Lexical and grammatical peculiarities of scientific-technical texts

Contents

Introduction

1. Theoretical issues of translation

1.1 Development of translation notion in linguistics

1.2 Equivalence of translation

1.3 Types of translation

1.4 Pragmatics of translation

2. Lexical and grammatical peculiarities of scientific-technical texts

2.1 The characteristic of the scientific and technical language

2.2 Analysis of terminology in scientific-technical style

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

At present time there is a great necessity to emphasize scientific-technical translation not only as a special kind of translation activity and special theory that investigates this kind of activity but as to assign scientific-technical translation a status of independent applied science. From the linguistic viewpoint peculiarities of scientific-technical are spread on its stylistics, grammar and lexics. The main task of scientific-technical translation is a possibly clear and precise bringing of the information to the reader. This can be achived by logical interpretation of actual material without explicit emotionality. The style of scientific-technical materials can be identified as formally logical.

Scientific-technical texts reveal a great number of grammar peculiarities. The most typical lexical feature of scientific-technical materials is terms and terminology saturation as well as presence of lexical structures and acronyms. A special place in such materials are the texts oriented not only for this group language speakers but for representatives of a certain professional group with certain extralinguistic knowledge.

The aim of this term paper is devoted to peculiarities of scientific-technical translation.

The following tasks were set up to identify translation peculiarities of technical materials:

1. Reveal and describe common linguistic basis of translation, identify what peculiarities of language systems and functions are the foundations of translation process.

2. Classify main kinds of translation activity.

3. Research peculiarities of scientific-technical materials.

4. Study specific English terminology required for professional translation.

5. Analyse grammatical and lexical peculiarities of scientific-technical texts.

The object of this research is some scientific-technical texts representing manuals for electric devices. The subject of this research is the translation of scientifi-technical materials.

The paper consists of introduction, two chapters and conclusion. It is also provided with bibliography list.

The introduction explains the urgency of the research theme, its theoretical and practical value, it identifies the object, subject, aim and tasks of the work.

The first chapter of this research is devoted to the review of theoretical issues of translation, classification of translation and description of certain kinds of translation as well as types of texts being translated.

The second chapter ivestigates scientific-technical terminology, morphological structure of terms (simple, compound, term phrases), it analyses the main approaches of their translation into English (use of equvalents, analogues, calking and transliteration), structure of scientific-technical terms, translation of full items, acronyms, company items and difficulties related to structure differences of compared languages.

Methodology of the research. The aim achivement of the research and implementation of the set up tasks outlines the need in a number of theoretical and emperical methods of research (theoretical research, concretization, modelling, studying of specific literature, manuals, dictionaries).

Theoretical value of the research results. The ivestigation, detalization of the issues studied, theoretical value of the received results leads to the conclusion that this research finds out the necessity to emphasize scientific-technical translation as an independent applied science.

The results of the research are submitted in the conclusion of the work.

1. Theoretical issues of translation

Translation is the interpretation of the meaning of a text in one language and the production, in another language, of an equivalent text that communicates the same message. Translation must take into account a number of constraints, including context, the rules of grammar of the two languages, their writing conventions, their idioms and the like. Consequently, as has been recognized at least since the time of the translator Martin Luther, one translates best into the language that one knows best. Traditionally translation has been a human activity, though attempts have been made to computerize or otherwise automate the translation of natural-language texts (machine translation) or to use computers as an aid to translation (computer-assisted translation). [1; 48] Perhaps the most common misconception about translation is that there exists a simple “word-for-word” relation between any two languages, and that translation is therefore a straightforward and mechanical process. On the contrary, historical differences between languages often dictate differences of expression. Hence, source and target texts may differ significantly in length. In addition, translation is always fraught with uncertainties as well as the potential for inadvertent “spilling over” of idioms and usages from one language into the other, producing linguistic hybrids, for example, "Franglais" (French-English), "Spanglish" (Spanish-English) and "Poglish" (Polish-English). [2; 31]

The translation of technical texts (manuals, instructions, etc). More specifically, texts that contain a high amount of terminology, that is, words or expressions that are used (almost) only within a specific field, or that describe that field in a great deal of detail. The translation of scientific research papers, abstracts, conference proceedings, and other publications from one language into another. The specialized technical vocabulary used by researchers in each discipline demand that the translator of scientific texts have technical as well as linguistic expertise.

1.1 Development of translation notion in linguistics

Among multiple problems that modern linguistics studies an important role is played by studying of lingustic aspects of cross-language speaking activity that is called translation or translating activity. Translation is an ancient human’s activity. Due to groups of people appeared in the history of mankind had different languages the bilinguals became urgent as they helped communication between groups with different languages. Then writing appeared and along with oral interpreters written translators became urgent as well. They translated different texts of official, religious and business issues. From its very beginning translation played a significant social function allowing people of different languages communicate. Spreading of written translations gave people access to cultural achivements of other people and it made interacting and intersaturation of literatures and cultures feasible. Knowledge of foreign languages allows reading books originally written in those languages [3; 562].

