961) was an American novelist, short-story writer, and a journalist. He was a part of the 1920s expatriate community in Paris, as well as the veterans of World War One later known as "the Lost Generation". Hemingway's distinctive writing style is characterized by economy and understatement, in contrast to the style of his literary rival William Faulkner. It had a significant influence on the development of twentieth-century fiction writing. His protagonists are typically stoic men who exhibit an ideal described as "grace under pressure." Many of his works are now considered canonical in American literature. Ernest Hemingway’s literary style is well known and close to linguistic minimalism. But his understatement, scarce speech patterns are only surface impression but in reality every expression is meaningful which should be traced between lines. Hemingway was very resentful against attempts to find any underlying meaning in his works as if something that should be understood was not clear. Nevertheless accentuated detailed description involves numerous symbols. The English writer Syril Conolly wrote about Hemingway’s prose structure: “This style implies that a body tells more than mind does; it is vital to describe such emotions as love, fear, joy of fight, despair and sexual lust but it is extremely poor to imply intellectual ideas”.

In terms of aesthetics Hemingway had an obsession of being objective. According to his concept of literary oeuvre, prose should be perceived on the physical level and it is necessary to expel any signs of intellectual consideration and fantasies. Detailed and very exact description of events must be the guide line and the reader should feel it clearly, not only imagine forms and notions but also inosculate with objects and notions the author suggests.

Hemingway creates such a vivid and effective unity of his creative manner with very scarce means, he is extremely taciturn. In this respect, his style has nothing to do with detailed and grandiloquent literary tradition typical of such American writers as Edgar Allan Poe, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Herman Melville who could be considered as Hemingway’s forerunners in some aspects.

Hemingway, as a writer who started his career with journalism, aspired to freeze and write down the expressive and laconic vernacular language of streets. He anticipated the English writer Syril Conolly’s adage expressed in 1938: “Language of our days is journalistic language, and the secret of journalism is to write as people speak in reality”. Hemingway’s principal technique was to stick to reality and everyday life. When Hemingway was a reporter and a correspondent, he tried to follow the same models as those of literary works implying his inspiration and fantasy into the facts depicted. He was interested in man’s actions, character’s type and atmosphere. That’s why he implied impressionism manner in his literary works which makes a possibility to catch vivid atmosphere the most important principle. Hemingway tried to convey feelings and emotions which are experienced in the course of events, distorting or even omitting information of higher importance. He took a well-known rule of journalism very personally: “ Don’t let the reality spoil good news”. He considered a report as a minor genre of a novelist. [16]

Hemingway wrote articles for two magazines of Oak Park: The trapeze and Tabula. His first experiments of his literary technique involved imitating Jack London’s style and articles in which he patterned himself on Ring Lardner who was a symbol of the entire epoch of the American journalism. Sarcastic, masterly and intentionally vulgar style of Lardner with interrupted phrases was perfect for sport reviews and comments. It is Lardner’s style that Hemingway adopted as a model.

As a result, that he was inclined to such masters of picturesque description as Jack London and Mark Twain was initially combined with his inclination to the newspaper style of writing that was aggressive and straightforward. Besides, he had been reading much the writers who were considered a model of aestheticism – Henry James, William Butler Yeats. These two literary sources formed the creative individuality of Hemingway although they might seem rather controversial ranging between vulgarity and aestheticism.

Like a lot of his contemporaries, Hemingway strived to create such kind of prose which would put an end to the baroque style typical of the 19^th
century. His developing skill of a journalist allowed him to deny grandiloquence and focus on everyday life what resulted in peculiar realism of his literary works emphasizing correspondence with reality as the major principle.

Just after Hemingway got a job at Kansas City Star, he was given a brochure with 10 stylistic requirements pointed out. The editors intended to make all the authors follow common style and set up a single standard of text published where objectivity and laconic language were primary. In brief the requirements were as follows:

· Make up brief, simple and clear phrases;

· Avoid Passive Voice if Active Voice is possible;

· Avoid two words if one is enough;

· Employ descriptive, straightforward and functional language;

· Use verbs which convey more detailed description of an action:

· Avoid adjectives except the cases when they convey exact notion;

· Expel all the grandiloquent adorning;

· Tend to narrate positively describing what really exists but not what could exist. [16]

Speaking about the career of a writer, Hemingway’s contacts with other authors who visited Gertrude Stein and Ezra Pound’s society appeared of more importance though they belonged to the previous generation. For example, Sherwood Anderson whom Hemingway had met before his travel to Paris became his first literary critic. Hemingway was fascinated while reading Anderson’s collection of stories titled “Winesburg, Ohio” (1919) where Anderson implied colloquial language with scarce expressive means. It was Anderson who prompted Hemingway the idea of that it would be impossible to consider the work completed without rereading it several times.

The English writer of the older generation Ford Madox Ford shared his technique flash-back
with Hemingway (retrospective, or a leap into the past). This narrative technique consists in that the actions in the present tell about events in the past. This experience became fundamental for the writer because he lacked the way to convey discontinuity of life events.

