TRANSLATION IN REGARD THE CULTURAL NUANCES OF THE LANGUAGE

234
TRANSLATION IN REGARD THE CULTURAL NUANCES OF THE
LANGUAGE
Bannopo a Zulxumo Xa amo na,
senio eache , depa men unc ional lexicos o he ilology acul y, o he
Uzbekis an s a e wo ld language uni e si y
Ashu o a Fe uza
senio eache , Uzbekis an s a e wo ld language uni e si y
Abs ac : The ollowing pa ag aph aises he ques ion o he need o enhance
he s uc u al ange and ope a ional abili ies o he mode n dic iona y (bi- o
mul ilingual) o a oid laciness in he ansmission o cul u es and non-equi alen
ph ases in o e e y o he language. Wi hou i he dic iona y is incomple e and
languages a e unequal. The a icle o e s wi h a numbe o al e na i es o asymme y
e lec ion o he cul u eless in he con ex o social and e hno-psychic eali y o a
na i e-speaking communi y. The speci ics o lexicog aphical ansmission is ound in
o de o emphasize he wan o in addi ion in es iga ion o he linguis ic map o he
wo ld. Linguis ics o he ecen yea s is a p ope ly illus a ion o e e yday ai s in he
mode n humani a is ics: we wi ness an an inc easing numbe o ob ious inclina ion o
in e disciplina i y and in e pa adigm in app oaches o such complica ed objec s as a
language, deep pe cep ion o i as an an h opological phenomenon in he immanen
ela ionships wi h psychological and beha iou al ma ices, wi h e hno cul u al o igins
o he linguis ic pic u e o he wo ld.
Key wo ds: linguis ic and in ellec ual pix o he wo ld, non-equi alence and
lexical gaps, seman ics and p agma ics o language signs, Classi ica ion o
cul u emes, In mode n linguocul u al esea ch, linguocul u al ma e ial h ough
po en ial o some o he language, lexicog aphe s pu sui s a a dic iona y o end up as
en i onmen iendly and nonideological ool as possible, Equi alence (o i s absence)
is a ma ginal phenomenon, “T ansla ion s a s o e ol ed wi h se ing up equi alence
on he wo d le el” he jou ney o cu ing-edge lexicog aphe s ac ually shows ha in
he me hod o compila ion o any bilingual o ex a lingual ansla ion dic iona y, he
p oblems o con eying subcul u e speci ici y.
1. Cul u es’ and non-equi alen lexis
The e o e, linguocul u ology is one o he mos dynamically de eloping ields
o linguis ics and linguocul u al s udies which de elops bo h s anda d ( he ela ionship
o cul u e and language, speech and language, comp ehension o meaning-making
ules) and new (concep ology and cul u e, linguis ic and in ellec ual pics o he wo ld,
non-equi alence and lexical gaps, seman ics and p agma ics o language signs) issues.
Indeed, he po en ial o alk and hink in a su e language la gely de ines a cul u al
iden i y. Indi idual app ecia ion o he wo ld is linked wi h he linguis ic g oup, which
235
we belong o. Since he speake s o one o a kind languages disco e he wo ld
di e en ly, i is impossible o lea n a unique language wi hou simul aneous examining
i s cul u al con ex (Hall, 2002).The linguocul u al wo ks o ecen yea s ha e amassed
a lo o e minological p inciples which in one way o ano he e lec an i al cul u al
which means and a ac ion o he na ional, cul u al speci ici y o meaning-making:
cul u al componen , cul u e- ela ed ocabula y, he na ional-au hen ic language,
linguo-speci ic ocabula y, e hno-cul u al ocabula y, lexical gaps, non-equi alen
lexis, cul u e-ca ying ocabula y, his o y knowledge, ealia, cul u emes, cul u onym,
linguocul u al en i onmen , he coun y wide speci ici y o e bal communica ion,
lexical backg ound, linguis ic epis eme, coun ywide concep , coun y wide symbol,
e c. The lookup o compa able phenomena is ans e ing di e gen ly as nicely – bo h
h ough po en ial o language clichés analysis and he s udy o ph aseological uni s,
s ylis ically ma ked ocabula y and iden i ica ion o s e eo ypes o linguis ic
consciousness, as p ope ly as examina ion he unde lying ph ase seman ics.