The first theoreticals of translation were the translators themselves who tried to generalize their own experience. Translators of ancient world discussed the issue of proximity degree to the source text. In early Bible translations or translations of other materials that were considered to be sacral and exemplary we can find word for word approach of the source text interpretation that sometimes lead to partly or even full misunderstanding of translations. That is why later translators tried theoretically approve the right of translator for reasonable variety in subject to the source text that meant the interpretation of meaning and the impression of the source text instead of word for word coping [4; 124].

The foundations of scientific theory of translation started to be develped in the middle of XXth century when the problematics of translating appeared to be urgent amongst linguists. Before that period it was thought that translation is not the issue of linguistic range. Translators themselves considered linguistic aspects to be non-significant but totally technical role. The translator was supposed to be fluent both in source and target languages but knowledge of the language was just a preliminary condition and did not cover its meaning.

By the middle of XXth century the attitude to translation activity had changed and its systematic studying commenced. During this period the translation of political, commercial, scientific-technical and other texts was of great priority. In those types of translation the features of individual writer’s style were not important. Due to this fact more and more attention was paid to the main difficulties of translation related to different structures and functioning of languages in this process.

The meaning of language units was emphasized by more precise requirements for the translation. During the translation of such materials it was not enough to get “general” translation as the translation was supposed to provide information transmission in all details up to the meaning of single words. It was required to identify linguistic meaning of this process and what factors identified it and what range they have for information transmiting. [4,5; 37,12]

1.2 Equivalence of translation

So, there are always two texts during translation, and one of them is initial and is created independently on the second one, and the second text is created on the basis of the first one with the help of some certain operations - the inter language transformations. The first text is called “the text of original"; the second text is called “the text of translation". The language of the text of original is called “ the source language” (SL). The language of the text of translation is called “ the target language” (TL). [10; 97]

We need to define the most important thing: why do we consider that the text of translation is equivalent to the text of original? For example, why do we speak that the Russian sentence “Мой брат живет в Лондоне" is the translation of the English sentence “My brother lives in London", while the Russian sentence “Я учусь в университете” is not the translation of the English sentence given above - to say in other words - is not equivalent to it? Obviously, the replacement of the text in one language by the text in the other language is not always the translation. The same idea can be expressed in the other way: the process of translation or the inter language transformation is realised not arbitrary, but with the help of some certain rules, in some strict frameworks. And if we do not observe this rules we have already no rights to speak about translation. To have the rights to be called the translation, the text on TL should contain in it something that the text on SL contains. Or else, while replacing the text on SL by the text on TL it is necessary to keep some certain invariant; the measure of keeping of this invariant defines by itself the measure of the equivalence of the text of translation to the text of original. So, first of all, it is necessary to define what is the invariant in the process of translation, that is in the process of transformation of the text on SL in the text on TL. [10; 176]

At the decision of this problem it is necessary to take in account the following. The process of translation directly depends on bilateral character of a mark, as it is called in a mark systems science - semiotics - It means that any mark can be characterised from two sides, or plans the plan of expression or form and the plan of contents or meaning. It is known that the language is a specific mark system, that is why the units of language are also characterised by the presence of two plans, both form and meaning. Thus the main role for translation is played by that fact that different languages contain different units and this units differ from each other in the way of expression, that is by the form, but they are similar in the way of the contents, that is by the meaning. For example, the English word "brother" differs from Russian word “брат" in the way of the expression, but coincides with it in the way of the contents, that is has the same meaning. [11; 312]

The English word "brother" has not only the meaning “брат" but also some meanings expressed in Russian language by the words “собрат", “земляк", “коллега”, “приятель" etc. And the Russian word “брат" in the combination “двоюродный брат” corresponds not to the English word "brother", but to the word "cousin", which means not only “двоюродный брат” but also “двоюродная сестра". This phenomenon, namely, the incomplete concurrence of systems of meanings of units in different languages, complicates the process translation. Taking in account this fact we can say, that if we replace the English word "brother" by the Russian word “брат", the process of translation takes place here, as these words, differing in the way of expression, that is by the form, coincide or are equivalent in the way of the contents, that is by the meaning. Actually, however, as the minimal text is the sentence, the process of translation is always realised in the limits of minimum one sentence. And in the sentence, as a rule, the discrepancy between the units of different languages in the way of the contents is eliminated. Proceeding from this, we can give now the following definition of the translation:

The translation is the process of transformation of the speech product in one language into the speech product in the other language by keeping the constant plan of the contents, that is the meanings.