It is worth noticing that while reading Hemingway’s works the reader often comes across foreign speech piercing through the entire text as the original as the translated one because translators leave those phrases intact. Many Hemingway’s heroes speak English though English is not their native language; it is supposed that they speak other languages. The author overcomes this difficulty so that native language of a character is easily recognized by its syntactical structure and certain semantic connotations. Hemingway embeds English into expressive structure of the other languages in such a way that one always is able to recognize the English language of a foreigner from that of a native speaker. For example, the Spanish people who speak English in such novels as “Fiesta” and “For Whom The Bell Tolls” or the Italians in “Farewell to Arms!”. This peculiarity is lost in the translated texts because only native speakers of English are able to appreciate it. Hemingway persuades the same purpose when he introduces a lot of foreign words into his texts, mostly Spanish and Italian, thus creating mixed jargon. [16]

Hemingway opted for telegraphic style instead of prolixity. That telegraphic style allowed the author to lighten the character, a subject or an action with bright and brief phrases which are more effective than any additions and explanations. Brief and quick as lightning phrases join one another in a syncopated rhythm, thus, embodying the syntax with scarce means as its principal element. Due to simplicity and abundant repetitions, one can perceive it like ingenuous and awkward prose which is absolutely different from what is generally considered to be fine literature. But what is true is that this style is carefully thought over and very well disciplined.

Few adjectives are one of the characteristic features of Hemingway’s style. The author posed the noun on the top of all the naming means because the noun always conveys the essence of a phenomenon.

He believed that nouns implied the notions and qualities which adjectives described. The reader was free to imagine some others if reader’s personal experience told to do it. Hemingway used adjectives which described only colour, shape, etc.

Hemingway tried to express the reality that everyone could see as much as possible basing on the distinctive character of every situation and searching for the unique method of reflecting the moment and the emotion that this moment bears. The thing is that Hemingway attempted to catch a certain feeling for a reader to perceive with the help of sophisticated technique but he never tried to point what feeling it should be like. In other words, life teaches us to write as well as literature teaches us to live.

Hemingway always tried to evade sublimity, which estranges the author and the subject he writes about and it becomes more abstract. Hemingway aspired to reach the opposite that was to be as close as possible to the matter of description. According to Candido Perez Galliego, Hemingway’s literary style can be defined by 5 principles:

– to prefer what is concealed to what is evident;

– to prefer what is insignificant to what seems grandiose;

– to prefer something momentary to the eternal things;

– to prefer spontaneous to intellectual meaning that it is necessary to escape grandiloquence.

As for the novel “For Whom the Bell Tolls”, the protagonist of Robert Jordan is an American writer who joined the military actions not only for the sake of ideology but also for the sake of moral dogmas. His struggle is aimed at his own liberation. Hi is sure that human solidarity is vital as every person is not an island and the entire humankind feels death or salvation of anyone. That is why he believes that everyone does what he can do. Probably, you are unable to do anything for yourself but you can do something for the other. Besides, the fact that he loves a young Spanish woman Maria who witnessed disasters of the war symbolizes the moral unity against the background of his impending death. Hemingway disappointed Spanish republicans exiled from the country with such a passionate and thoughtful approach to the idea. The republicans expected him to write more bellicose novel. But nevertheless, the reader liked the novel in spite of the fact that this novel marked the beginning of Hemingway’s literary crisis. His unique fresh style that had been considered earlier as a kind of experiment was adopted and imitated by other American novelists and become a common literary technique of any second-rate author. So, Hemingway had nothing to amaze the public. He could not surpass his own expectations and excel his imitators.

So, peculiarities of the author’s literary techniques used in the analyzed novel give ground to consider the following. It is important not only to transform the text in accordance with translation techniques and rules, difference between the source and target languages but also rendering the impression which the author wanted to render for the reader in spite of his or her native language.

The next chapter involves examples of grammatical transformations based on the novel “For Whom the Bell Tolls” and each example will be commented on concerning transformations employed, reasons for transformations chosen and how the translator keeps the author’s style. [16]

Chapter 2

2.1. Lexical Transformations

The matter of lexical transformations is considered in linguistics concerning translation of scientific and social and political texts because new word formations are typical of the above texts (for instance, neologisms of various kind). However, little attention is paid to the features of lexical transformations in terms of literary translation. Mostly, the matter of lexical transformations concerns stylistic norms of the language because lexical transformations are connected mostly with such translation techniques as 1) generalization; 2) omission; 3) concretization; 4) antonymic translation; 5) meaning extension or sense development 6) loss compensation.

Generalization is used when something in the target language is usually expressed using concepts with broader meaning or when the preserving the original concepts with narrower meaning would result in an awkward translation.

The original text contains the Middle English pronoun thee.
The translator usually faces a challenge in such cases because there should be a choice between the archaic word with certain stylistic colouring and certain stylistic generalization, almost neutralization. In this particular case the translator opted for stylistic generalization and her choice might be explained by the historical context. The Russians had certain idea of Spanish guerillas
of that time. If the translator kept the archaic form in the translation, it would sound at least awkward and provoke a smile of the Russian reader. Nevertheless, here the author’s gesture interferes again because Hemingway assigned such awkward phrases to foreigners who spoke English in his works. Thus, English readers could exactly distinguish this inappropriate use of the word thee
. But at the same time, if we know the plot of the novel, we should note that the character, who pronounced How do they call thee
?, respected very much Robert Jordan, the person who this phrase was addressed to. Therefore, we may suggest that such enigmatic usage of the pronoun thee might have double sense. The translation was effected at the word level.

Omission is used when the clause is redundant, from the point of the target language, and would make the target sentence sound unnatural if it were to be translated. There are cases when certain words are just omitted without compensation and mentioning with the help of some lexical units.