2. Classi ica ion o cul u emes
The e m “cul u eme” i sel used o be c ea ed ou side he bounda ies o
linguis ics, in he cul u al heo y o S. Lem, in which i desc ibes, i s o all, he
minimal, indi isible uni s o cul u e: i uals, alues, and s e eo ypes.In mode n-day
linguocul u al lookup he e m “cul u eme” is a ho ly deba ed subjec and demons a es
a a ie y o p ocedu es o i s con en . V. Gak conside s cul u eme “as a signal o
adi ion ha addi ionally has a linguis ic exp ession” (Gak, 1998). A. Vezhbi skaia
ega ds cul u eme as “an buil -in in e le el uni , he shape o which is he cohesion o
a sign and language meaning, while he con en ma e ial – he uni y o language ha
means and cul u al alue” (Vezhbi skaia, 1999). V. Vo ob´o singles ou a linguis ic
cul u eme along wi h a cul u eme, gi en ha “a cul u eme” is conside ed o be an
elemen o eali y (an objec o a si ua ion), a ibu ed o a speci ic cul u e, whils “a
linguis ic cul u eme” is he p ojec ion o he li es yle ac o in o a language sign"
(Vo ob´o , 1997). Howe e , his s a egy is linguis ically es ic ed and igno es he
immanen asymme y o he which means and he implemen a ion, as seman ic load o
cul u eme is much highe han ha o ealia, because i appeals o cul u ally widesp ead
in o ma ion, i is ex apola ed o o he s ages o he e hno-cul u al pho o o he
wo ld.Va ious languages a y om one any o he in he way o o ganizing in o ma i e
a ia ions (pe cep ion and concep ualiza ion o he wo ld), and now no in sepa a e
cul u eme, hough i ’s well wo h no ing ha he coun ywide speci ici y o cul u eme
con en ma e ial mos wholly e eals i sel solely in con as wi h he possible gadge s
o implemen a ion in some o he language, in e cul u emes and in acul u emes
disclose speci ically in he asymme y and lexical gaps. The e o e, he a emp s o
deli e he linguocul u al clo h ia means o some o he language is cons an ly ela ed
wi h di icul ies o econs uc ion o all he linguis ic ocus and, in his way o ano he ,
236
doomed o s uggle wi h he lexical gaps o o e come he na u al asymme y o
languages.A. Bukhonkina sugges s he classi ica ion o cul u eme (Bukhonkina, 2002),
based on he unique cha ac e is ics o hei in e nal o m and speci ici y o
in e linguis ic asymme y; howe e , his app oach is mo e applicable o he ealia,
conside ing he cul u al magni ude and immanen signi ica ion is o en igno ed. So,
he esea che singles ou (as he examples Uk ainian and Polish cul u eme we e used,
each aken om adi ional e hno-cul u e and p esen day ones, wi h seman ic laye s,
and shi s in he in e nal o m) and in p e alen ( he b anch o non- e bal
communica ion esea ch ha examines he cul u al posi ion o as e sensa ions, i uals
and adi ions, associa ed wi h ood, delicacies as a e lec ion o coun ywide
men ali y).
Linguocul u al compe ence (N. Ale i enko), he e o e, does no longe depend
as an aw ul lo on he mas e y o he language legal guidelines as i does on he
ex alinguis ic eco ds subjec ( he semio ic code), which hampe s he ansmission
and pe cep ion o some o he cul u e-bea e .A ou s anding impo ance in he echnique
o in e cul u al in e ac ion in he ecep ion o cul u emes, ob iously, is gi en o
lexicog aphy as a ield dealing wi h expe dedica ion o sol ing he issues o c oss-
linguis ic asymme y and o e coming he p oblem o lexical gaps. I need o be ci ed
ha mode n lexicog aphy addi ionally e lec s mode n-day endencies o con e gence
o linguis ics wi h di e en ields o humani a is ics. Consequen ly, linguocul u al
esea ch is an essen ial and opical p oblem in he p inciple and p ac ice o compiling
dic iona ies. Lexiog a ica ion o linguocul u e (pa icula ly, he in e cul u al one)
includes each he common issues o linguis ic ma e ial and he new ones, associa ed o
he e olu ion o o ms and me hods o ansmi seman ic2.3. Re lec ing subcul u e in
lexicog aphy
Gi en he leng hy his o y o compiling and unc ioning o dic iona ies, simply
ecen ly, ha is, ex a o much less conside ing he 1950s, he e o s o some
lexicog aphe s ha e been a ge ed on he heo e ical issue o his wo k.The wo k o
lexicog aphe s objec i es a a dic iona y o eme ge as as en i onmen iendly and no
ideological de ice as possible. Nowadays, no one doub s ha he so-called “co pus
e olu ion” (Hanks, 2012; K ishnamu hy, 2002; Rundell, 1992) has helped o highe
mi o how he language wi hou a doub unc ions inside a speci ic eam o i s use s.