About “ the keeping of the constant plan of the contents” it is possible to speak only in the relative, but not in the absolute sense. During the inter language transformation some losses are inevitable, that is the incomplete transference of meanings, expressed by the text of the original, is taking place. [10; 29]

So, the text of translation can never be complete and absolute equivalent of the text of original; the task of the interpreter is to make this equivalence as complete as it is possible, that is to achieve the minimum of losses. It means, that one of the tasks of the theory of translation is the establishment of the order of transference of meanings. Taking into account that there are various types of meanings, it is necessary to establish which of them have the advantages during the transference in the process of translation, and which of them it is possible “to endow" so that the semantic losses would be minimal while translating.

To finish the consideration of the question about the essence of translation, it is necessary to answer one question yet. This question arises from the definition of translation equivalence based on the keeping of the constant plan of the contents, that is the meaning, given above. It was already marked that the opportunity of keeping of plan of the contents, that is the invariance of meanings while translating, assumes that in the different languages there are some units that are similar in the way of meaning.

The divergence in the semantic systems of different languages is a certainty fact and it is the source of numerous difficulties arising before the interpreter in the process of translation.

That is why, many researchers consider that the equivalence of the original and the translation is not based on the identity of expressed meanings. From the numerous statements on this theme we shall quote only one, belonging to the English theorist of translation J. Ketford: “ … The opinion that the text on SL and the text on TL “have the same meaning" or that there is “a carry of meaning" while translating, have no bases. From our point of view, the meaning is the property of the certain language. The text on SL have the meaning peculiar to TL; for example, the Russian text has Russian meaning, and the English text, that is the equivalent of it, has the English meaning. [12; 120]

For the benefit of translation it is possible to state the following arguments:

In the system of meanings of any language the results of human experience are embodied, that is the knowledge that the man receives about the objectively existing reality.

In any language, the system of language meanings reflects the whole external world of the man, and his own internal world too, that is the whole practical experience of the collective, speaking the given language, is fixed. As the reality, environmental different language collectives, has much more than common features, than distinguishes, so the meanings of different languages coincide in a much more degree, than they miss. The other thing is that these meanings (the units of sense or “semes’) are differently combined, grouped and expressed in different languages: but it concerns already not to the plan of the contents but to the plan of the language expression.

The greatest difficulties during translation arise when the situation described in the text on

SL is absent in the experience of language collective - the carrier of TL, otherwise, when in the initial text the so-called “realities” are described, that is different subjects and phenomena specific to the given people or the given country.

The ability to describe new unfamiliar situations is the integral property of any language; and this property makes what we speak about to be possible.

The translation was determined above as the process of transformation of speech product in one language into the speech product in the other language. Thus, the interpreter deals not with the languages as the systems, but with the speech products, that is with the texts. Those semantic divergences, that is in the meanings, which we are talking about, concern, first of all, to systems of different languages; in the speech these divergences very often are neutralised, erased, brought to nothing.

The concrete distribution of elementary units of sense (“semes" or semantic units) on separate words, word combinations or sentences of the given text is defined by the numerous and complex factors. And, as a rule, it does not coincide in the text on SL and text on TL. But it concerns not to the plan of the contents, but to the plan of expression and is not the infringement of a principle of semantic equivalence of the texts of original and the text of translation. [15; 65]

Last give an example to prove the fact given above. In the story of the known English writer S. Moem “A Casual Affair " we can see the following sentence: " He'd always been so spruce and smart; he was shabby and unwashed and wild-eyed ". This is the Russian variant of this sentence: "Прежде он был таким щеголем, таким элегантным, а теперь бродил по улицам Сингапура грязный, в лохмотьях, с одичалым взглядом. (translation of Litvinova M) On the first sight the Russian text do not seems to be the equivalent to the English one: there are such words as "прежде, а теперь, бродил по улицам Сингапура" in it, which have not the direct conformities in the text of original. But really, the semantic equivalence is available here, though here are no verbal equivalence, of course. The thing is that the Russian words “прежде" and “а теперь” transfer the meanings, which are expressed not by the words, but by the grammatical forms in the English text: the opposition of the forms of the verb "to be" -“had been” and “was” expresses that the first event is taking place before the second one, which has the logical expression through adverbs of time in Russian language. [10; 90]

Words “бродил по улицам Сингапура" transfer the semantic information, which the initial English text contains too, but in one of the previous sentences, not in the given sentence (He didn't been the job in Sumatra long and he was back again in Singapore). So, the semantic equivalence is provided not between the separate words and even not between the separate sentences here, but between the whole text on SL and the whole text on TL as a whole. [12; 37]

So, the semantic divergences between the languages can not serve as the insuperable obstacle for the translation, by virtue of that circumstance, that the translation deals with the languages not as the abstract systems, but with the concrete speech products (texts). And in their limits there is the complex interlacing and interaction of qualitatively diverse language means being the expressions of meanings - of words, grammatical forms, and "super signments" means, transmitting this or that semantic information together. That semantic equivalence of the texts of the original and the text of translation, which we regard as the necessary condition of the process of translation, exists not between the separate elements of these texts, but between the texts as a whole. And inside the given text the numerous regroupings, rearrangement and redistribution of separate elements are not only allowed, but frequently they are simply inevitable, (" translation transformations "). So, while translating, there is a strict rule - the principle of submission of elements to the whole, of the lowest units to the highest. [16; 176]

