Stylistically-marked Language Units

In different communicative situations the language users select words of different stylistic status. There are stylistically neutral words that are suitable for any situation, and there are literary (bookish) words and colloquial words which satisfy the demands of official, poetic messages and unofficial everyday communication respectively. SL and TL words of similar semantics may have either identical (a steed — скакун, aforesaid — вищезазначений, gluttony — ненажерливість, to funk – полохатись, лякатися) or dissimilar (slumber — сон, morn — ранок, to swop — змінювати) stylistic connotation. The translator tries to preserve the stylistic status of the original text, by using the equivalents of the same style or, failing that, opting for stylistically neutral units.

The principal stylistic effect of the text is created, however, with the help of special stylistic devices as well as by the interaction of the word meanings in a particular context. The speaker may qualify every object he mentions in his own way thus giving his utterance a specific stylistic turn. Such stylistic phrasing gives much trouble to the translator since their meaning is often subjective and elusive. Some phrases become fixed through repeated use and they may have permanent equivalents in TL, e.g. true love — справжнє кохання, dead silence — мертва тиша, good old England - стара добра Англія. In most cases, however, the translator has to look for an occasional substitute, which often requires an in-depth study of the broad context. When, for example, J. Galsworthy in his “Forsyte Saga” refers to Irene as “ that tender passive being, who would not stir a step for herself ”, the translator is faced with the problem of rendering the word “passive” into Ukrainian so that its substitute would fit the character of that lady and all the circumstances of her life described in the novel.

A common occurrence in English texts is the transferred qualifier syntactically joined to a word to which it does not belong logically. Thus the English speaker may mention “a corrupt alliance”, “a sleepless bed” or “a thoughtful pipe”. As often as not, such combinations will be thought of as too bizarre in Ukrainian or alien to the type of the text and the qualifier will have to be used with the name of the object it refers to. “The sound of the solemn bells ” will become „урочисте звучання дзвонів“ and “the smiling attention of the stranger” will be translated as „уважність незнайомця з усмішкою на обличчі“.

Note should also be taken of the inverted qualifier which syntactically is not the defining but the defined element. Such a qualifier precedes the qualified word which is joined to it by the preposition “ of ”: “ this devil of a woman ”, “ the giant of a man ”, “ an eagle of a lad ”, etc. The phrase can be transformed to obtain an ordinary combination (a devilish woman, a gigantic man) and then translated into Ukrainian. The translation may involve an additional element: the devil of a woman — неймовірно хитра (розумна, надзвичайна тощо) жінка.

Stylistically-marked units may also be certain types of collocations. Another common type includes conventional indirect names of various objects or “paraphrases”. A frequent use of paraphrases is a characteristic feature of the English language.

Some of the paraphrases are borrowed from such classical sources as mythology or the Bible and usually have permanent equivalents in Ukrainian (cf. Attic salt – аттична сіль, the three sisters — богині долі, the Prince of Darkness — принц темряви). Others are purely English and are either transcribed or explained in translation: John Bull — Джон Буль, the three R’s — читання, письмо й арифметика, the Iron Duke - герцог Веллінгтон.

A special group of paraphrases are the names of countries, states and other geographical or political entities: the Land of Cakes (Scotland), the Badger State (Wisconsin), the Empire City (New York). As a rule, such paraphrases are not known to the Ukrainian reader and they are replaced by official names in the translation. (A notable exception is “the eternal city” — вічне місто.)

Complicated translation problems are caused by ST containing substandard language units used to produce a stylistic effect. The ST author may imitate his character’s speech by means of dialectal or contaminated forms. SL territorial dialects cannot be reproduced in TT, nor can they be replaced by TL dialectal forms. It would be inappropriate if a black American or a London cockney spoke in the Ukrainian translation in the dialect, say, of the Northern regions of the USSR. Fortunately, the English dialectal forms are mostly an indication of the speaker’s low social or educational status, and they can be rendered into Ukrainian by a judicial employment of low-colloquial elements, e.g.:

He do look quiet, don’t ‘e? D’e know ‘oo ‘e is, Sir? Зовні він наче спокійний, егеж? Бува, не знаєте, добродію, шо він таке є?

Here the function of the grammatical and phonetical markers in the English sentence which serve to show that the speaker is uneducated, is fulfilled by the Ukrainian colloquialisms „егеж“, „бува“ and „шо він таке є“.

Contaminated forms are used to imitate the speech of a foreigner. Sometimes, both SL and TL have developed accepted forms of representing the contaminated speech by persons of foreign origin. For example, the speech of a Chinese can be represented in English and in Ukrainian in a conventional way, which facilitates the translator’s task:

Me blingee beer. Now you pay.

Моя плинесла пиво, твоя типел платити.

If no such tradition exists, the translator has to select some possible contaminated Ukrainian forms to produce the desired effect, e.g.:

When you see him quid’ then you quick see him ‘perm whale (the speech of a Kanaka).

Коли твоя бачив спрут, тоді твоя скоро-скоро бачив кашалот.

Не нашли, что искали? Воспользуйтесь поиском: