Other “troublemaking” lexical units: numerals, proper names, specific items of

Date: 2015-10-07; view: 792.

Them

Set phrases (clichés) and phraseological units (idioms) are “structurally, lexically and semantically fixed phrases or sentences having the meaning, which is not made up by the sum of meanings of their component parts” [Корунець 2003: 182]. An important feature of these units is their figurative meaning (connotation). The difference between the two is, perhaps, that stereotype set phrases “of today” are often used in oral discourse adding positive or negative assessment to it or even in quite neutral contexts (e.g. cold-blooded killing; financial levers; the rule of law; double standards; interagency rivalry; run for the presidency; to put a great price on something; гальмуючий фактор; марні зусилля; плідне співробітництво; подати на розгляд; передвиборний марафон; розсипання у вдячності; бути в ефірі, etc), while phraseological units are used in cases, when there is a strong need to reinforce argumentation by reference to “the popular wisdom”, or “wisdom of our ancestors or famous people”, or just to add emotional colouring to what is being said (e.g. the sword of Damocles; Pyrrhic victory; to cast pearls before swine; to fish in troubled waters; to climb on the band wagon; to look a gift horse in the mouth; to sing for someone's supper; одним ударом двох зайців убити; вставляти палиці в колеса; оберігати таємницю родинного вогнища; ходити по краю безодні; на ладан дихати; підкласти свиню, etc).

Methods of translating/interpreting set phrases and phraseological units are described by many authors [Корунець 2003: 182-198; Кунин 1972; Рецкер 2004: 143-165, etc], however successful application of these methods depends upon the capacity of the “operational memory” of the interpreter. Set phrases due to their frequent occurrence are easier to keep in memory comparing to phraseological units, some of which are quite rare, outdated or extremely culturally specific. Therefore, as far as idioms are concerned, recommendations for interpreters are as follows:

1) The best way of interpreting set phrases and phraseological units is to choose an absolute equivalent, near equivalent or an analogy, e.g. cold-blooded killing – холоднокровне вбивство; financial levers – фінансові важелі; the rule of law – верховенство права; “гальмуючий” фактор – impediment; марні зусилля – futile effort(s); плідне співробітництво – fruitful co-operation; the sword of Damocles – дамоклів меч; to cast pearls before swine – кидати (розсипати) перли перед свинями; убити двох зайців – to kill two birds with one stone; що з воза впало, те пропало @ there is no use crying over spilt milk; the spectres at the feast @ложка дьогтю у бочці з медом.

2) If no equivalents or analogies can be found in the “operational memory” of the interpreter, then there always exists an option of a descriptive translation (i.e. translating by lexical items without connotation), e.g. to climb on the band wagon – приєднатися до руху (групи людей, політичної партії), що має шанс на успіх;

3) Special care should be taken of the cases, when speakers distort the meaning of an idiom or misuse it. If the interpreter feels that such distortion is unintentional and there is no “hidden connotation” behind it (which is, in fact, sometimes difficult to feel), then interpreter has the right to “correct” the speaker and find the proper variant of translating, which may be prompted by the context, e.g.: ми змушені будемо *запобігти до використання сили – we will have to use force; не слід намагатися *підставити під цьогослона всі його чотири ноги – it is not worth trying to settle all problems artificially; ми *приносимо вам таку велику вдячність – we are very grateful to you; тут ми можемо *поставити фіфті на фіфті – we can count fifty-fifty here, etc.