1.3 Types of translation

Though the basic characteristics of translation can be observed in all translation events, different types of translation can be singled out depending on the predominant communicative function of the source text or the form of speech involved in the translation process. Thus we can distinguish between literary and informative translation, on the one hand, and between written and oral translation (or interpretation), on the other hand. [18; 251]

Literary translation deals with literary texts, i. e. works of fiction or poetry whose main function is to make an emotional or aesthetic impression upon the reader. Their communicative value depends, first and foremost, on their artistic quality and the translator's primary task is to reproduce this quality in translation.

Informative translation is rendering into the target language non-literary texts, the main purpose of which is to convey a certain amount of ideas, to inform the reader. However, if the source text is of some length, its translation can be listed as literary or informative only as an approximation. A literary text may, in fact, include some parts of purely informative character. Contrariwise, informative translation may comprise some elements aimed at achieving an aesthetic effect. Within each group further gradations can be made to bring out more specific problems in literary or informative translation. [2,7; 34,97]

Literary works are known to fall into a number of genres. Literary translations may be subdivided in the same way, as each genre calls for a specific arrangement and makes use of specific artistic means to impress the reader. Translators of prose, poetry or plays have their own problems. Each of these forms of literary activities comprises a number of subgenres and the translator may specialize in one or some of them in accordance with his talents and experience. The particular tasks inherent in the translation of literary works of each genre are more literary than linguistic. The great challenge to the translator is to combine the maximum equivalence and the high literary merit. [5,10; 34,49]

The translator of a belles-lettres text is expected to make a careful study of the literary trend the text belongs to, the other works of the same author, the peculiarities of his individual style and manner and sn on. This involves both linguistic considerations and skill in literary criticism. A good literary translator must be a versatile scholar and a talented writer or poet.

A number of subdivisions can be also suggested for informative translations, though the principles of classification here are somewhat different. Here we may single out translations of scientific and technical texts, of newspaper materials, of official papers and some other types of texts such as public speeches, political and propaganda materials, advertisements, etc., which are, so to speak, intermediate, in that there is a certain balance between the expressive and referential functions, between reasoning and emotional appeal. [13; 21]

Translation of scientific and technical materials has a most important role to play in our age of the revolutionary technical progress. There is hardly a translator or an interpreter today who has not to deal with technical matters. Even the "purely" literary translator often comes across highly technical stuff in works of fiction or even in poetry. An in-depth theoretical study of the specific features of technical translation is an urgent task of translation linguistics while training of technical translators is a major practical problem.

In technical translation the main goal is to identify the situation described in the original. The predominance of the referential function is a great challenge to the translator who must have a good command of the technical terms and a sufficient understanding of the subject matter to be able to give an adequate description of the situation even if this is not fully achieved in the original. The technical translator is also expected to observe the stylistic requirements of scientific and technical materials to make text acceptable to the specialist.

Some types of texts can be identified not so much by their positive distinctive features as by the difference in their functional characteristics in the two languages. English newspaper reports differ greatly from their Russian counterparts due to the frequent use of colloquial, slang and vulgar elements, various paraphrases, eye-catching headlines, etc. [17; 58]

When the translator finds in a newspaper text the headline "Minister bares his teeth on fluoridation" which just means that this minister has taken a resolute stand on the matter, he will think twice before referring to the minister's teeth in the Russian translation. He would rather use a less expressive way of putting it to avoid infringement upon the accepted norms of the Russian newspaper style.

Apart from technical and newspaper materials it may be expedient to single out translation of official diplomatic papers as a separate type of informative translation. These texts make a category of their own because of the specific requirements to the quality of their translations. Such translations are often accepted as authentic official texts on a par with the originals. They are important documents every word of which must be carefully chosen as a matter of principle. That makes the translator very particular about every little meaningful element of the original which he scrupulously reproduces in his translation. This scrupulous imitation of the original results sometimes in the translator more readily erring in literality than risking to leave out even an insignificant element of the original contents.

Journalistic (or publicistic) texts dealing with social or political matters are sometimes singled out among other informative materials because they may feature elements more commonly used in literary text (metaphors, similes and other stylistic devices) which cannot but influence the translator's strategy. More often, however, they are regarded as a kind of newspaper materials (periodicals).

There are also some minor groups of texts that can be considered separately because of the specific problems their translation poses to the translator. They are film scripts, comic strips, commercial advertisements and the like. In dubbing a film the translator is limited in his choice of variants by the necessity to fit the pronunciation of the translated words to the movement of the actor's lips.

