Translation is one of the most important types of speech activity and is necessary for high-grade work of representatives of the most various professions. The major task is search of the corresponding units in the initial text for saving congruence of correlating units. Such units are called translation units.
There are two directions of investigation in science. Firstly the correlation between source texts and target text is investigated. Secondly, the psycholinguistics (whether some branches of psychology) is engaged in processes which occur in mind of the translator. Concept of translation is closely connected with concept of discourse. What is family discourse? Language and gender discourse?
Recently scientists pay attention to investigation of concrete discourse specifics, namely a family English-speaking discourse. The main types of family discourse are the matrimonial dialogical discourse, a parental dialogical discourse and sibling discourse. These types of a discourse are versions of personal-oriented discourse in family sphere.
The actuality is defined by that fact that now oral colloquial speech involves the attention of scientists, because just spontaneous types of a discourse are the most optimum material for identification of the interactive nature and regularities of speech activity which gives the chance to define key parameters of translation of such types of discourse.
There are such tasks as:
- to define the main types of family communication discourse;
- to determine key parameters for explanation of communicators speech behavior;
- to investigate characteristics of matrimonial discourse;
- to compare a matrimonial discourse in original languages and translation;
- to learn lingvo-communicative features of parental discourse;
- to analyse ways of translation of family communication discourse.
The object of investigation is English matrimonial and parental discourse. The subject is peculiarities of base roles of members of the family objectivation in this discourse activity, and also translation of semantic and functional features of a English family discourse, speech means of conflicts solution, use of nonverbal communication, and its translation.
Expediency of any message is defined by its communicative orientation on the recipient. Unlike significant units of language – words and sentences which have no recipient, the utterance has the author, expression and the addressee.
This addressee can be a direct participator of everyday speech dialogue, differentiated group of experts of any special area of cultural communication, differentiated public, contemporaries, adherents, opponents, enemies, managees and chief etc. It can be absolutely uncertain and not concretized (in monologic utterances of emotional type) – all these types and concepts of the addressee are defined by that area of human activity and a life to which this utterance belongs to, to whom the utterance is addressed, and how the sender images and feels his/her addressees, what force of their influence on composition, and especially style of the utterance.
Any speech genre in the field of speech communication has its typical concept of the addressee. The addressee of the utterance can personally coincide with that or with those, to whom the utterance is address. Personal coincidence takes place in everyday speech dialogue: the one, whom I answer, is also my addressee, it is the one, whom I expect, to answer or, in any case, active corresponding understanding.
But in cases of such personal coincidence, one person acts in different roles. The author, building his/her utterances, intends to define and to foresee mentally firther utterance influence on the reader. The regard of the addressee and foresight of his/her reaction often happens to be versatile and brings peculiar internal dramatic nature in the utterance (in some types of everyday speech dialogue).
The addressee and the addresser in English-speaking family dialogical discourse have the certain characteristics depending on their gender, age, status in family, thinking emotionality and rationality. Existence hierarchy of the relations in a family dialogical discourse of which is shown in fixity of communicants social roles, make gender and age the main parameters for an explanation of communicants speech behavior.
The last decade in linguistic science is celebrated by transition from immanent and structural linguistics, to anthropological linguistics which considers the language phenomena in close connection with the person, his/her thinking and practical activities.
Verbal and nonverbal behavior are shown in utterances and speech patterns. Gender differences in this case depend on three factors: a concrete form of this behavior, gender structure of the group and its position – the leader or the managee. There are the following forms of verbal and nonverbal behavior: time during which the participant of dialogue speaks, interruptions of partner language (positive, negative, neutral, successful, unsuccessful), duplications, choice of discussion subject, sound background, statement of questions, repetition, doubt and denial, an opening speech, smiles and laughter, and also touch.
Gender stereotypes in linguistics are considered not only as memory reproduced word connections, but also as prints of specific features of public reality which exists in speaker consciousness. Now consideration of stereotypes in a context of social interaction as behavior models that is connected with defined predetermined ethnocultural situation as verbal fixing of the substantiated requirements of social group is actual.
