More interesting and significant differences in the matter of transitivity and intransitivity of the verbs between English and Uzbek and Russian in are in the plan of content. So, some transitive English verbs have intransitive verb correspondences in Uzbek and Russian, comp.:
tofollow (smb.. smth.)- ergashmoq- следоватьза (кем-л., чём-л.)
toapproach (smb., smth.)- yaqinlashmoq- приближатьсяк (кому-л.,
чему-л.)
towatch (smb., smth.)- kuzatmoq- следитьза (кем-л., чём-л.)
and vice versa :
tolistento (smb., smth.) - tinglamoq-слушать (кого-л., что-л.)
towaitfor (smb., smth.) - kutmoq-ждать (кого-л., чего-л.)
It is obvious, that the possibility of two-fold “solution” of any action (either as transitive or as intransitive) is put in the fact of the connection of the verb with two poles: the bearer of the action and its object. Therefore there cannot be absolute border between transitive and intransitive verbs. Thus the verb towatch can be translated not only as ‘kuzatmoq’ следить, but also as ‘tomosha qilmoq’ наблюдать.
In comparing Uzbek, Russian and English one can note that in English the differentiation of transitive and intransitive verbs is much less tough than in Uzbek and Russian. Thus, in most cases two Uzbek and Russian verbs(transitive and intransitive) have one English correspondence:
Ochmoq (transitive) - to open She opened the door.- U eshikni ochdi
Ochilmoq (intransitive) – to open The door opens easily.- Eshik osonlik bilan ochiladi.
Boshlamoq (transitive) – to begin Will you begin reading?- Uqishni boshla.
Boshlanmoq (intransitive)- to begin Our journey began like this.- Bizning sayohatimz huddi shunday boshlangan.
Tushirib qo’ymoq (transitive) – to drop She dropped her handkerchief.- U ro’molchasini tushirib qo’ydi.
Tushib ketmoq (intransitive) – to drop Another leaf dropped on the ground.- Yana bitta barg yerga tushdi.
Yetishtirmoq (transitive)- to grow They grow rice there. –Ular u yerda sholi etishtirishadi.
Usmoq, ulg’aymoq (intransitive)- to grow Children grow fast.- Bolalar tez ulg’ayishmoqda.
In order to understand why English, usually striving for formal completeness and logical exactness of expressing, in this case it is going along contrary way , we must remember the aspiration of Englishmen to compensate syntactical constraint of their speech with more freedom in morphological and semantic relations. It is obvious, thattherubbingoff the borders between transitive and intransitive verbs is one those compensating means, which expand and enrich the opportunities of the language. As a result the broadening of the meaning of many verbs occurs. Here we can also observe the influence of grammatical structure of the language on the character of its lexicon. For example:
She laughed unwillingly, and the laughing reflection under the green hat decided her instantly. U hohlamagan holda kulib yubordi, uning yashil shlyapasi ostidagi kulayotgan chehrasining oynadagi aksi uni qaror chiqarishiga majbur qildi.-Онаневольнорассмеялась, иотражениевзеркалееесмеющегосялицаподзеленойшляпоймоментальнозаставилоеерешиться.
You don't know what a life she led me. – Sizlar uni mening hayotimni do’zzahga aylantirganini bilmaysizlar. Вынезнаете, чтозажизньонамнеустроила.
It is typical for English the constructions, in which intransitive verb becomes transitive in causative meaning “kimnidir biror ishni bajarishga majburlamoq”, for example: toflyaplane, torunapencil and etc. The possibility of this kind of constructions has led to the wide use of laconic and expressive word combinations like: tolaughsmb. outoftheroom (literally.: «ustidan kulib honadan chiqarib yuborish- заставитького-л. выйтиизкомнаты, засмеявего»), towavethequestionaway (literally.: «savolga javob berishda o’zini olib qochmoq- отмахнутьсяотвопроса») and etc.