Concretization is used when something in the target language is usually expressed using concepts with narrower meaning or when preserving the original concepts with broader meaning would result in awkward translation.

Sometimes concretization causes not only choice of more exact word for translation but also transposition in the sentence and change of syntactical structure of the sentence.

Sometimes a translator adapts rather general word combinations to the context and translates them with more precise meaning than they were implied in the source text. Due to this translator’s decision, the target text becomes clearer and reflects the contextual background better.

Antonymic translation involves translating a phrase or clause containing a negation using a phrase or clause that does not contain a negation or vice versa. Nevertheless, antonymic translation is more related with stylistic devices of translation because it is personal decision of the translator to imply this technique concerning some speech patterns in the source text.

Antonymic transformation concerns word combinations more often. This kind of transformations is effected at the phrase or word combination level.

The whole subordinate clause can be transformed with antonymic translation that proves effectiveness of this method if a translator has the purpose to keep author’s taciturn and laconic style of writing.

So, meaning and use of Russian and English word-building suffixes diverge considerably. Every language has rather productive suffixes, for example, the English suffix –er. “ The suffix –er is capable of forming a noun which means an agent of an action derived from practically any word. <…> That is why verbs are often used when nouns with –er are translated into Russian”.[1]
Actually the following example shows how a translator can apply meaning extension or sense development. It regards the word driver and the way how it was translated. Meaning extension involves translating a cause by its effect or vice a versa.

Translation often practices when one part of speech is converted into other one. An English verbal noun with –er is “frequently and regularly”[2]
converted into a Russian finite verb.

Sometimes a translation technique of addition is used to translate words with –er according to stylistic norms. A translator often uses by his personal view.

While literary translation, one should consider not only word-forming peculiarities but also “rich stylistic resource of the Russian language in comparison with the English language”[6]. This factor should be taken into account when emotional and expressive constructions typical of literary texts are translated. So, a great number of various Russian diminutive, affectionate, pejorative suffixes allow a translator to convey the speaker’s attitude to the subject.

Loss-of-meaning compensation involves adding to or reinforcing a target text in one place to compensate for something that hasn’t been translated in a different place in the source text. Sometimes it can concern the reproduction of certain parallel lexical and syntactical model as it is observed in the examples below.

The considerable part of translator’s work is dedicated to rendering various colloquial phrases. Such situations usually occur while translating some dialogues when characters interchange utterances of sub neutral stylistic level and the translator must confer the same colouring to the target text.

A translator can employ paraphrasing to reach the equivalent energy of the phrase or render the atmosphere and the mood which are relevant to the situation described.

Imperative Mood and an exclamatory sentence were transformed into Indicative and an interrogative sentence though a rhetorical one. Such transformations occur when translating colloquial sentences and immediate utterances. Actually, the present example can be considered as a case of concretization because the translator made the idea of exclamation more exact and showed that the speaker had no idea of the seal but didn’t ask whose it was, or some other reasons.

It is possible to point out the following concluding the subject of lexical transformations:

1. Word-building suffixes and prefixes are different in various languages in terms of their productivity and their additional meanings. The most productive English suffix –er is usually translated into Russian as a finite verb corresponding with the meaning of the verb form which the noun with –er was derived. Transformation of the noun with –er provoked some syntactical transformations as well.

2. Though there are more affixal formations in English than in Russian, Russian possesses more affixes of higher stylistic value than English does. In this respect a translator has to use lexical means introducing modal words and emotional lexis to reach adequate translation.

3. Various parts of speech and phraseology can be employed when English formations are translated in order to make an adequate translation. It concerns some set expressions which are typical of and natural for the target language.

4. It is important to know the literal style of the author because it limits the number of translation techniques and the translator makes conveying closer to the original. In this particular case, the translator should not have used grandiloquent lexis

2.2. Morphological transformations

Differences between English and Russian result in real difficulties a translator faces and these are morphological transformations which are often the only mean to overcome the difficulty. Morphological transformations involve change of a part of speech, special character of translation of an article, specific translation of tenses and mode, the categories of number, gender, etc. Some types of morphological transformations will be considered in a more detailed way.

2.2.1. Article

Article determines whether the noun is definite or indefinite. That’s why one should bear in mind that while translating from English into Russian it is necessary to convey the meaning of articles. “When a translator pays little attention to that, the meaning of a Russian sentence is not quite equivalent to the original one”[3]
. The meaning of articles is usually rendered with lexical means, or word order; thus, the following transformations are used: substitution and addition (absence of article in Russian results in its substitution with other lexical unit, thus, causing addition), omission (if an article has no additional meaning, it can be omitted while translating).

2.2.1.1. Indefinite Article

Indefinite article generally classifies subject and its belonging to some class disregarding its specific features and peculiarities. Sometimes indefinite article is very close in its meaning to such indefinite pronouns as some and any
. In that case its meaning should be rendered in the translation. E.V. Kurovskaya points out that “use of an article with a naming component determines the use of those meaningful components which could be expresses with the article in the original text” [7] and sometimes the article with a naming component can change semantics considerably.

2.2.1.2. Definite article

Definite article has the limiting function. “ It marks a subject out of a class of similar ones, makes it more concrete”[8]. Sometimes definite article has its primary meaning of a demonstrative pronoun from which it is derived.

2.2.2. Unconformity of the Category of Number

Both Russian and English have the category of number. However, use of nouns in singular and plural are often different in terms of countable and uncountable nouns. This fact causes transformations while translating, in particular, substitution of an English noun in plural with a Russian one in singular, and backwards.

