CC BY
0UZBEKISTAN STATE WORLD LANGUAGES UNIVERSITY
COMPARATIVE LITERATURE
ISSN 3060-4559 __^^^^
UDC (UO'K, y^K): 82.091
ADABIYOTSHUNOSLIKDA QIYOSIY TADQIQOTLAR: METOD VA METODOLOGIYA
Xalliyeva Gulnoz Iskandarovna
filologiya fanlari doktori, professor O'zbekiston davlat jahon tillari universiteti Toshkent, O'zbekiston 0000-0002-7467-4388
Yuldoshova Shaxnoza Azimboyevna
O'zbekiston davlat jahon tillari universiteti mustaqil tadqiqotchisi O'zbekiston, Tashkent shaxnozayuldoshova1991@,gmail.com 0009-0009-9553-6353
ANNOTATSIYA
KALIT SO'ZLAR
Maqola adabiyotshunoslik bilan bog'liq holda qiyosiy tadqiqot metodologiyasiga bag'ishlangan. Mualliflar adabiy faktlarni qiyosiy tadqiq etishning asosiy vazifasini turli darajadagi strukturaviy elementlarni (mavzu, syujet, obraz, til, uslub va boshqalar) taqqoslash asosida obyektlar o'rtasidagi o'xshashlik va farqlarni aniqlash sifatida belgilaydilar. Maqola mualliflari qiyosiy tahlil vazifalari sifatida gnoseologik, mantiqiy, uslubiy va aksiologik vazifalarni o'z ichiga oladi. Qiyosiy tahlilning har bir bosqichining ahamiyati taqqoslash obyektlari haqida yangi bilimlarni olish va ular o'rtasidagi munosabatlarni tushunish kontekstida baholanadi. Qiyosiy tahlil jarayonida vujudga keladigan tipik vaziyatlar, masalan, bir joyda va/yoki zamonda yonma-yon mavjud bo'lgan yoki mavjud bo'lgan joyi va/yoki vaqti bilan farq qiluvchi adabiy fakt va hodisalarni qiyoslash kabilar ham batafsil bayon etilgan. Muallif taqqoslash natijalarini baholash mezonlarining to'liq ro'yxatini taqdim etadi va qiyosiy tahlil natijalarining ishonchliligini ta'minlash uchun zarur bo'lgan shartlarni aniqlaydi. Maqolada qiyosiy adabiyot obyekti sifatida tarjimaga alohida e'tibor qaratilgan. Unda taijimonning madaniyatlararo badiiy muloqot jarayonida vositachi roli ta'kidlanadi va asl matn va uning tarjimasini qiyosiy o'rganishning mumkin bo'lgan jihatlari ko'rib chiqiladi.
Taqqoslash vazifalari, taqqoslash bosqichlari, tipik vaziyatlar, qiyosiy tahlil metodikasi, qiyosiy tarixiy va qiyosiy metodlar, tarjima, adekvatlik, badiiy tarjima, tarjima san'ati.
СРАВНИТЕЛЬНОЕ ЛИТЕРАТУРНОЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЕ: МЕТОД И МЕТОДОЛОГИЯ
Халлиева Гульноз Искандаровна
доктор филологических наук профессор Узбекского государственного университета мировых языков Ташкент, Узбекистан 0000-0002-7467-4388
Юлдошова Шахноза Азимбоевна
независимый исследователь,
Узбекский государственный университет
мировых языков
Узбекистан, г.Ташкент
shaxnozayuldoshova1991@,gmail.com
0009-0009-9553-6353
АННОТАЦИЯ
КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА
Статья посвящена методологии сравнительного исследования применительно к литературоведению. Авторы определяют основную задачу сравнительного изучения литературных фактов как выявление сходств и различий между объектами на основе сопоставления структурных элементов на разных уровнях (тема, сюжет, образ, язык, стиль и др.). К задачам сравнительного анализа авторы статьи относят эпистемологическую, логическую, методологическую и аксиологическую задачи. Значимость каждого этапа сравнительного анализа оценивается в контексте получения нового знания об объектах сравнения и понимания отношений между ними. Также подробно описаны типичные ситуации, возникающие в процессе сравнительного анализа, такие как сопоставление литературных фактов и явлений, сосуществующих в одном месте и/или времени или различающихся по месту и/или времени своего существования. Автор представляет исчерпывающий перечень критериев оценки результатов сопоставления и обозначает условия, необходимые для обеспечения достоверности результатов сопоставительного анализа. Особое внимание в статье уделяется переводу как объекту сравнительного литературоведения. В ней подчеркивается роль переводчика как посредника в процессе межкультурной художественной коммуникации и рассматриваются возможные аспекты сопоставительного изучения текста оригинала и его перевода.