Sometimes the verb- intransitive in its main meaning- becomes transitive in derivative meaning 'biror- bir narsani(fikrni) qaysidir yo’l bilan ifodalamoq-выразитьчто-л. каким-л. способом', for example:
Неnoddedhisassent. – U boshini egib uz roziligini berdi- Кивкомголовыонвыразилсогласие.
Valentin looked his query at the proprietor. – Valentin savol nazari bilan ho’jainga qaradi.- Валентин вопросительно взглянул на хозяина.
Shecriedherselftosleep.- Uyig’lab –yig’labuhlabqoldi.- Она так много плакала, что наконец уснула.
Speaking about the verbs of existence, we have already stated that they can be used not only independently but also as a link- verb, proper meaning of which is graded and has become the part of the composite predicate. The same thing can occur with some verbs of action. Such possibility is provided by the circumstance that syntactical tie of these verbs with the following members of the sentence (particularly, their meaning of transitivity and intransitivity) remains much less determined and regulated than that Uzbek and Russian have. The object in the above mentioned examples is the thing which cannot be in reality (literally: ‘savol qaramoq-взглянутьвопрос’, ‘rozilik egmoq -кивнутьсогласие»), and this transmits the speech expressive and imagery character. Thus together with the loss of syntactical independence the verb of action undoubtedly expands the semantic opportunities and gains great specific gravity as the center of the entire semantic complex (composite predicate).
Especially flexible in the relation of the category of transitivity-intransitivity are the verbs tolook, tosound, tofeel and some others. Thus tolook has the meaning not only 'qaramoq- смотреть', but also 'ko’rinmoq-выглядеть', and it is not only applied to the acting person and also irrelatively to any person, in impersonal sentences.
Неlookswell. – Uning ko’rinishi yahshi-Онхорошовыглядит.
It looks like rain. –Yomg’r yog’sa kerak.Похоже, чтобудетдождь.
He sounded on edge. – Ovozidan achchiqlanish sezilardi.-Онговорилраздраженно.
It sounds like a good idea to me. Bufikrmengayahshituyulyapti.-Это кажется мне хорошей мыслью.
Не feelswell. Uo’ziniyahshihisqilmoqda.-Он чувствует себя хорошо.
His hands felt so warm and strong, so comfortable to cling to. Uning qo’llari shunchalik illiq va kuchli ediki, unlarga yopishib olish shunchali yoqimli edi.- Руки его были такими теплыми и сильными, к ним так приятно было прильнуть.
How does it feel, my dear, to have the woman you hate stand by you and cloak your sins for you?- Sen yoqtirmagan ayollni seni himoya qilishi va gunohlaringni yashirishga urinishiga , jonim sen qanday qaraysan? Ну, так как тебе нравится, моя милая, что женщина, которую ты ненавидишь, защищает тебя и прикрывает твои грехи?
The same can be applied to the verb toshow, which is used not only as transitive in its main meaning 'ko’rsatmoq- показывать', but also as intransitive verb with the meaning 'ko’rinmoq-виднеться', comp.:
Show me the way. Menga yo’lni ko’rsating-Покажитемнедорогу.
Неhad rank showing on his shoulders. Uning mansabini pogonlaridan ko’rish mumkin edi.-Егочинможнобылоувидетьнапогонах.
Неisdrunk. Itshows. –Umast. Bun ko’rinib turibdi.- Онпьян. Этовидно.
Some transitive verbs can be used in analogous way in the role of reflexive ones: toread, tosell and others.
Thebookreadswell. – Bu kitobni yahshi uqishmoqda.- Этакнигахорошочитается.
Newspapers sell well in the evening.- Gazetalar kechqurunlari yahshi sotiladi.- Вечеромгазетыхорошопродаются.
It is not accidental that the pair of verbs in Uzbek and Russian: hidlamoq- hid taratmoq-нюхать—пахнут;, ta’m bilmoq- ta’mga ega bo’lmoq- пробоватьнавкус—быть... навкус; ushalb ko’rmoq- his qilmoq-ощущать — быть... наощупьand etc. are transformed into English not by two appropriate verbs but by one:
Smell these flowers. Mana bu gullarni hidlab ko’r.-Понюхайэтицветы.