There a lot of cases exist when one form in singular in Russian corresponds with an English form in plural.

E.g. овес – oats, лук – onion, картофель- potatoes, окраина (города) – outskirts, etc.

And on the contrary, a Russian form in plural corresponds with an English form in singular.

E.g.деньги - money, чернила - ink, новости - news,сведения – information, etc.

Thus, substitution of number stems there [9].

2.2.3. Grammatical Gender.

English category of gender is rather relative. Practically, the category of gender is concerned when it comes to reference to the real biological gender. As for Russian, here reference to the grammatical gender is obligatory, thus, determining a grammatical transformation – substitution of a word form while translating from English into Russian.

Mostly, translator takes the norms of his native language, its traditions, due to that one animals, plants, birds are feminine, and others are masculine, thus, changing one gender to another one. Change of the gender of nouns also depends on a word which a translator chooses for the target text among a great variety of synonyms. Nevertheless, the category of gender is rather developed in Russian that’s why the amount of transformation increases in this respect.

2.2.4. Change of Parts of Speech

Change of parts of speech is one of the most frequent morphological transformations. Such changes result from “different word use and their combinatory rules in English and Russian, and in some cases – absence of such a part of speech in Russian”[8].

Noun is subject to such a morphological transformation most. While translating from English into Russian, an English verbal noun is converted into a finite verb.

It is worth mentioning that some English nouns are translated as finite verbs and as verbal nouns.

Translation of the predicate often provokes grammatical transformations, what is usually related with change of parts of speech (the latter results in syntactical transformations).

There are cases when other parts of speech are changed. So, pronoun is often subject to transformation (converted into a noun).

Adjectives are often converted into nouns and backwards. For example,

Participle is often translated with a finite verb.

An adjective which had an attributive function was converted into an adverb describing the way how the name sounds in Spanish. Such transformations occur rather often because the combination of a verb with an adverb describing the action is more typical of Russian. Also the transposition and transformation are worth mentioning because, as we can see, the verb have
was rendered as звучит
and actually the supplement name became the subject in the Russian sentence.

Translation generates some other types of changes which may often correlate with change of sentence parts, thus, causing rearrangements of syntactical structure of the sentence.

2.2.5. Unconformity of the Tense

Sometimes the source sentences are translated into the target language without strict observance of the tense employed. It depends on the stylistical features and syntactical requirements. There cases when Present Simple is translated as Future Simple. In fact, it is the so called stylistic Future.

Summing up morphological transformations, it is necessary to point out that:

1. The category of definiteness /indefiniteness, which is presented with corresponding articles in English, is often translated with additional lexical units to reach equal meaning and stylistic framing. It often results in further transformations within a sentence.

2. A translator should substitute singular with plural and backward if it requires norms of the languages. Since English has no category of gender, it should be introduced in Russian translated text. Besides, in the cases when pronouns are introduced of certain gender, a translator should consider not only grammatical features of the source language, but also peculiarities of national mind of native speakers.

3. Change of parts of speech is one of the most frequent transformation (nouns, pronouns, verbs, non-finite verbs, and adjectives). So, parts of speech are changed to reach equal meaning and expressiveness, thus, causing the change of syntactical structure, which will be considered in a detailed way in the following chapter. Nevertheless, sometimes change of parts of speech cam be considered as inevitable in translation because changes can be explained by combinatory norms of words implied.

4.
Translation’s decisions on unconformity of tenses occur mostly due to stylistic preferences and a little number of Russian grammatical tenses. There are only 3 tenses in Russian as compared with very diversified tense system in English. That is the reason for a set of transformation typical of synthetical language that is Russian.

2.3. Syntactical transformations

2.3.1.Transposition of sentence members

Transposition of sentence members results in change of syntactical structure of the sentence. This happens when a part of speech is changed. Considerable transposition of syntactical structure is connected with change of principle members of a sentence, especially, the subject. In English-Russian translations the reason for such changes is that “ the English subject seldom functions as the subject of the action”[5], for example:

– The object of the action (the subject is substituted with the supplement),

– Markers of time (the subject is substituted with adverbial modifier of time),

– Definition of place (the subject is substituted with adverbial modifier of place),

– Definition of cause (the subject is substituted with adverbial modifier of cause), etc.

The reason for grammatical transformation in English is frequent use of nouns which signify inanimate objects or notions, as “the agent of the action (i.e. the subject), that can be considered as a sort of personification. Such personification is not a stylistic device at all, because it is a linguistic phenomenon, but not that of speech and does not have individual character”[8].

One of the most wide spread syntactical transformations of this kind is substitution of an English passive pattern with a Russian active pattern, thus, “converting the English subject into the Russian supplement in the sentence; and in a Russian sentence the subject is the word which corresponds with the English supplement with by
or there is no subject at all (the so called “indefinite-personal pattern); Passive Voice in English is converted into Active voice in Russian”[9].

It should also be pointed out that sometimes the translator succeeds in keeping the structure of the source text without stylistic losses for the target text. For example,

Transformations of such a kind (Passive into Active) are rather frequent and considered in many books and manuals on Grammar of English which are supposed for Russian students. They are reversible like other transformations above mentioned in the present work. The opposite transformation is applied (active into passive) while translating from Russian into English.

There are many cases when the English subject is translated as the adverbial modifier. This transformation occurs when the English subject is in the beginning of the sentence and expresses some adverbial notions. In such cases the English subject becomes the adverbial modifier of place in Russian.