Translating the captions in a comic strip, the translator will have to consider the numerous allusions to the facts well-known to the regular readers of comics but less familiar to the Russian readers. And in dealing with commercial advertisements he must bear in mind that their sole purpose is to win over the prospective customers. Since the text of translation will deal with quite a different kind of people than the original advertisement was meant for, there is the problem of achieving the same pragmatic effect by introducing the necessary changes in the message. Though the present manual is concerned with the problems of written translation from English into Russian, some remarks should be made about the obvious classification of translations as written or oral. As the names suggest, in written translation the source text is in written form, as is the target text. In oral translation or interpretation the interpreter listens to the oral presentation of the original and translates it as an oral message in TL. As a result, in the first case the Receptor of the translation can read it while in the second case he hears it.

There are also some intermediate types. The interpreter rendering his translation by word of mouth may have the text of the original in front of him and translate it “at sight". A written translation can be made of the original recorded on the magnetic tape that can be replayed as many times as is necessary for the translator to grasp the original meaning. The translator can dictate his “at sight" translation of a written text to the typist or a short-hand writer with TR getting the translation in written form. [20; 54]

These are all, however, modifications of the two main types of translation. The line of demarcation between written and oral translation is drawn not only because of their forms but also because of the sets of conditions in which the process takes place. The first is continuous, the other momentary. In written translation the original can be read and re-read as many times as the translator may need or like. The same goes for the final product. The translator can re-read his translation, compare it to the original, make the necessary corrections or start his work all over again. He can come back to the preceding part of the original or get the information he needs from the subsequent messages. These are most favourable conditions and here we can expect the best performance and the highest level of equivalence. That is why in theoretical discussions we have usually examples from written translations where the translating process can be observed in all its aspects.

The conditions of oral translation impose a number of important restrictions on the translator's performance. Here the interpreter receives a fragment of the original only once and for a short period of time. His translation is also a one-time act with no possibility of any return to the original or any subsequent corrections. This creates additional problems and the users have sometimes; to be content with a lower level of equivalence. [19; 32]

There are two main kinds of oral translation - consecutive and simultaneous. In consecutive translation the translating starts after the original speech or some part of it has been completed. Here the interpreter's strategy and the final results depend, to a great extent, on the length of the segment to be translated. If the segment is just a sentence or two the interpreter closely follows the original speech. As often as not, however, the interpreter is expected to translate a long speech which has lasted for scores of minutes or even longer. In this case he has to remember a great number of messages and keep them in mind until he begins his translation. To make this possible the interpreter has to take notes of the original messages, various systems of notation having been suggested for the purpose. The study of, and practice in, such notation is the integral part of the interpreter's training as are special exercises to develop his memory. [14107]

Sometimes the interpreter is set a time limit to give his rendering, which means that he will have to reduce his translation considerably, selecting and reproducing the most important parts of the original and dispensing with the rest.

This implies the ability to make a judgement on the relative value of various messages and to generalize or compress the received information. The interpreter must obviously be a good and quickwitted thinker.

In simultaneous interpretation the interpreter is supposed to be able to give his translation while the speaker is uttering the original message. This can be achieved with a special radio or telephone-type equipment. The interpreter receives the original speech through his earphones and simultaneously talks into the microphone which transmits his translation to the listeners. This type of translation involves a number of psycholinguistic problems, both of theoretical and practical nature.

1.4 Pragmatics of translation

Words in language are related to certain referents which they designate and to other words of the same language with which they make up syntactic units. These relationships are called semantic and syntactic, respectively. Words are also related to the people who use them. To the users of the language its words are not just indifferent, unemotional labels of objects or ideas. The people develop a certain attitude to the words they use. Some of the words acquire definite implications, they evoke a positive or negative response, they are associated with certain theories, beliefs, likes or dislikes. There are "noble" words like "honour, dignity, freedom", etc. and "low" words Шее "infamy, cowardice, betrayal". Words can be nice or ugly, attractive or repulsive. Such relationships between the word and its users are called "pragmatic". [12; 28]

The pragmatic implications of a word are an important part of its meaning that produces a certain effect upon the Receptor. Of even greater significance is the pragmatic aspect of speech units. Every act of speech communication is meant for a certain Receptor, it is aimed at producing a certain effect upon him. In this respect any communication is an exercise in pragmatics.

Since the pragmatic effect plays such an important part in communication, its preservation in translation is the primary concern of the translator, though it is by no means an easy task. The pragmatic aspect of translation involves a number of difficult problems.

To begin with, the pragmatics of the original text cannot be as a rule directly reproduced in translation but often require important changes in the transmitted message. Correlated words in different languages may produce dissimilar effect upon the users. An "ambition" in English is just the name of a quality which may evoke any kind of response - positive, negative or neutral. Its Russian counterpart "амбиция" is definitely not a nice word. Thus, the phrase 'The voters put an end to the general's political ambitions" can be translated as "Избиратели положили конец политическим амбициям генерала", retaining the negative implication of the original, but if the implication were positive the translator would not make use of the derogatory term. The sentence 'The boy's ambition was to become a pilot" will be translated as "Мечтой мальчика было стать летчиком".

