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.
| …How many attacks have you seen and you ask me why?… [1] | …Мало ли вы наступлений видели, если спрашиваете меня почему?… [2] |
| As it is seen from the example, the second subject in the subordinate clause is missing. This proves the features of Russian where one of the subject, if it is the same, may be omitted and actually the sentence becomes mononuclear one. | |
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.
| …This is the easy country of the pass where the stream flows gently…[1] | …Тут место ровное, и река течет спокойно…[2] |
| Subordination is transformed into coordination due to the initial words in the Russian translation. Actually, the initial phrase тутместоровное instead of the English variant This is the easy country of the pass prevents the use of subordination. The translator wanted to create the sentence where one circumstance (месторовное) supplements to the other (…ирекатечетспокойно) as compared with the English one where one part (the easy country) is characteristic of the other (where the stream flows gently). | |
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.
| …He lay flat on the brown, pine-needled floor of the forest, his chin on his folded arms,and high overhead the wind blew in the tops of the pine trees… [1] | …Он лежал на устланной сосновыми иглами бурой земле, уткнув подбородок в скрещенные руки,а ветер шевелил над ним верхушки высоких сосен…[2] |
| The present example shows the transformation of the word combination “his chin on his folded arms” into the adverbial participle construction «уткнувподбородоквскрещенныеруки». Actually, here we deal with partially morphological transformation. As for the change of the structure, it was effected with minimal losses and the translator managed to keep the original syntactical structure without transpositions and maintaining the rhythm of the original phrase. | |
| …He worked his arm through the other strap and settled the weight of the pack against his back…[1] | …Потом надел другую лямку и поправил рюкзак, чтобы тяжесть пришлась на всю спину…[2] |
| Here the coordination in the source sentence was change into the subordination and the clause of purpose, in particular. Such transformations often occur while translating from English into Russian. In terms of syntactical transformations it should be marked that in there are one subject in the source text and two subjects in the target texts ( [он] надел and тяжесть пришлась). | |
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.
| …He remembered now noticing, without realizing it, that Pablo’s trousers were worn soapy shiny in the knees and thighs…[1] | …Ему вспомнилось, что штаны Пабло вытерты до блеска на коленях и с внутренней стороны ляжек, он заметил это сразу, но как-то не придал значения…[2] |
| Transposition of the initial members of the sentence is connected with certain stress imposed on these members. Transformation results from thematic and rhematic difference. Russian rheme tends to have final position as compared with English one. Also Gerund was transformed into subordinate clauses that is transformation typical of English –Russian translation as there is no category of Gerund in Russian. Conversion of the principal clause is also significant. The phrase he remembered (subject + predicate) was transformed into Passive construction with the impersonal finite verb вспомнилось with the supplement ему. | |
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.
| …Across this gorge is the bridge…[1] | …Вот через теснину и перекинут мост… [2] |
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 иwhich 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 вотчерезтеснину. 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.
| – “It [attack] will start on time, if it is your attack,” – Robert Jordan said.– “They are never my attacks,” – Golz said. [1] | – Если наступлением руководите вы, оно начнется вовремя, – сказал тогда Роберт Джордан.Я никогда не руковожу наступлением, – сказал Гольц. [2] |
| In the target sentence the subordinate clause precedes the principle one has a little bit inverted word order because the pronoun is at the end of the clause. Thus, an emphasis is made on the agent of the action. The key word of the reply is the word never. It is emphasized in both variants with intonation, with certain syntactical structure and it really sounds as the marked word. | |
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.
| …He must have an outfit…[1] | …Наверное, у него полная экипировка…[2] |
| The verb must is used in the source sentence in its modal meaning of probability what the translator conveyed in the target text. It caused the syntactical transposition. The verb must is converted into the adverb наверное in the target sentence. The syntactical structure of the sentence was changed. It became impersonal sentence. The subject he became the supplement него. The word outfit is rather polysemantic in English and was translated as экипировка that is with more concretized meaning. Nevertheless, the average length of the original sentence is kept and the target sentence is equivalent in terms of expressiveness. Translation is realized at a word and a phrase level. | |
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.