One should remember that members of the sentence are changed due to stylistic purposes but not grammatical ones.

2.3.2. Transformation of Simple Sentence into Complex Sentence.

The most relevant reason is of system character. Transformation is usually applied while translating simple English sentences with complex syntactical components – Infinitive, Gerund, and Absolute Constructions. “There is no Russian system analogue of the English syntactical complexes. That makes translation transformations inevitable”[10]. As a rule, when such complexes are translated into Russia, the type of the sentence is changed, and “the simple sentence converts into the complex sentence, more rarely into a compound sentence”[10].

Simple sentences in English texts are subject to internal fragmentation while converting into complex structures in translation. Transformations can be explained by some grammatical reasons (for example, absence of the same category in Russian).

Absence of the category of Gerund is the reason for this kind of transformation. Gerund is a very broad category in English which can be rendered into Russian with a lot of grammatical means - noun, verb, clause, etc. Therefore, the simple sentence containing Gerund as the subject was transformed into the compound sentence where Gerund is represented as the subordinate clause.

In other cases transformations are the result of stylistic reasons.

Passive patterns are less employed in Russian as compared with English and have absolutely different stylistic connotation. English Passive is stylistically neutral; though it is more used in bookish and written speech, meanwhile in Russian Passive prevails only in bookish and written speech of official and scientific character[10].

Reduction and simplification of complex syntactical structure result in drop of polysemy, creating monosemantic relations among components: “Translator analyses the initial sentence, transforms it into simpler and more definite forms, transposes them into the source language system and then reestablishes messages at this level into the source language system and then transpose them into the target language”[11].

2.3.3. Transformation of Complex Sentence into Simple Sentence

Normative and stylistic factors are the main reasons for the syntactical transformation of this type in literary translation. In particular, there are a lot of complex sentences in English texts as compared with Russian ones.

Thus, subordinate clauses may convert into participle (participle clause), adverbial participle (adverbial participle clause), and a verbal noun with preposition.

English complex sentences with the patterns It (was)…that (who)
are often translated as simple sentences in Russian. “ This regularity occurs mostly while translating attributive clause and adverbial clause”[12].

The emphatic construction was transformed in an adverbial modifier of place but nevertheless it is stressed more that others parts of the sentence. While translating similar construction from English, complex sentence usually is transformed into a simple one with a range of supplements substituting the emphatic constructions of the target text. It is the result of the difference between language systems of English and Russian, thus, causing lexical addition in the Russian text. Russian emphasis is often expressed lexically as compared with syntactical emphasis of English.

Emphatic constructions are rather difficult to translate because of hard search of the right and equivalent mean in the target language. The Russian language is rich with expressive means but they are mostly of lexical character but nevertheless the following example demonstrates that the lexical changes cause transposition of the whole sentence.

This short utterance involves at least 3 translation techniques to render the peculiarities of the original phrase. Moreover, we should mention such a translation technique as inversion to comment on this particular example. Inversion is the changing of the usual order of words and used to give emphasis or to be rhetorical in more formal situations, in political speeches, on the news, and also in literature. Some native speakers may also use them occasionally in day-to-day conversation. In the previous chapters we mentioned that Hemingway used a bit illiterate way of making up sentences to show that the utterance was not pronounced by a native English speaker but, in this particular novel, by a Spaniard. Thus, only a native English can distinguish the phrase uttered by a foreigner from that of native speaker. Unfortunately, this colouring is lost in translation. But here the translator got through the situation and made the phrase sound natural and very colloquial. Such words as Вот
and и
which are put in a little bit inverted order create the colloquial colouring. Also we should point out that inversion is present not only in the source text but in the target text as well because of the adverbial modifier of place вотчерез
теснину
.
Here translator’s knowledge of the author’s literary style should be marked positively because otherwise this phrase would lose its ideal content.

Another example of inversion shows that it is rather an effective way of emphasizing the idea of the utterance. Here inversion was applied to mark the word another man
. Nevertheless, in the target sentence usual word order can be observed but the word еще put stress onto the idea which was in the source sentence.

2.3.4. Sentence Fragmentation

Sentence fragmentation is rather effective for literary translation and has normative reasons. As a result of sentence fragmentation, one initial sentence (more often complex and rarely simple sentence) transforms into two sentences (or more).

English sentences can be overloaded with information which passes through several rather independent ideas. “It is no use of keeping the structure of such English sentences while translation, because such overload with information does not correspond with norms of the Russian language”[10].

The process of sentence fragmentation into several independent sentences is a distinct case of autonomation of the source structures, for example, in dramatic works.

Fragmentation results in reduction of the sentence while translation. Splitting large constructions into independent elements results in simplification of sentence structure.

Sometimes fragmentation and integration occur simultaneously while translation. But there are cases when sentence fragmentation is not actual for translation of some texts and literary works. It is connected with the author’s style. For example, Hemingway made up rather compact sentences. Here his literary technique should be mentioned. He strived to make taciturn sentences and words but with expressive context and bright connotation. Thus, his sentences were always well disciplined, each member implied its own function and meaning and the syntactical cohesion was remarkable.

2.3.5.Sentence Integration

Sentence integration is transforming and uniting two or more independent sentences into one sentence.

Sentence integration results in compression of the source phrase retaining “information value and text cohesion”[13].