Such words as "idealism" or "nationalism" often have a positive effect in the English text and are rendered into Russian not as "идеализм" or "национализм" but as "служение идеалам, бескорыстие" and "национальное самосознание, национальные интересы", respectively. [15; 64]

When we consider not just separate words but a phrase or number of phrases in a text, the problem becomes more complicated. The communicative effect of a speech unit does not depend on the meaning of its components alone, but involves considerations of the situational context and the previous experience. A report that John has run a hundred metres in 9 seconds will pass unnoticed by some people and create a sensation with others who happen to know that it is a wonderful record-breaking achievement.

Here again, a great role is played by differences in the historical and cultural backgrounds of different language communities, in their customs and living conditions. It stands to reason that the natives of a tropical island can hardly be impressed by the statement that something is "as white as snow". The reported "cooling" in the relations between two friends may be understood as a welcome development by the people who live in a very hot climate.

It seems imperative, therefore, that translation should involve a kind of pragmatic adaptation to provide for the preservation of the original communicative effect. This adaptation must ensure that the text of translation conveys the same attitude to the reported facts as does the original text. It goes without saying that in an adequate translation the comical should not be replaced by the tragical or a praise turned into a censure.

The pragmatic adaptation of the translation must also see to it that TR understands the implications of the message and is aware of its figurative or situational meaning. A phrase like "Smith made another touchdown in three minutes" refers to a situation which does not mean anything to a Russian Receptor who does not know anything about the rules of American football. When the English original just refers to the First Amendment, the Russian translation should make it more explicit by speaking about the First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution; otherwise TR will not understand what it is all about. [12; 97]

It is obvious that there can be no equivalence if the original text is clear and unequivocal while its translation is obscure and hard to understand.

Discussing the problem of equivalence at different levels, we have emphasized the necessity of making the translation as understandable and intelligible as the original text is. We have also taken care to include in the overall meaning of the text all its emotional, figurative and associative implications. The pragmatic adaptation of this kind is an integral part of translation procedures which ensure the necessary level of equivalence.

The pragmatics of the text, which are linguistically relevant and depend on the relationships between the linguistic signs and language users, are part of the contents of the text. It is a meaningful element whose preservation in translation is desirable at any level of equivalence. It is reproduced in translation if TR gets the whole information about the pragmatic aspects of the original text and the pragmatics of the original text are just as accessible and understandable to him as they are to SR. This does not imply that he will be actually influenced by this information or react to it in the same way. [11; 55]

Apart from the pragmatics of linguistic signs, there are also the pragmatics of individual speech acts. In a concrete act of speech the Source has to do with the specific Receptor upon whom he tries to produce the desired effect, and from whom he would like to elicit the desired reaction.

This second type of pragmatics is also present in translation events. A translation event is a kind of speech act and it is performed with a certain pragmatic purpose as well. But here we are confronted with a more complicated process than in ordinary speech.

A translation event is pragmatically oriented in two directions. On the one hand, it is translation which means that its primary purpose is to give the closest possible approximation to the original text. This orientation towards a foreign text is one aspect of its pragmatics. [11; 59]

But on the other hand, a translation event is a concrete speech act in the target language. Therefore, it is not just an act of interlingual communication between the Source and TR, but also an act of speech communication between the Translator and TR. This involves two important implications. First, a translation event may be pragmatically oriented toward a concrete TR, and, second, it is the result of the activities of a concrete translator, who may have some additional pragmatic motivation, may pursue some aims beside and beyond the true reproduction of the original text.

As long as translation is not just an exercise in producing an equivalent text in another language but a pragmatic act under specific circumstances, its results can be assessed both in terms of its loyalty to the original and its ability to achieve the purpose for which it has been undertaken. This necessitates the introduction of the concept of the "pragmatic value" in translation, which assesses its success in achieving this pragmatic super-purpose.

As has been pointed out, the additional pragmatic goal of the translation event may depend either on the particular type of TR or on the translator's designs beyond his call of duty as a no-nonsense transmitter of the original message.

The users of the translation often make judgements of its quality exclusively on its merits as an instrument in achieving some specific aim. If in doing it, the translation departs from the original text, so much the worse for the latter.

Sometimes books written for adults are translated for children's reading with appropriate alterations made in the course of translation. Presumably any text should be differently translated depending on whether it is for experts or laymen, for staging or screening, and so on. [11; 64]

As to the specific aims pursued by the translator, they may also bring about considerable changes in the resulting text with no direct bearing on the original. Each translation is made in a certain pragmatic or social context, and its results are used for a number of purposes. The translator is assigned his task and paid for it by the people for whom his work is not an end in itself but an instrument for achieving some other ends. Aware of this, the translator tries to make his work meet these "extra-translational" requirements, introducing appropriate changes in the text of translation. Sometimes these changes are prompted by the desire to produce a certain effect on the Receptors, which has already been mentioned.