Задачи сопоставления, этапы сопоставления, типовые ситуации,
методология сопоставительного анализа, сравнительно-исторический и
сравнительно-сопоставительный методы, перевод, адекватность, художественный перевод, искусство перевода.
COMPARATIVE LITERARY STUDIES: METHOD AND METHODOLOGY
Khallieva Gulnoz Iskandarovna
Doctor of Philology, Professor of Uzbek State World Languages University Tashkent, Uzbekistan 0000-0002-7467-4388
Yuldoshova Shakhnoza Azimboyevna
Independent researcher of Uzbekistan State University of World Languages, Uzbekistan, Tashkent shaxnozayuldoshova1991@,gmail.com 0009-0009-9553-6353
ABSTRACT
KEYWORDS
The article focuses on the methodology of comparative analysis as applied to literary studies. The authors identify the primary objective of comparative studies of literary facts as the identification of similarities and differences between objects based on the comparison of structural elements at different levels (theme, plot, image, language, and style, among others). To the tasks of comparative analysis the authors of the article refer epistemological, logical, methodological and axiological tasks. The significance of each stage of comparative analysis is evaluated in the context of acquiring new knowledge about the objects of comparison and understanding the relationships between them. Typical situations that arise during the process of comparative analysis, such as comparing literary facts and phenomena that coexist in the same place and/or time, or differing in the place and/or time of their existence, are also described in detail. The authors provide a comprehensive list and detailed characterization of the criteria for evaluating the results of comparison, as well as the conditions for ensuring the reliability of the results of comparative analysis. The article devotes particular attention to translation as an object of comparative literary studies. The focus is on the role of the translator as an intermediary in the process of intercultural artistic communication, as well as on potential aspects of a comparative study of the original text and its translation.
Comparison tasks, stages of comparison, typical
situations, methodology of comparative analysis,
comparative-historical and comparative-comparative methods, translation,
adequacy, artistic
translation, art of translation.
INTRODUCTION
Comparative analysis differs from the traditional analysis of a literary work. Traditional analysis is aimed at objects that consist of elements that form them, so it is sufficient for researchers to identify and analyze these components. Comparative analysis, in addition to these actions, involves comparing the elements identified in the object of analysis with each other. The purpose of comparative analysis is to
identify similar and different aspects of the compared objects, to discover and interpret common patterns that cause similarities between them.
For centuries, it has been posited that truth is learned through comparison. This is the reason why the methodology of comparison has become so prevalent and is currently employed in all areas of science and practice.
Furthermore, we will examine the scientific and practical justifications for a more profound comprehension of the content, essence, and objectives of the methodology of comparison.
MAIN PART
The objects, tasks, and typical situations that are subject to comparative analysis will be considered. The objects of comparative analysis may be divided into three categories: natural, social, and spiritual. These relatively independent spheres are interconnected in a harmonious manner. Together, these elements comprise the environment in which an individual lives and finds expression in the form of an image in fiction.
Although natural phenomena are relatively independent, they become objects of comparison only after they become involved in the social life of people. In other words, as people engage in the comparative analysis of natural phenomena, they transfer their own social characteristics to them, proceeding from their own interests and views. Consequently, the comparative analysis of natural phenomena is to some extent influenced by social factors. Consequently, the process of comparing natural phenomena is inextricably linked to social factors.
The second group of objects of comparative analysis is social phenomena. The methodology employed for the comparison of these phenomena exhibits certain distinctive characteristics. In this case, the field of analysis expands, and the number of indicators of comparative analysis increases. The reason for this is that the laws of social development operate within all spheres of social relations. Therefore, it is necessary to take into account a wide range of relations, including economic, political, spiritual-ideological, legal, scientific-technical, informational, military, environmental, and many other relations.
The third group of objects of comparative analysis is that of spiritual and ideological issues. This process is associated with the comparative analysis of objects within the spiritual and attitudinal sphere.
Therefore, the natural, social, and spiritual phenomena present in fiction are the subjects of comparative analysis. However, these objects are distinctive and necessitate consideration of a number of their own characteristics.
The objectives of comparative analysis are as follows: As evidenced by the scientific literature, comparative analysis is tasked with fulfilling a number of
43
functions, including epistemological, logical, methodological, and axiological ones. (Mineralov, 2019; Zhirmunsky, 1979; Kokorin, 2009) In other words, these stages are unavoidable in the process of comparing literary events.