Components of actual fragmentation remained unchanged in spite of integration of internal structure and the meaning was rendered correctly. Compression inside of the components didn’t provoke any sense distortion because theme and rheme kept their functions while translation. But if one phrase includes several messages and, respectively, several rhemes, these themes become one while translation. Therefore, one can assert that translation is indispensable without losses. Information Theory of Translation confirms this assumption. “Translation keeps only a part of the original. Losses are inevitable while communication in two languages as well as in any other communication”[14].

Analysis of the novel, that serves the material for the thesis, showed that the author’s style and his literary techniques made sentence integration almost a forbidden transformation. As previous chapters mentioned, Hemingway opted for laconic syntactical structure and the translator kept the author’s principle with great care. While reading and comparing the original of the novel with its translation, there were no interesting cases of integration found.

2.3.6.Transformation of Two-Member Sentence into a Mononuclear Sentence

System features are main reason for this type of transformation though it is rather a rare type of transformation. Both principle members of the sentence are obligatory in an English sentence, as a rule. In Russian such contents of the sentence is not obligatory and one of the principle members may miss.

2.3.7. Transformation of the Type of Syntactic Cohesion

Sentences can be linked with both coordinating and subordinating means in Russian as well as in English. “However, in Russian coordination conjunctions prevail, whereas subordinating conjunctions in English, if not prevail, occur more frequently that in Russian”[9]. That’s why while translation from English into Russian subordination is transformed into coordination.

It is worth mentioning that transformation of subordination into coordination mostly go with change of conjunction link into asydenton.

Transformation of subordination into coordination (asydenton as well) can occur within a simple sentence. Individual choice of a translator is one of the reasons for that type of transformation.

As an example of syntactic beginning domination in English, one should remember frequent use of homogeneous parts of the sentence linked with the conjunction and
which belong to different logical plans[10].

But change of syntactic link is effected not only at sentence level or word combination, but also at phrase level.

2.3.8. Change of Actual Sentence Fragmentation During Translation

A translator should catch the whole figurative system made by the author of the source text to convey it correctly into the target language. This figurative reproduction depends on sentence structure, that is actual thematic-rhematic articulation or actual sentence fragmentation. Word order is the most important factor to distribute communicative functions among parts of the sentence.

Professional literature considers Russian free word order and English fixed word order as two opposite syntactical structures. However, comparative analysis of some English and Russian inversion structures proves that significance of English word order and free position of words in Russian were overestimated.

Different functionality of word order is result of different proportion of formal and actual fragmentation of Russian and English sentence. Whereas word order in an English sentence is for conveying the communicative type of the sentence and determination grammatical relations among its members, cohesive function and the function highlighting the rheme are the dominant functions of word order. [15]

Change of conventional word order as in an English text as in a Russian one contributes to positional contact of the sentences in the literary work and conveys emphasis, accentuating the rhythm of narration.

This short utterance involves at least 3 translation techniques to render the peculiarities of the original phrase. Moreover, we should mention such a translation technique as inversion to comment on this particular example. Inversion is the changing of the usual order of words and used to give emphasis or to be rhetorical in more formal situations, in political speeches, on the news, and also in literature. Some native speakers may also use them occasionally in day-to-day conversation. In the previous chapters we mentioned that Hemingway used a bit illiterate way of making up sentences to show that the utterance was not pronounced by a native English speaker but, in this particular novel, by a Spaniard. Thus, only a native English can distinguish the phrase uttered by a foreigner from that of native speaker. Unfortunately, this colouring is lost in translation. But here the translator got through the situation and made the phrase sound natural and very colloquial. Such words as Вот
and и
which are put in a slightly inverted order create the colloquial colouring. Also we should point out that inversion is present not only in the source text but in the target text as well because of the adverbial modifier of place вотчерез
теснину
.
Here translator’s knowledge of the author’s literary style should be marked positively because otherwise this phrase would lose its ideal content.

Changing of the position of the supplement in the beginning occurs rather often, when inversion in an English sentence occurs due to positional contact among the elements and is not used for emphasis.

Inversion of the predicate in the beginning of the phrase does not remain while translating into Russian.

In particular, inverted predicate member of the compound nominate predicate is usually placed in the end of a Russian sentence because the final position in the Russian sentence is rather expressive point. [12]

Adverbial modifiers of manner and degree have stylistically important position in translation when they are in the beginning of the utterance or after the verb.

Word order of parts of a complex sentence is often changed while translation that is parts of principle and subordinate sentence.

In English subordinate clause precedes the principle clause, in Russian this is on the contrary. But some opposite cases occur.

Finally, independent sentences within the text can be subject of transposition.

On the whole, even analysis of limited number of examples shows that actual sentence fragmentation is an important element of creating rhythm and style, has cohesive function in the literary text. The main reason for that are typological features of languages and their grammar rules.

After analyzing main types of syntactical transformations to reach equivalent translation, one should consider the following:

1. Syntactical adaptation, as a translation technique, presupposes converting syntactical structure of the source language into similar structure of the target language. It is possible when both languages of the translation have replicate syntactical constructions.

2. A translator often has to use actual sentence fragmentation when the original sentence of the source language converts into 2 or more independent sentences. This transformation results in change of sentence components or transforming a simple sentence into a complex one.

3. Reverse transformation is integration of 2 simple sentence of the source language into one complex sentence of the target language. Sometimes integration and fragmentation correlate when one sentence is divided into 2 parts, and one of its parts joins other sentence. This process is usually linked with transposition of predicative syntagmas. But the matter of the author’s laconic style should be consider as a question of principle as well.