The coffee smells good. Qahva hushbo’y hid taratmoqda.-Кофехорошопахнет.
Taste the cake. – Pirogdan tatib ko’ring.-Попробуйтепирога.
How much better fresh food tastes than food that has come from tins! – Konserva bankalaridan chiqqan mahsulotlarga qaraganda yangi mahsulotlar qanchalik yahshi ta’mga ega.-Насколькожевкуснеесвежиепродукты, чемконсервы!
Thesepoodlesmustfeelverycold. Bupudellargasovuqbo’sakerak.-Этим пуделям, должно быть, очень холодно.
Her hands felt so soft. Uning qo’llari shunchalik yumshoq ediki.-Рукиеебылитакимимягкими.
3.2 Predicate as the center of the sentence
As we have already said the predicate in English is factual center, which gravitates all the parts of the sentence. Particularly it is interesting to mark the fixed place of the negation before the predicate, not depending on to which part it belongs by the meaning.
We do not advocate the rights of black Africans in order to drive white Africans. Biz qora Afrikaliklarning huquqini ularni bu yerlardan quvg’in qilish maqsadida himoya qilayotganimiz yo’q.- Мызащищаемправачерныхафриканцевнедлятого, чтобыизгнатьбелыхафриканцев.
"Неwasn't born here," Leo said. "He was born in New York." “Ubuyerdatug’ilmagan- dediLeo.- UNyu-Yorkdatug’ilgan”- «Он родился не здесь, — сказал Лео. — Он родился в Нью-Йорке».
One can conclude fro here, that in Uzbek and Russian sentence the negation belongs to the word, but in English it belongs to the whole sentence. Consequently, in English the negation is syntactical, and in Uzbek and Russian- morphological.
Indicative example of the fact that in English negative sentence the negation belongs to the entire sentence, not to its separate parts is referring the negation in compound sentence to the main part, though by sense it belongs to the subordinate clause:
I don't think we've been to the theatre for two or three years.- Menimchabizteatrda 2-3 yildavomidatushmadik.- Думаю, что мы не были в театре в течение двух-трех лет.
"Do you think he'll pay the money back?" "No, I don't
think he will. (...) –Seningcha u pulni qaytaradimi? –Yo’q menimcha u pullarni qaytarmaydi. -Нет, думаю, чтонеотдаст.
Adverbs of indefinite tense (often, never, ever and etc.) also precede, as a rule, the predicate. We must note that all of the quantitative adverbs, in contrast to the qualitative, which come in the end of the sentence. Only, also being quantitative adverb comes in most cases before the predicate, irrespective of what word of the sentence it (in Uzbek and Russian the place of the adverb ‘faqat- только’ is stipulated by the meaning).
I've only been along this road once. Men bu yo’lad faqat bir marotaba yurganman- Этойдорогойяездилвсегоодинраз.
Itonlybloomstonight. Bu faqat bugun kechqurun gulladi.- Он цветет только сегодня ночью.
We can suppose, that taking the preposition to the end in special questions (Whatareyoulookingat?) and in the attributive clauses without conjunction at the end of the sentence (Thebookyouarelookingforisonmydesk) is explained by the gravitation of the preposition to the verb- predicate, which controls this preposition.
But not only qualitative adverbs and prepositions gravitate to the verb –predicate. All kind of determiners belonging to it are also closely connected with it. Thus, in nominal composite predicate, expressed by the combination of the verb «tobe + adjective», the modifiers of measure or the quantity are wedged into two components of the predicate- between the link-verb to be and the predicative, which they determine.
The postman was an hour late. –Pochtalon bir soatga kech qoldi.Почтальонопоздалначас.
The snow was three feet deep.- Qorqalinligiuchfutedi.- Снег был глубиной в три фута.
The aspiration to introduce the determiner, which is factual modifier or the object, into the group of is clearly seen in the sentences like:
Неwasmountainborn. – U tog’da tug’ilgan.- Он родился в горах. (literally: «- Он был горнорожденным».)