Fo ins ance, i used o be s a ed ha p e-co pus dic iona ies no mally con ained a e
meanings o some iden ical lexical gadge s (and hei equi alen ansla ion), howe e
hey lacked o he necessa y common uni s. Some imes he wo ds which a e equen ly
used do no longe appea in he dic iona y mac os uc u e; in di e en cases, he wo ds
a e p o ec ed in he mac os uc u e, bu hei de ini ion lea es a lo o be desi ed.
Nowadays he size o equency is pa o he p e e ed o lexicog aphical wo k. Bu
he keywo d conco dances and he equency o ac o s ha e come o be no only an
237
quin essen ial esou ce o lexicog aphic documen ing o he s a is ic con en , bu also
inc easingly mo e equen ly on he web-si es o on-line dic iona ies, he s a is ic
con en ma e ial o he headwo ds is complemen ed (o e en eplaced) by way o
dynamically gene a ed con en , p ima ily based on co pus in o ma ion. I is na u al
ha he main ask o he su icien e lec ion o p agma ics which lexicog aphy aces
is an enough pe cep ion o a linguis ic sign, o e coming e hno linguis ic ba ie , which
is o su e p ima ily based on he asymme y o e hno-men al cul u eme. This po en ial
dealing wi h wo (o mo e) linguis ic pic u es o he wo ld and wi h ge ing o know
non-equi alen ocabula y. The ouble o equi alence lies in he a ea, in which an
in e disciplina y consensus has been achie ed: lexico-seman ic s uc u es o lexis o a
p ecise language a e peculia , p ecise o his language and, he e o e, hey a e in pa
unique. I po en ial ha he lexical seman ic s uc u es o wo (o mo e) languages a e
non-isomo phic. Non-isomo phy o lexis ypes he heo e ical and ound empi ical
ci cums ances, examina ion o which leads o conc e e mani es a ions o he ouble o
equi alence in exclusi e disciplines. In his case, we a e only ascina ed in he
me alexicog aphic aspec o his issue. We ag ee wi h ha he hough o equi alence
in he lexicog aphical lookup need o no be de eloped an i-in ui i ely, away om i s
use in he equen language sense, howe e need o be g ea e p ecise, and addi ionally
mus be ex ao dina y om he no ion o equi alence in associa ed disciplines,
especially i we e e o con as i e linguis ics and ansla ion heo y.Equi alence (o
i s absence) is a ma ginal phenomenon, i lexicological s udies a e ela ed o solely one
language. Fo example, you can e e o he lexical synonyms wi hin he limi s o
designa o lexis. They a e ex ensionally equi alen , which skill hey ha e he same
ange o meanings. The hough o equi alence, on he o he hand, plays a essen ial
posi ion in con as i e o con on a ional lexicology. The e a e addi ionally qui e a
numbe lexicological mani es a ions o he p oblem o equi alence.
Compa a i e lexicology is ega ded as a pa ial discipline wi h an emphasis on
langue. Acco dingly, he no ion o equi alence in lexicology is concen a ed on he
language sys em, bu , in gene al, is an as ically ague. The ounda ion o he
designa o lexis is polysomic g asp o he language signs. The e o e, he ac o s o he
lexis can be a ious ins ances polyseman ic. While co ela ing one hing o language
A wi h e e y o he elemen o language B, hei deno a i e ela ionship is usually
ypical as a ounda ion o he compa ison.