4. Change of members of the sentence results in change of its syntactical structure. Complex sentence can convert into compound sentence with homogeneous predicates.

5. A translator should use actual fragmentation to reach adequate figurative system of the source text. Word order is the most important factor to distribute communicative functions among members of the sentence. Inversion is a significant expressive mean as in Russian as in English.

6. A translator often uses compensation to reach the equivalent figurative image of the literary text. Compensation presupposes when lost components of the source language reoccur in the target language in some other forms. Grammatical means of the source language are often substituted with lexical ones and on the contrary. So, grammatical and lexical means join each other to ensure completely equivalent translation.

7. A translator uses compensation especially to make up for loss of certain stylistic and figurative aspects of the source text.

8. Phrase, a clause or a sentence is a translation unit concerning syntactical transformations.

6.Summary on Different Types of Transformations

The matter of grammatical transformations is very vital because it is the work of the translator as it is. Analysis of each type of transformation is important because it helps beginners to realize how some transformations work and how they transpose the source sentence. It concerns knowledge not only of the foreign language which the translator works with but also knowledge of the native language. Nevertheless, one should consider all the types of grammatical transformation as the entire unity because it constitutes the entire picture of the translated text as a literary work. The following examples will show how lexical, morphological and syntactical transformations coexist within one unit of translation and the main role of each of them will be pointed out.

Sometimes knowledge of Grammar is vital to choose necessary stylistic technique for translation.

The translator is capable of changing the syntactical structure of the sentence in order to create another one in the target language which would sound more idiomatic. A range of grammatical transformation is employed for that purpose.

The source sentence implies the emphatic construction that is
….. The Russian translation comprises the word так
as the indication of manner and the grade of the state, thus, marking and keeping the stress on the initially accentuated words in the source sentences. As for syntactical structure of the sentences, the target sentence is more simplified because it contains less grammatical stems: that is the sadness, they get, they quit, they betray
. There are four grammatical stems in the source sentence. The Russian translation comprises only 2. The parallel patterns - before they quit or before they betray
was united into one and became homogeneous parts of the sentence. The word they was concretized and translated as люди
. The word quit
is given with more exact meaning closer to the context - дезертировать. The word sadness
underwent morphological transformation and became an adjective печальный
. The translation was effected at sentence level.

The following example shows that the translator should keep the chosen pattern of grammatical members and the way of description in the consequent sentence to ensure the logical cohesion of the whole text.

Here approximately the same set of grammatical transformation is used. The translator keeps the same way of narration involving such word as печален
, предатель
, and бывает
. It proves that the translation is not only mechanical reproduction of the foreign text but also a well disciplined and carefully planned literary work. As for some other transformation employed in the above example one can notice that the translator introduced a person
into his translation. The translator overviews the idea from the point of view of a person who can betray, quit and have such sadness. The word sell-out
is very specific here because it possesses a series of meaning which are different from and connection between these meaning can be traced with the help of association and figurative thinking. Sell
-
out
is распродажа, торг, полный аншлаг, концерт, and измена. The necessary word goes the last in the list of meaning that a dictionary provides.

The given examples show that one should consider transformations within one sentence as a complex unity. Sometimes one transformation provokes another one, thus, resulting, in a sort of linguistic “chain reaction” but syntactically based one. The role of each transformation is important for the target text because it approaches the source text and the source idea to notions and construction which are understandable for the foreign readers.

100 examples were analyzed within the framework of the thesis. 56 examples were considered in the present work and given comments on with main transformation techniques pointed out and explanation. It is necessary to consider transformations as a complex unity with a unit of translation. The volume of the unit depends on translator’s decision, stylistic norms of the target language and certain linguistic factors (absence of some categories in the target language). The following table involves only general examples on types of transformations.

Here are examples sourced from the 40 pages of the novel “For Whom The Bell Tolls”. The percentage shows the occurrence of certain types of transformation within the material understudied. Some of the examples reveal the translator’s technique of keeping the author’s style with means of the target language.

Comparison of the part of the novel resulted in the following percentage: lexical transformations account for 23 %, morphological ones – 30 %, grammatical ones – 50 %. The rest 7% account for other types of transformations that can be grouped as occasional ones and not relating to the subject of the thesis.

Conclusion

Comparative linguistic analysis is an important method of research works that is analysis of form and contents of the text by comparing them with those of the source text. The method was applied to the present research work. Analysis of the literary text is of special interest. Comparative analysis allows revealing the translation technique, equivalent units and finding out what transformations should be applied to make a translation quite equivalent in terms of lexis, grammar, and stylistics.

Transformations can be lexical and grammatical depending on the source lingual units which were considered as material for transformations. English and Russian are different in terms of lexis and grammatical systems that is why study of grammatical transformations is vital for literary translation. The study of grammatical transformations helps to reveal main obstacles and difficulties to create stylistically and emotionally equivalent target text. A translator will be more linguistically oriented concerning the translation from certain language (English, in particular) after studying, classifying and pointing out the most frequent grammatical transformations. However, translation problem focuses on choice of the right word and implementing a complex of lexical and grammatical transformations, shifting from lexical units to grammatical ones. And it is well known from translation practice that a translator pays his attention to some unknown lexical units, then peculiar grammatical patterns are considered involving those words and finally, translator processes the entire unit of translation. As it was mentioned, the translation unit varies from a word to sentence and even more.