The gnoseological (epistemological) task of comparative analysis. The fundamental objective of comparative analysis is to gain new insights into the objects of comparison. The aforementioned methodology allows us to achieve the following results:
Firstly, the process of comparative analysis yields new information about each object being compared. Secondly, it provides insight into the interaction of the literary phenomena being compared. Thirdly, if the result of comparing the objects is sufficiently complete and accurate, it forms a general idea of their past, present, and future. Concurrently, the theory of comparison methodology is enhanced.
The logical task of comparative analysis is the application of logical laws and rules in the process of comparing literary phenomena. In order to ensure that the process of comparative analysis remains consistent with the principles of logic, it is essential to adhere to the following guidelines:
1. It is illogical to compare literary events on different bases. It is not uncommon for different bases to be employed in the comparison of literary events. In such instances, the process of comparison becomes inaccurate. In many instances, the object of comparison remains undefined, rendering the process ineffective. This is why it is of the utmost importance to have a clear basis for comparison. For the purpose of comparison, it is not possible to equate one entity with another. For instance, it is logical to compare the plot of one work with the plot of another, or to compare the language of one work with the language of another.
2. Unless certain non-objective situations are excluded from the analysis, the expected result cannot be achieved.
3. In the process of comparison, one may encounter conflicts and contradictions, which are to be expected. Even in the most disparate characters, there are undoubtedly points of commonality that do not contravene logic.
The methodological task of comparative analysis. In the process of comparison, a variety of methods and techniques are employed. This process not only increases our knowledge about the object under study but also our empirical knowledge about solving some life tasks, i.e., our experience, and expands our practical possibilities.
The task of examining worldviews in the context of comparative analysis. It is well established that every process is contingent upon the knowledge and worldview of the individuals involved. The extent to which a comparative analysis can be comprehensive is contingent upon the worldview, knowledge, and educational level of the individual undertaking the analysis. Consequently, the worldview plays a
44
pivotal role in this process, serving to enrich the worldviews of both the subjects and the readers.
The evaluative (axiological) task of comparative analysis manifests itself in a multitude of forms and aspects. In any comparative analysis, it is inevitable that a summary of the scientific-theoretical reflections will be required, as well as an assessment of the literary phenomenon in question. Consequently, comparative analysis is essentially axiological, as its content is the evaluation of the phenomena being compared in terms of their similarities and differences. This not only enhances the theoretical depth of analysis but also has a tangible practical impact in addressing specific issues.
The objective of empirical comparative analysis is to provide solutions to practical problems. Every day, we encounter a multitude of practical issues. The efficacy of comparative analysis is contingent upon its ability to facilitate the achievement of practical objectives that are of significant consequence to human life.
The most essential stages in the comparison process. What actions should the researcher take and which steps should they follow in order for the comparative analysis to yield the desired results?
First and foremost., the researcher must select the objects of comparison with precision, as this stage is contingent upon the existence of such objects.
Firstly, it is not possible to compare and determine similarities and differences between phenomena without comparing their internal characteristics and internal parameters. The primary considerations are the content, essence, and qualities of the objects being compared. Consequently, the initial step in the process of comparison is the identification of similarities and differences between the content, essence, and qualities of phenomena.
Secondly, it is evident that the internal characteristics of events, namely their content, essence, and quality, are manifested externally in a distinctive manner. Consequently, it is essential to investigate the extent to which the internal characteristics of the objects of comparison are manifested in the external environment, as well as the similarities and differences between them. This represents the subsequent phase of comparative analysis.
Thirdly, it is important to note that the environment itself can be a factor influencing the objects being compared. This entails a comparison of the external environment's impact on the objects of analysis.
Thus, at the stage of comparing phenomena, the third direction is naturally determined. The essence of this stage is to identify similarities and differences in the influence of the environment on the objects of comparative analysis.
Fourthly, the appearance of any phenomenon, including that of literature, is the result of a specific reason and necessity. It is therefore essential to consider these
45
factors when making comparisons. A multitude of factors contribute to the emergence, persistence, evolution, and functionality of any given phenomenon. However, some of these factors assume a more prominent role than others. In the field of literature, this concept is often referred to as motive. Consequently, prior to undertaking a comparative analysis of the phenomenon in question, it is essential to identify the factors that gave rise to its occurrence. This enables us to identify similarities and differences in the underlying reasons for the existence of the objects being compared. For this purpose, it is reasonable to conduct a comparative analysis based on the algorithm of need (motive) - object - essence (result).