Thus, he e appea s equi alence, no mally e e ed o as seman ic equi alence,
unde nea h he p e equisi es ha , i s ly, he wide a ie y o sameness in language A
equals he wide a ie y o sameness in language B (and hey ha e he same meaning)
and, secondly, hei deno a ion (in pai s o sameness) is he same.I is necessa y o be
awa e abou a ious p ocedu es o he de ini ion o he equi alen and equi alence in
ansla ion s udies. Equi alence o ansla ion is desc ibed as he common con en
238
ma e ial o he unique ex and he ansla ion.A. I ano ega ds an equi alen as
“ unc ional compliance in a a ge language, ansmi ing exp ession on he simila
le el (wo ds, colloca ions) o all ele an ac o s inside he gi en con ex , o one o he
e sions o ha means o he o iginal uni in he supply language” (I ano , 2006).
A classical sen ence om he ex book on ansla ion esea ch is as ollows:
“T ansla ion s a s wi h es ablishing equi alence on he ph ase le el” (I ano , 2006).
Undoub edly, he p oblems o ansla ion commence a he s age o a sepa a e ph ase
o colloca ions, when he e seems non-equi alen lexis, i.e. lexical gadge s which do
no ha e hei equi alen s in he goal language. We ag ee wi h ha non-equi alen
lexis (as a phenomenon bo h in ansla ion esea ch and lexicog aphy) gi es a a y o
p oblems. In ansla ion i is connec ed wi h wha is usually e e ed o as
“un ansla able”; as o lexicog aphy, he p oblem is ex a complica ed, due o he ac
a dic iona y does now no u nish as many chances as a ex does o dis inc ypes o
lexical ans o ma ions, wi h he help o which a nonequi alen hough can be
iden i ied.The ime pe iod i sel is common o many au ho s, who unde s and i in a
exclusi e way: some au ho s ega d non-equi alen lexis as a synonym o ealia, he
o he s see simply wo ds, which due o cul u al di e ences do no longe exis in he
o he language. S. Vlakho and S. Flo in in hei e book The Un ansla able in
T ansla ion supply he mos comple e desc ip ion o so s o lexical uni s, which can
be conside ed as non-equi alen ones (Vlakho , Flo in, 1980). I looks ha non-
equi alen lexis, as nicely as lexical gaps (composing a signi ican sec ion o he
coun ywide speci ici y in any language) a e he e ms on he junc ion o a ious
educa ional disciplines, which complica es he me hod o hei de ini ion inside he
amewo k o lexicog aphy. Howe e , he ip o mode n-day lexicog aphe s clea ly
indica es ha in he p ocedu e o compila ion o any bilingual o g ea e lingual
ansla ion dic iona y, he issues o con eying li es yle speci ici y, absen in ano he
language, do now no lose hei impo ance:
T ansla ion in he sys em o in e cul u al con e sa ion ( ecoding o
linguocul u al ab ic by way o means a dis inc i e language sys em) and he so wa e
o a ious ansla ion me hods c ea e a ex ao dina y linguis ic and ansla ion ha
means o a cul u eme, p ima ily based on mo e han a ew ela ionships o equi alence
(Gusa o , 2002): signi ica ion (me hods o ansc ip ion), seman isa ion (a me hod o
desc ip i e ansla ion), e e ence (a echnique o emo al o coun y wide cul u al
speci ici y, desc ip i e ansla ion), syn agma ics (a app oach o ansla ion
pe iph asis) and pe o mance (a echnique o app oxima e ansla ion, desc ip i e
ansla ion).
3. Re lec ing subcul u e in lexicog aphy
Gi en he leng hy his o y o compiling and unc ioning o dic iona ies, simply
ecen ly, ha is, ex a o much less conside ing he 1950s, he e o s o some

239
lexicog aphe s ha e been a ge ed on he heo e ical issue o his wo k. The wo k o
lexicog aphe s objec i es a a dic iona y o eme ge as as en i onmen iendly and no
ideological de ice as possible. Nowadays, no one doub s ha he so-called “co pus
e olu ion” (Hanks, 2012; K ishnamu hy, 2002; Rundell, 1992) has helped o highe
mi o how he language wi hou a doub unc ions inside a speci ic eam o i s use s.