Word formation is related with lexicology but the essence of word formations can be revealed only within texts, within a sentence, first of all. Word formation affixes in the two languages differ not only in terms of their productivity but also in terms of additional connotations. Meanwhile, change of a part pf speech is very frequent while translation and one of the most productive translation techniques.

Russian is rich with stylistic resources as compared with English that has limited set of such means. Due to that, the translator often has to introduce additional modal and emotionally expressive words into a literary translation to reach the adequate translation that is implementing addition.

On the other hand, Russian possesses a great number of some expressive suffixes which English lacks considerably, thus, inducing repetition, introducing additional words into translation, word combinations and phraseology.

Analyzing morphological transformations allows pointing out that change of parts of speech is the most frequent transformation.
Change of sentence parts is important to reach expressively equivalent translation. But it often causes syntactical transformations. It is possible to say that some morphological transformations result in syntactical transformations almost inevitably.

Articles define subjects in English but as there is no such a category in Russian, the target text involves additional lexical means. The meaning and connotation of an article is translated with adding such words as волне
, один
, какой
-нибудь
, adjective +такое
, так
+ adjective, вот
.

As there is no grammatical gender in English, a translator should effect this kind of transformation with national features and peculiarities taken into account.

Principal types of syntactic transformations can be generalized into 4 main classes:

1. Transpositions: changing the order of lingual units in comparison with the order in the source text. Words, word combinations, parts of a complex sentence and independent sentences within a text are main elements subject to transposition. The role of transposition is to arrange word and elements of the sentence in the target text in such an order that would be comprehensive and idiomatic for the target language. Transposition reflects the way of catching an idea by a foreign reader.

2. Substitution or changes are one of the most frequent translation transformations. A translator can change grammatical units and lexical ones. Thus, grammatical and lexical changes are effected. Grammatical changes involve:

a) change pf a word form;

b) change of parts of speech;

c) change of sentence members (transposition);

d) syntactical changes within a complex or a compound sentence.

3. Additions: this type of transformations focuses on compensating losses of appropriate words while translation.

4. Omission: it is opposite addition. Semantically abundant words are usually omitted while translating that is they express notions which are clear from the context without them.

The translator determines the role of each transformation because it is the translator who decides which transformation is necessary to render the author’s idea. Some transformations are supposed to keep the original structure of the sentence; others transpose it considerably but help to create idiomatic language of the source text and, thus, implementing its main role that is convey the idea and emotion which the author aspired to tell the reader.

Bibliography:

[1] Ernest Hemingway, For Whom The Bell Tolls; АнтологияКаро, Санкт-Петербург, 2006

[2] Эрнест Хемингуэй, По ком звонит колокол; Роман/ Пер. с англ.– СПб.; Азбука Классика, 2004 – 576 с. Перевод с английского Н.Волжиной, Е.Калашниковой, И.Кашкина.

[3] Розенталь Д.Э., Теленкова М.А. Словарь-справочник лингвистических терминов. – м.; ООО «Издательство Астрель», ООО «Издательство АСТ», 2001. – 624 с.

[4] А.В. Федоров «Основы общей теории перевода»: Лингвистиче­ские проблемы. - М.: Высш.шк., 1968. - 303 с.

[5] Комиссаров В.К. Теория перевода. - М.: Высш.шк., 1990. -253 с. 8.

[6] Мизецкая В.Я., Некоторые особенности перевода англоязычного драматургического текста. Одесса, 1986, стр. 141

[7] Куровская Е.В., указ. Сочин., стр.134

[8] Левицкая Т.Р., Фитерман А.М.,указ.сочин., 1973, стр.16

[9] Бархударов Л.С.,указ.сочин.,стр.144.

[10] Нешумаев И. В. Синтаксические трансформации при переводе английского текста на русский язык.//Лингвистические и методические проблемы русского языка как неродного: Текст: структура и анализ. - М,, 1991. - с. 117-126.

[11] Швейцер А.Д. К проблеме лингвистического изучения процес­са перевода.//Вопросы языкознания. - 1970. -№ 4. - с.40-49.

[12] Ольшанская Н.Л., Балаян Н.М. Синтаксис авторской речи в оригинале и в переводе. М.,1999

[13] Матузкова Е.П., Шеховцева М.Д., Фролов А.А. Перераспределение границ предложения и СФЕ в переводе.//Контрастивное исследование оригинала и перевода художественного текста./ Под ред. В.Н.Ярцева. - Одесса,., 1998. - с. 113-115.

[14] Миньяр-Белоручев Р.К. Общая теория перевода и устный пе­ревод. - М.: Воениздат, 1980. - 237 с.

[15] О смещении этих понятий см.Ж Шевлякова В.Е.,указ.сочин.,стр.38

[16] Артуро Паскуаль, Эрнест Хемингуэй. Серия «Биография и творчество». ИздательствоАСТ, Транзит книга, Москва 2006. c.29-125

[17] Латышев Л. К. Межъязыковые трансформации как средство достижения переводческой эквивалентности. //Семантико-синтаксические проблемы теории языка и перевода. - М., 1936. - с. 90-107.

[1]
Левицкая Т.Р., Фитерман А.М. Пособие по переводу с английского языка на русский. – М.,1973

[2]
Бархударов Л.С. Язык и перевод. – М., 1975, стр. 196

[3]
Левицкая Т.Р., Фитерман А.М., указ сочин., 1973,стр.15