The specific goal, which makes the translator modify the resulting text, often means that, for all practical purposes, he assumes an additional role and is no longer just a translator. He may set himself some propaganda or educational task, he may be particularly interested in some part of the original and wants to make a special emphasis on it, he may try to impart to the Receptor his own feelings about the Source or the event described in the original. In pursuance of his plans the translator may try to simplify, abridge or modify the original message, deliberately reducing the degree of equivalence in his translation.

It is clear that such cases go far beyond the inherent aspects of translation and it is not the task of the translation theory to analyse or pass a judgement on them. But the translator should be aware of this possibility for it will have an impact on his strategy.

In many types of translation any attempt by the translator to modify his text for some extra-translational purpose will be considered unprofessional conduct and severely condemned. But there are also some other types of translation where particular aspects of equivalence are of little interest and often disregarded.

When a book is translated with a view to subsequent publication in another country, it may be adapted or abridged to meet the country's stan dards for printed matter. The translator may omit parts of the book or some descriptions considered too obscene or naturalistic for publication in his country, though permissible in the original.

In technical or other informative translations the translator or his employers may be interested in getting the gist of the contents or the most important or novel part of it, which may involve leaving out certain details or a combination of translation with brief accounts of less important parts of the original. A most common feature of such translations is neglect of the stylistic and structural peculiarities of the original. In this case translation often borders on retelling or precis writing.

A specific instance is consecutive interpretation where the interpreter is often set a time limit within which he is expected to report his translation no matter how long the original speech may have been. This implies selection, generalizations, and cutting through repetitions, incidental digressions, occasional slips or excessive embellishments.

It is obvious that in all similar cases the differences which can be revealed between the original text and its translation should not be ascribed to the translator's inefficiency or detract from the quality of his work. The pragmatic value of such translations clearly compensates for their lack of equivalence. Evidently there are different types of translation serving different purposes.

Linguistics and typology of texts.

By means of analysis the translator is to identify what type of texts needs to be translated. The same as during the asessment of translation it is rrequired to have a clear picture of the text type to avoid incorrect charateristics of text asessment. Typology of the texts that complies with translation process and spread for all types of texts is the reason of correct asessment of translation. There is a number of tries to develop such a typology of texts that will allow to make sonclusions regarding the principles of translation or regarding the choice of special methods of translation. This fact reveals the understanding that the methods of translation are not only identifird by readers group and specification of translation.

One of the visible achievements of modern linguistics is the impetuous development of its new branch - the linguistics of the text - within last decades. This new linguistic discipline, the object of which is the coherent text - the completed sequence of the statements, united with each other by semantic connections, has put before itself a task to state the essence of these connections and ways of their realization, to find out the system of grammatical categories of the text with its substantial and formal units, to describe the essence and organization of conditions of the human communication using the material of the text.

From this brief list of the purposes and tasks of the new trends its affinity to the theory of translation becomes clear. [12; 87]

The connection between linguistics of the text standing on the early stage of its development, and the theory of translation, first noticed Yuriy Nida. On his opinion, the theory of translation should take into account some common attributes of the texts, which he has named " the universals of discourse ". To them belong:

1). Various ways of marking of the beginning and the end of the text;

2). Ways of marking of transitions between internal divisions of the coherent text;

3). Temporary connection;

4). Spatial connections;

5). Logic relations (for example, the reason and the consequence);

6). Identification of discourse' participants;

7). Various means of apportionment of this or that elements for focusing on them the attention or for the emphasis;

8). Author involvement, that is, his position and his point of view. [15; 105]

The markers of the beginning and the end of the text include the standard formulas such as " once upon a time " (жили были) and " they lived happily ever after " (и стали они жить поживать, добра наживать).

The markers of internal transitions are the traditional ways of introduction of new divisions of the text such as “on the other hand, however... ” (однако, с другой стороны), “ then all of a sudden..." (и вдруг), “in contrast with all this” (в отличие от всего этого) еtc.

To the markers of the temporary relations belong prepositions of time, the temporary phrases such as “ the next morning ” (на следующее утро), “all that day ” (весь день), relative times such as Future Perfect and Past Perfect, sequence of tenses, e. g. “he said he came”, a sequence of events reflected by the order of words.

Among markers of the spatial relations there are spatial prepositions such as “long way off" (далеко-далеко), “ ten miles long” (длиной в десять миль), “it's a day's trip” (езды туда целый день).

Logic relations are marked with the help of modifying sentence adverbs, such as “moreover" (более), “ therefore" (поэтому), “ nevertheless” (тем не менее); conjunctions introducing subordinate clauses “if", “although", “because"; verbal forms (adverbial, gerundial), depending on the verb expressing the main event; lexical units, expressing the logic relation, such as “ he concluded" (он пришел к выводу), “he argued” (он возразил).

The markers of the consecutive indication on the same reviewer include personal pronouns (he, she, they), demonstrative pronouns (this, that) and synonyms (dog, animal, pet, puppy).