Fo ins ance, i used o be s a ed ha p e-co pus dic iona ies no mally con ained a e
meanings o some iden ical lexical gadge s (and hei equi alen ansla ion), howe e
hey lacked o he necessa y common uni s. Some imes he wo ds which a e equen ly
used do no longe appea in he dic iona y mac os uc u e; in di e en cases, he wo ds
a e p o ec ed in he mac os uc u e, bu hei de ini ion lea es a lo o be desi ed.
Nowadays he size o equency is pa o he p e e ed o lexicog aphical wo k. Bu
he keywo d conco dances and he equency o ac o s ha e come o be no only an
quin essen ial esou ce o lexicog aphic documen ing o he s a is ic con en , bu also
inc easingly mo e equen ly on he web-si es o on-line dic iona ies, he s a is ic
con en ma e ial o he headwo ds is complemen ed (o e en eplaced) by way o
dynamically gene a ed con en , p ima ily based on co pus in o ma ion. I is na u al
ha he main ask o he su icien e lec ion o p agma ics which lexicog aphy aces
is an enough pe cep ion o a linguis ic sign, o e coming e hno linguis ic ba ie , which
is o su e p ima ily based on he asymme y o e hno-men al cul u eme. This po en ial
dealing wi h wo (o mo e) linguis ic pic u es o he wo ld and wi h ge ing o know
non-equi alen ocabula y. The ouble o equi alence lies in he a ea, in which an
in e disciplina y consensus has been achie ed: lexico-seman ic s uc u es o lexis o a
p ecise language a e peculia , p ecise o his language and, he e o e, hey a e in pa
unique. I po en ial ha he lexical seman ic s uc u es o wo (o mo e) languages a e
non-isomo phic. Non-isomo phy o lexis ypes he heo e ical and ound empi ical
ci cums ances, examina ion o which leads o conc e e mani es a ions o he ouble o
equi alence in exclusi e disciplines. In his case, we a e only ascina ed in he
me alexicog aphic aspec o his issue. We ag ee wi h ha he hough o equi alence
in he lexicog aphical lookup need o no be de eloped an i-in ui i ely, away om i s
use in he equen language sense, howe e need o be g ea e p ecise, and addi ionally
mus be ex ao dina y om he no ion o equi alence in associa ed disciplines,
especially i we e e o con as i e linguis ics and ansla ion heo y.Equi alence (o
i s absence) is a ma ginal phenomenon, i lexicological s udies a e ela ed o solely one
language. Fo example, you can e e o he lexical synonyms wi hin he limi s o
designa o lexis. They a e ex ensionally equi alen , which skill hey ha e he same
ange o meanings. The hough o equi alence, on he o he hand, plays a essen ial
posi ion in con as i e o con on a ional lexicology. The e a e addi ionally qui e a
numbe lexicological mani es a ions o he p oblem o equi alence.
240
Compa a i e lexicology is ega ded as a pa ial discipline wi h an emphasis on
langue. Acco dingly, he no ion o equi alence in lexicology is concen a ed on he
language sys em, bu , in gene al, is an as ically ague. The ounda ion o he
designa o lexis is polysomic g asp o he language signs. The e o e, he ac o s o he
lexis can be a ious ins ances polyseman ic. While co ela ing one hing o language
A wi h e e y o he elemen o language B, hei deno a i e ela ionship is usually
ypical as a ounda ion o he compa ison. Thus, he e appea s equi alence, no mally
e e ed o as seman ic equi alence, unde nea h he p e equisi es ha , i s ly, he wide
a ie y o sameness in language A equals he wide a ie y o sameness in language B
(and hey ha e he same meaning) and, secondly, hei deno a ion (in pai s o
sameness) is he same.I is necessa y o be awa e abou a ious p ocedu es o he
de ini ion o he equi alen and equi alence in ansla ion s udies. Equi alence o
ansla ion is desc ibed as he common con en ma e ial o he unique ex and he
ansla ion.A. I ano ega ds an equi alen as “ unc ional compliance in a a ge
language, ansmi ing exp ession on he simila le el (wo ds, colloca ions) o all
ele an ac o s inside he gi en con ex , o one o he e sions o ha means o he
o iginal uni in he supply language” (I ano , 2006).