Continuous change of communicative roles when interlocutors alternately carry out functions of the speaker and the addressee, reflects special character of a dialogical discourse. Scientists refer spontaneity, weak organization, insufficiency of logic coherence, situatedness, , direct address, sociability and direct influence to the communicative characteristics of a dialogical discourse.
Depending on orientation of dialogical interaction the dialogue that is directed on a task, and the dialogue that is directed on relationship between partners are distinguished. Exactly the last type of dialogue is present at a discourse of family communication.
The central link in everyday speech discourse is communication in a family which main types are:
- the matrimonial dialogical discourse (communication “man – woman”),
- a parental dialogical discourse (communication “parents – children”),
- and sibling discourse (communication “brothers – sisters”.
These types of a discourse, considering the social sphere and a position of participants of communication, act as types of personal-focused discourse in family sphere. Typical featuress of such communication is official regulation irrelevancy of communicative behavior.
All participants of a family discourse are well informed about characteristic features and habits of each other practically at all levels of family activity, including features of communicative activity.
Characteristics such discourse is high degree of communication organization spontaneity, situational dependence, relative subjectivity in the solution of all-valuable everyday problems and, as result, logic violation, free operation of structural, lexical, grammatical and stylistic means of utterance’s formation, and high concentration of nonverbal communicative components in speech.
Lost in Translation
The main complexity in dialogues translation from English is that communication registers in other language use are planned more spitted, than in English, and in translation they must be established according to the circumstances of conversation, character and “biographical particulars” of interlocutors, their relations, intentions and other factors which set is called communicative situation in linguistics and psychology. Naturalness of dialogue cannot be reached without taking into consideration communicative situation.
Translating matrimonial discourse, the task of the translator is complicated hundredfold, as he/she should consider not only author’s style, but also consider features of characters, enter into an image and speak words of different characters, creating complete character of each of them. Therefore such translation is a difficult complex of tasks. Except complexity of task of thorough translation of character’s features, translation of direct speech is difficult for other reason. Matrimonial discourse consists of dialogues “husband-wife”, and dialogue as written expression of oral language owns all its characteristic features, but on the other hand, it is a part of the literary text which is consciously picked up by the author, and changing it, the translator distorts the concept of the author’s text.
Characteristic features of family matrimonial and parental communication in English, Ukrainian and Russian literary discourse are:
- emotionally painted words,
- incompleteness of utterances,
- large number ellipsis,
- interrogative sentences, as a form of the utterance or summarizing,
- ease of syntactic links,
- violation of literary norms,
- use of vulgarism,
- special types of the address.
These means can be translated by means of such translational transformations as:
- contextual replacement,
- differentiation and concretization,
- modulation and semantic development,
- antonymic translation,
- partitioning and uniting,
- replacement of passive constructions by active and vice versa,
- transcription and transliteration,
- literal translation,
- grammatical replacements, an explication etc.
Translator’s task is to apprehend and to realize information, including its stylistic, situational, functional and other features. Process of text perception occurs at the same time with the process of its reconstruction on the basis of available information equivalents in target language.
Situational and communicative conditions of creation of the target text specify that an analysis and synthesis of substantial components take place in consciousness of a receptor (translator) at the same time. Analyzing literary translations, including translations with elements of matrimonial and parental discourse, scientists make conclusion that it is impossible to reduce translation process to one model. Together with grammatical transformations which take place in the semantic analysis of the text and in creation of the final utterance, methods of leksiko-syntactic paraphrase, semantic modifications, and, in some cases, procedure of direct compliances finding are applied in translation. And exactly here the important place is occupied by life experience of the translator, idiomatic command of the language of target text, knowledge of elements of cultures. Each of these partial competences corresponds to two subcompetences (addressee’s in the sphere of original language and reproductive in the target language sphere). Both subcompetences mutually supplement each other and form the competence basis that is necessary for translator for rendering difficult in substantial and stylistic relation texts with necessary degree of communicative equivalence.