The theory of translation is subdivided into a general theory dealing with the general characteristics of translation. The General Theory of Translation has clearly defined subject matter — the process of translation including its results. The GTT reflects what is common to all types and varieties of translation of fiction, poetry, technical and scientific literature and official documents. As each special branch depends on special branches are mainly concerned with the specifics of each.
The main direction in the history of linguistic theory of translation inconsiderable the earnest.
Linguistic theory of translation was developed by Russian scholars K V Retsver and A V Flodov, who pioneered in Linguistic analyses of translation problems.
They suggested the theories of regular correspondence. They noted, the translation is inconsiderable without the serious linguistic bases.
They studied two main things while analyzing linguistic phenomena:
- Original language
- Transforming language.
The authors of the theory paid more attention to the typology of relationship between linguistic units and equivalents. They defined permanent correspondence to be not sensitive to the context
The leugue of Notion.
Translation act by two phases:
- Communication with the sender and translation communication between the translation and receptor.
- The translation act as a target language sender producing and equivalent and redirecting it to the target large receptor.
The translation of phraseological units is not easy matter as it depends on several factors. Different combinability of words; homonymy, synonymy, polysemy of phraseological units and presence of falsely identical units, which make it necessary to take into one account the context. Besides, a large member of phraseological units have stylistic expressive component in meaning, which usually have a specific notional feature. So, it is just necessary to get acquainted with the main principles of the general theory of phraseology.
The following types of phraseological units may be observed: phrasemes and idioms. A unit of constant context consisting of a dependent and a constant indicatory may be called phraseme.
An idioms is a unit of constant context which is characterized by an integral meaning of the whole and by weakened meanings of the components, and in which is dependent and the indicating elements are identical and equal to the whole lexical structure of the phrase. And type of the phraseological units can be presented as a definite micro-system. In the process of translating phraseological units functional adequate linguistic units linguistic principles. These principles reveal elements of likeness and distinction. Certain parts of these systems may correspond in form and context or have no adequacy.
The main types of phraseological conformities are as follows:
- Complete conformities.
- Partial conformities.
- Absence of conformities.
Complete coincidence of form and context of phraseological units in rarely met with:
- Black frost — qora sovuq.
- To bring oil to fire — alangaga yog’ quymoq.
Partial conformities of phraseological units in two languages assume lexical, grammatical and lexico-grammatical differences with identify of meaning and style, they are figuratively close, but differ in lexical composition, morphological number and syntactic arrangement of words order.
1. Partial lexic conformities by lexic parameters:
No with a bean — bir gruch arzimaslik, bir chaqaga arzimaslik.
There the word “bean” means “lovia” in Uzbek, but we have chaged the word “bean” to “guruch”. In this translation we take into account the social life, national meals of uzbek country as “rise” — “guruch” is more midely used and it is rightly chosen translation.
To get out of bed on the wrong feet — chap yoni bilan turmoq.
2. Partial conformities by the grammatical parameters:
A. Different as to morphological arrangement .
To fish in trouble mater — loyqa suvda baliq tutmoq.
To agree like cats and dogs — it mushukdek yashamoq.
B. Different as to syntactical arrangement:
Strike while iron is hot — temirni qizigida bos.
3. Absence of conformities:
Many English phraseological units have no phraseological conformities in Uzbek and Russian. In the first instance this concerns phraseological units based on realias.
When translating units of this kinds it is advisable to use the following types of translation:
- A verbatim word for translation.
- Translation by analogy.
- Descriptive translation.
Verbatim translation is possible when the way of thinking does not bear a specific National feature.
To call things by their names — xar narsani uz nomi bilan atamoq.
The arms rose — qurollanish poygasi.
Gold war — sovuq urush.
Translation by analogy. This way of translation is resorted to when the phraseological unit has a specific National realia
1. “Pick” said the dwarf, translating his head in at the door — “my pet”, “my pencil”,.
Pik azizim, tolibim, kuzginamning nuri, xitob qildi eshikka boshini suqqan odam.
2. To pull somebody’s leg- kimnidir axmoq qilmoq.
Descriptive translation that is translation phraseological units by a free combination of words, it is possible when the phraseological unit has a particular National feature and has no analogue translation into.
To enter the house — parlament a’zosi bulmoq.
To cross the floor of the house — bir parlamentdan boshqasiga utib ketmoq.
In the examples given above the word “house” is translated as “parlament” as a political word.
Functionally and semantically in separable units that are usually called phraseological units. Phraseological units cannot be freely made up in speech but are reproduced as readymade units. The lexical components in the phraseological units are stable and they are non-motivated, that is its meaning cannot be decoded from the meaning of its components and they do not allow their lexical components to be changed or substituted. In phraseological units the individual components do not seem to posses any lexical meaning outside the word group.
Red tape, to get rid of, to take place, to lead the dance, to take care.
Hence, A V Koonin thinks that the phraseological units must be considered as an independent linguistic part of lexicology. His classification of phraseological units is based on the function of them in speech.