Не washouseproud. – Uo’zuyibilang’ururlanadi. -Он гордился своим домом. (literally: «Онбылдомомгордый».)
Sometimes the group of the predicate can be very large because of adverbial meaning (manner) which it contains. This happens in composite predicates like:
I am horrid to say such things.
I was surprised to find Elliott very spry.
The elements of these composite predicates are closely connected between each other, but while translating them into Uzbek or Russian they have to be torn, breaking to pieces the predicate into predicate and the modifier of manner, or dividing the simple English sentence into the main and subordinate parts.
Bunday narsalani gapitishim juda ham dahshatli.- Ужасно, что я говорю такие вещи.
Elioto’zinitetiktutayotganligidanmenhayronqoldim.-Я был удивлен, что Эллиотт держался так бодро.
The use of such many-componential predicates with the adverbial meaning in English is stipulated by briefness of the means of expression, compactness of English sentence.
Неseemed to recognise her at once. – Bir qarashda u uni birdaniga tanib qolgan degan hayol keladi.-Казалось, онсразужеузналее.
I happened to meet him there.- Shunday bo’ldiki, men uni o’has yerda uchratib qoldim.-Случилосьтак, чтояего
тамвстретил.
She appeared to misunderstand me.- Menimcha, umenitushunmadi. -По-видимому, она не поняла меня.
As we can see these simple sentences are translated into Uzbek and Russian either by compound sentence or by introductory word.
The close connection of the predicate with the modifier can be seen in other kind of word combinations, which have become common for English, but still keeping its imagery character.
She was stung out of her fear.- Bu uning nafsoniyatiga shunchalik tegdiki, u hattoki qo’rqishni bas qildi.- Этотакуязвилоее, чтоонапересталабояться.
This shocked Mr Campbell into speech. –BujanobKempbelnishunchalikhayratlantiribyubordiki, uhattogapiribyubordi. -Этотакпотряслом-раКэмпбелла, чтоонзаговорил.
The new situation seemed likely to torture her into desperation. Ishning bunday tus olishi uni qayg’uga botiradi degan hayolga olib keldi.-Изменившеесяположениедел, казалось, доведетеедоотчаяния.
In such word combinations the meaning of the modifier of manner is always present.
tofrown — humrayib qaramoq- взглянутьисподлобья, глядетьхмурясь
toscowl — jahl bilab qaramoq-сердитосмотреть
tostare— baqrayibqaramo-смотреть пристально, с изумлением уставиться
tosmile— iljayibqaramoq-с улыбкой взглянуть на кого-л.
tosmirk — o’zigaishonganholdailjayibqaramoq-смотреть с самодовольной, деланной или глупой улыбкой
togrin—tishiniko’rsatibqaramoq- смотреть с ухмылкой
tosquint —bilintirmayqaramoq- смотреть искоса, украдкой
tosnub— past nazar bilan qaramoq-смотретьсвысока, спрезрениемan so on.
As it is clearly seen such verbs are translated into Uzbek and Russian not by a single word, but by the combinations of the words.
C O N C L U S I O N
Our qualification paper deals with the problems of the theory of translation and the theoretical grammar, and it was carried out at the interfaces between these two subjects, which shows their close connection.
The object of investigation was English predicate, its properties and the way of transforming it into Uzbek language, but we have also touched Russian.
In general while translating the predicate there are not any difficulties, if the predicate is expressed by the action verbs, therefore we have taken the most interesting and significant, and at the same time causing problems for the translator parts of the predicate, that is the link- verbs, to be and to have. Besides being a link verb they fulfill a greater number of functions, sometimes forming idiomatic expressions. Generally to be is not translated into Uzbek in present tense, but in the future and in the past tenses it appears. We have revealed the cases when one should use action verbs in translation. The same is with the verb to have, which besides its main meaning “ega bo’lmoq” have a number of different meanings, and most of them are idiomatic.