A classical sen ence om he ex book on ansla ion esea ch is as ollows:
“T ansla ion s a s wi h es ablishing equi alence on he ph ase le el” (I ano , 2006).
Undoub edly, he p oblems o ansla ion commence a he s age o a sepa a e ph ase
o colloca ions, when he e seems non-equi alen lexis, i.e. lexical gadge s which do
no ha e hei equi alen s in he goal language. We ag ee wi h ha non-equi alen
lexis (as a phenomenon bo h in ansla ion esea ch and lexicog aphy) gi es a a y o
p oblems. In ansla ion i is connec ed wi h wha is usually e e ed o as
“un ansla able”; as o lexicog aphy, he p oblem is ex a complica ed, due o he ac
a dic iona y does now no u nish as many chances as a ex does o dis inc ypes o
lexical ans o ma ions, wi h he help o which a nonequi alen hough can be
iden i ied.The ime pe iod i sel is common o many au ho s, who unde s and i in a
exclusi e way: some au ho s ega d non-equi alen lexis as a synonym o ealia, he
o he s see simply wo ds, which due o cul u al di e ences do no longe exis in he
o he language. S. Vlakho and S. Flo in in hei e book The Un ansla able in
T ansla ion supply he mos comple e desc ip ion o so s o lexical uni s, which can
be conside ed as non-equi alen ones (Vlakho , Flo in, 1980). I looks ha non-
equi alen lexis, as nicely as lexical gaps (composing a signi ican sec ion o he
coun ywide speci ici y in any language) a e he e ms on he junc ion o a ious
educa ional disciplines, which complica es he me hod o hei de ini ion inside he
amewo k o lexicog aphy. Howe e , he ip o mode n-day lexicog aphe s clea ly
indica es ha in he p ocedu e o compila ion o any bilingual o g ea e lingual
241
ansla ion dic iona y, he issues o con eying li es yle speci ici y, absen in ano he
language, do now no lose hei impo ance:
“…in each and e e y way o li e he e exis ideas o phenomena now no o be
disco e ed some o he place in he wo ld. Such disc epancies be ween cul u es, o
cul u al gaps, p o ide ise o lexical gaps in he ocabula ies o he in ol ed languages,
mani es ing hemsel es mos i idly in he sys em o es ablishing in e lingual
equi alence. This, in u n, makes li e challenging o bo h bilingual lexicog aphe s and
ansla o s. Vocabula y gadge s deno ing p inciples a ibu e o a speci ic cul u e a e
e e ed o h ough a quan i y o names in he li e a u e on he subjec ma e enume a e
such labels as cul u al o cul u e-bound wo ds, cul u e-speci ic concep s, ealia,
cul u e-bound phenomena and ph ases and cul u e-speci ic i ems. Howe e , he
p oposed labels call o a su e disambigua ion. As has been ema ked, cul u es
peci ici y is no longe as easy o pinpoin as i may addi ionally seem. The e a e hese
who a gue ha in eali y e y ew i any ocabula y i ems a e way o li e independen :
“As language is c ea ed and used in con ex , i is ine i able o be in ed wi h he
colo a ion o cul u al idiosync asies” (Podolej, 2009)
The p ocess o ansla ion is o en hinde ed by s uc u al, lexical and
con ex ual cons ain s. Rhy hmical, alli e a i e and onoma opoeic aspec s ha e been
hu dles a he lexical le el. Cul u al nuances o he language cons i u e he congeni al
me i s o any li e a y wo k. They end o esis ansla ion and make ansla ion
unpoe ic. Puns, equi oca ions and idioms cons i u e he lexical p oblems ha li e a y
ansla o s encoun e . Mos o he lexical p oblems a ise om he p oblems o
equi alences. The e a e ou ypes o equi alences: (1) one- o-one equi alence; (2)
one- o-many equi alence; (3) many- o-one equi alence; and (4) one- o-none
equi alence o null equi alence. The i s ype o equi alence is ela i ely
unp oblema ic as a wo d in he Sou ce language has only one equi alen in he Ta ge
language: o ins ance, he wo d amo (La in) has lo e (English) as i s equi alen . Bu
i becomes p oblema ic when he lexical gap be ween he wo languages widens due o
cul u al, social and his o ical di e ences. The second ype o equi alence is inhe en ly
p oblema ic due o al e na i es o equi alen s o e ed: he wo d amo (La in) o e s
h ee al e na i e meanings-e ose, ilia and agape- in G eek. He e he Sou ce language
co e s a wide ange o con ex ual meanings. When such wo ds a e ansla ed, he
ansla o has o choose he po en and i al meaning mos app op ia e o he con ex .