Participants and events can be put in front (to the “ linguistic proscenium”) or they can be removed on a background. We use the complex syntactic structure for this purpose, the hierarchy, with the help of which we mark a place of the participants and events in a described situation.

Participation of the author can be of two types - autobiographical (real or fictitious), the marker of which is the first person pronoun, and estimating, the marker of which are the estimating lexical units: “this was an ugly scene" (это была безобразная сцена).

Characterizing pointed features as “universals of discourse”, Yuriy Nida, at the same time, points out that in the different languages various means are used for their expression. [16; 79]

Thus, for translation it is obviously important, how “universals of discourse" are realized in contacting with each other languages during translation and the results of it for the structuring of the final text. Barhudarov N. S. gives the following example: “You goin' to court this morning? asked Jim. We had strolled over” (Мы подошли к ее забору - “Вы в суд пойдете? ” - спросил Джим). As the marker of temporary relation in English text the relative tense Past Perfect is used, but in Russian the order of sentences appropriates to the real order of events “Then I saw old Pancho come around the corner of the wagon" (Hemingway) (И тут вдруг старина Панчо стал огибать фургон. .) In this example the marker of internal transition then is represented by contextual equivalent и тут вдруг, appropriating to the stylistic norms of the given genre (the narration is in a colloquial manner given by the story-teller). “When he arrives in Paris next week our Foreign Secretary will have to spell out our position” (Когда министр иностранных дел посетит на следующей неделе Париж, он должен будет четко изложить нашу позицию).

The order of two correfent units is changing here during the translation - of a name and personal pronoun, because in Russian language the first pointing with the help of pronoun (such as “Когда он посетит Париж, наш министр иностранных дел..." in the given genre (the newspaper text) is unacceptable.

One of the problems of linguistics of the text traditionally connected with the theory of translation is the actual partitioning or the functional prospect of the sentence. Fruitful for the theory of translation is, in particular, ascending to F. Danesh idea of a thematic progression, according to which the theme cement the text, while rheme serves for transference of new information.

Yu. V. Vannicov has developed the scheme focused on the translation of the typology of texts. This scheme is based on 14 main typological attributes generalizing the properties of text from the point of view of practice of translation [4; 27]:

1). Linguistic organization;

2). Functional style;

3). Functional substyle;

4). Speech modus;

5). Dominant logic contents;

6). Subject (thematic) contents;

7). Form of speech presentation;

8). Genre differentiation;

9). Information primacy - non primacy;

10). Expressive - stylistic mentioning;

11). Basic pragmatic functions;

12). Concrete purposes;

13). Types of adequacy of the text;

14). Types of adequacy of translation.

To the linguistic organization belong oppositions of the texts with rigid structure (scientifically technical) and with soft structure (art). This attribute also takes into account the degree of copula of the text. The functional styles are pointed depending on sphere of communication (scientifically technical, social - business etc) [4; 28].

Typology created by Yu. V. Vannicov can be seemed a little bulky. But its dividing into parts makes it more adequate to the given task - the reflection of real variety of the texts.

The essential advantage of this typology is that it takes into account the presence of mixed and transitive cases as well. So, for example, Yu. V. Vannicov especially points out such functionally non-uniform texts as informing - ordering.

So, as a conclusion to chapter one of this work, it can be said that in the result of the factors mentioned above, different peculiarities might be revealed during translation. They are related to common features and differences between similar functional styles of languages as well as to specific conditions and tasks of translation activity of this type. In the outline of each functional style there are some certain peculiarities and their impact on the procedure and the way of translation are significant. Therefore, in this research work the peculiarities of scientific-technical materials based on electric devices manuals are studied. In the next chapter lexical and grammatical peculiarities have been reviewed.

2. Lexical and grammatical peculiarities of scientific-technical texts

In any scientific and technical text, irrespective of its contents and character, can be completely precisely translated from one language to other, even if in an artwork such branch of knowledge is required, for which in language of translation there is no appropriate nomenclature. In such cases the interpreter more often resorts to interpretation, but becoming of a necessary nomenclature of a realization in a sphere of production or those scientific circles, which are engaged in data by problems.

To ensure valuable translation, it is necessary to an interpreter to present the following requests:

1. The substantial acquaintance to a subject, which is treated in the original text.

2. Good enough knowledge of language of an artwork and its lexical and grammatical features in comparison to the native language.

3. Knowledge of the bases' theory of translation, and also receptions of technical translation and skill to use them.

4. Legible introducing about the character of scientific and technical functional style both in language of the original, and in the native language.

5. Acquaintance to accepted conventional signs, abbreviations (cuttings), systems of measures and weights, both in language of the original and in the native language.

Good possession of the native language and the right use of a nomenclature.

2.1 The characteristic of the scientific and technical language

Having studied the material of scientific-technical texts some of the characteriscts can be determined: