ON THE TRANSLATION OF METAPHORICAL MODELS OF THE TARGET NAME «HUMEN BEING» IN THE UKRAINIAN LANGUAGE

Authors

  • Yurii SHEPEL Oles Honchar Dnipro National University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24919/2522-4565.2021.45.38

Keywords:

metaphor, connotation, translation transformation, anthropocentrism, cognitive linguistics, culture, pragmatics

Abstract

The article is devoted to linguo-cognitive especially lexical-semantic transformations in the translation of anthropocentric productive metaphorical models. The material base was literary and encyclopedic sources, as well as explanatory dictionaries. The article explores and describes the features of lexical-semantic transformations. The author aims to conduct and describe the linguo-cognitive analysis of the anthropocentric metaphoricity of models in the original and translation languages in order to determine the adequacy of the translation. The object of analysis is addressing 50 conceptual anthropocentric metaphoricity of models from the work “Vanity Fair” by William Makepeace Thackeray. The subject of the research is the linguacognitive features of the use of translation transformations in the translation of anthropocentric metaphorical models, taking into account their connotative potential. The analysis is performed using general scientific research methods, such as: descriptive-analytical – to determine the patterns of conceptual modeling; conceptual and contextual – to formulate levels of translation equivalence according to anthropocentric conceptual models. The article determined that the texts of fiction embody the process of verbalizing concepts. The concept is part of the universal. The features of conceptualization and categorization are based on ethno cultural factors. The author argues that the conceptual projection in translation, the metaphorically of models depends on how close the conceptual pictures of the worlds of the original language and the target language are to each other. It is shown that the choice of the conceptual relationship is due to the creative individuality of the translator, his knowledge of the cognitive base of culture, taking into account especially the recipient.

References

Арутюнова Н.Д. Предложение и его смысл. Москва, 1976. 383 с.

Беркнер С.С., Вошина О.Е. Проблема сохранения индивидуального стиля автора и стиля произведения в художественном переводе. Вестник ВГУ. 2003. № 6. C. 71–73.

Борисенкова Л.М. Когнитивный диссонанс как переводческая проблема. Вестник НГЛУ. 2009. № 4. С. 72–78.

Брославская Е.М. Этнокультурные особенности зооморфизмов в русском, украинском и английском языках. Вестник МСУ. 2001. № 6. С. 49–52.

Виноградов В.С. Введение в переводоведение: общие и лексические вопросы. Москва, 2001. 224 с.

Влахов С.І., Флорин С.П. Непереводимое в переводе. Москва, 1986. 416 с.

Гак В.Г. Метафора: универсальное и специфическое / под ред. В.Н. Телия. Москва, 1988. 262 с.

Комиссаров В.Н. Современное переводоведение. Москва, 2001. 192 с.

Комиссаров В.Н. Теория перевода: (лингвистические аспекты). Москва, 1990. 253 с.

Макарова И.А. Уильям Джералд Голдинг: Одиссея к Британским островам. Рига, 2011. 110 с.

Метафора в языке и тексте / В.Н. Телия и др. ; под ред. В.Н. Телия. Москва, 1988. 176 c.

Рецкер Я.И. Пособие по переводу. Москва, 1982. 159 с.

Швейцер А.Д. Теория, и практика перевода. Москва, 1988. 216 с.

Якобсон Р.О. О лингвистических аспектах / под ред. В.Н. Комиссарова. Москва, 1978. 243 с.

Joseph G. Foundations of Meaning: Primary Metaphors and Primary Scenes. California, 1997. Vol. 1. 280 p.

Lakoff G. The contemporary theory of metaphor. Metaphor and Thought / ed. by А. Ortony. Cambridge, 1993. 279 p.

Mandelblit N. The Cognitive View of Metaphor and it’s Implication for Translation Theory. Translation and Meaning: Part 3. Maastricht, 1995. P. 93–495.

Thompson R. The Edwardians: The Remaking of British Society. Routledge, 1992. 87 p.

Published

2021-09-23