Fo ins ance, when di ine lo e is e e ed o, agape is he meaning app op ia e o he
con ex .
The hi d ype is also p oblema ic as he exac ness o p ecision o meaning
changes in ansla ion. The ou h ype leads o he p oblem o un ansla abili y. While
ansla ing idioms and p o e bial exp essions he ansla o con on s an ob ious
dilemma: whe he he should ans e he i ems om he Sou ce language and ansc ibe
242
hem in he Ta ge language. The ans e o he un ansla able wo ds and hei
ansc ip ion in he a ge language p o ide a local colou o he ansla ion. Thus,
ansla ion is a c ea i e p ocess a e e y le el o which he ansla o makes a choice.
The choice o he ansla o is poli ical as well as aes he ic, hough hey a e mo e o
less synonymous. In he ma e o equi alence, he ansla o ’s choice is no be ween
al e na i e ye exac equi alen s, bu be ween equi alen s mo e o less inexac . So he
choice depends on he ideology o he ansla o and he aes he ic ha he ollows. As
any li e a y ex is a syn hesis o poli ics and aes he ics o he w i e , he ansla o ’s
choice o equi alen s depends on he equi emen s o his ex ual poli ics.All ypes o
ansla ion in ol e loss o gain o meaning. T ansla ion also causes skewing o
meaning while decoding and encoding ideas. This esul s om he choice o he nea es
equi alen . In his ega d, J.C.Ca o d ema ks: “In ansla ion, he e is he subs i u ion
o TL meanings o SL meanings; no ans e ence o TL meanings in o SL. In
ans e ence, he e is an implan a ion o SL meanings in o he TL ex . These wo
p ocess mus be clea ly di e en ia ed in any heo y o ansla ion” (1965:27).
The dis inc ion be ween ansla ion and ans e ence is essen ial o de ine
linguis ic un ansla abili y. J.C.Ca o d de ines ansla ion as a uni-di ec ional p ocess
which in ol es “ he eplacemen o ex ual ma e ial in one language (SL) by equi alen
ex ual ma e ial in ano he language (TL)” (1965:20).I is p ima ily a linguis ic ac as
i in ol es an ope a ion pe o med on languages. Though he de ini ion seems o be
simple, i calls o commen on wo e ms, namely “ ex ual ma e ial” and “equi alen .”
The use o he e m “ ex ual ma e ial” unde lines he ac ha in no mal condi ions o
ansla ion i is no he en i e y o a SL ex ha is eplaced by TL equi alen s. A one
o mo e le els o language he e may be eplacemen s by non-equi alen TL ma e ial
he e is eplacemen o SL g amma and lexis by equi alen TL g amma and lexis.
The e is also eplacemen o SL g aphology by TL g aphology. Bu , he TL g aph
logical o m is in no way a ansla ion equi alen o he SL g aph logical o m. Hence,
he cen al p oblem o any ansla ion p ac ice is ha o inding ansla ion equi alen s.
Se e al heo is s speak on he p oblems o equi alence in ansla ion. Roman Jakobson,
Eugene Nida and An on Popo ic ha e con ibu ed o he heo y o equi alence. In his
essay “On Linguis ic Aspec s o T ansla ion” (1959), Roman Jakobson app oaches he
p oblem o equi alence as a linguis ic p oblem: “Equi alence in di e ence is he
ca dinal p oblem o language and he pi o al conce n o linguis ics” (B owe , 1962:
239). He a gues ha he ansla o ecodes and ansmi s he SL messages in o TL
messages and hus ansla ion in ol es wo equi alen messages in wo di e en codes.
In Jakobson’s discussion, he p oblem o equi alence ocuses on he di e ences in he
s uc u e and e minology o languages a he han on he inabili y o one language o
ende a message w i en in ano he e bal language. He emphasizes ha he p oblem
o equi alence is ela ed o he s uc u e and syn ax o he language.The con en ional