Consequently, the comparison of needs (motives) represents a crucial stage in objective analysis, as nothing arises without need and necessity. Accordingly, in Alisher Navoi's work "Lison ut-tayr," the initial destination was reached by traversing the first of the seven valleys that were necessary (Ivanov).
It is necessary to determine the typical situations that can be the object of comparison. On occasion, the abundance of available material can render it challenging to identify an appropriate comparison or contrast. It is widely acknowledged that a number of factors can influence the process of comparative analysis and the resulting outcomes. For instance, the composition of objects of comparison, the methodological tools of analysis, and the methods of comparative analysis, among other factors, must be considered. In light of the aforementioned considerations, it is possible to identify a number of typical situations that can be subjected to comparative analysis.
The first situation is as follows: A comparison of literary events that occur simultaneously in the same location. This specific instance of comparison presents a unique set of characteristics. Firstly, the spatial unity of the objects being compared, as well as the commonality of their environment, precludes the necessity for an investigation into the influence of this environment on the characteristics in question. The common space and time indicate that the environment of the objects of comparison is the same, and that this environment has the same impact on them. This results in a certain degree of simplification and facilitation of comparative analysis. Secondly, the presence of comparable phenomena in the same space and time naturally allows us to speak of their historical unity. For instance, a comparison of the works of Utkir Hashimov and Tahir Malik allows us to identify the shared and distinctive characteristics of the creative output of writers who inhabited the same geographical area and produced their works at approximately the same time.
The second situation is as follows. The same location is utilized to compare literary events from disparate historical periods. The second situation arises when it is necessary to compare literary phenomena that existed, exist, or may exist in a certain environment, in the same space, but at different times. Conversely, it is challenging to
46
make comparisons between events that occurred at different times but in highly analogous circumstances. In such cases, certain problems and difficulties are typically encountered.
It is common for scholars to attempt to compare events that occurred in the same geographical location, such as the works of poets who resided in the same area but created their art at different points in time. However, this approach often fails to account for the influence of temporal factors. This is erroneous. For example, the views of Mukimi and Muhammad Yusuf will inevitably be subject to the influence of time, particularly in relation to their formative years. In other words, even if the objects being compared exist in an identical environment, it must be acknowledged that time affects their development in disparate ways at different points in their existence. Even if the conditions in which the phenomena exist (a country, a specific cultural or geographical region) have not undergone a fundamental transformation, the objects of comparison themselves may have undergone significant changes over time.
The third situation is as follows. A comparison of objects existing at the same time but in different locations. To illustrate, the novels entitled "Revenge" by the Uzbek writer Nasir Zahid and the American writer Victoria Schwab, who both reside and work in different locations, are currently well-known. In comparing the theme of revenge in both novels, it is of the utmost importance to consider the precise environment in which the objects under comparison emerged. In this case, it is of particular importance for the researcher to pay close attention to this factor, as the specific objects being compared were influenced by completely different circumstances and reasons.
The fourth situation is as follows. The process of comparing literary phenomena from different places and times. In this case, the researcher must consider the different environments, places, and literary events that occurred at different times. This situation in the methodology and technique of comparative analysis is considered the most challenging. For instance, when examining the treatment of the Enlightenment in the works of Shakespeare and Alisher Navoi, or the subject of artistic psychology in the works of Abdulla Kahhar and Jack London, it is essential to consider the following:
First, it is essential to comprehend the nature of the phenomena being compared. Second, it is imperative to conduct in-depth research on the prior conditions and environment in which the objects of comparative analysis exist, in order to identify their influence on the outlook of Shakespeare and Navoi or Abdullah Kahhar and Jack London. In order to ascertain the connections between the works of writers who lived in different times and places, in addition to their popularity, it is necessary to identify and analyze a multitude of literary factors.
The scholar-analyst encounters numerous challenges when attempting to ascertain the spatial and temporal indicators of objects of comparison. However, these difficulties can be overcome by considering the distinctive circumstances that arise during the evolution of the literary phenomena being compared. If the researchers conducting the comparative analysis possess the methodological tools and expertise to navigate the complexities of contrasting and contradictory phenomena, their research will yield the anticipated outcomes.
Methodology of Comparative Analysis
Comparative analysis is one of the stages of the methodology of cognition and change of existing phenomena. Comparative methodology forms the basis for comparing different processes existing in a certain space and time. Therefore, it is necessary to determine the place of comparative analysis in the methodology.
It is known that methodology is a doctrine of scientific research methods. Methods of scientific research in all disciplines are divided into empirical and theoretical. Every science, including literary studies, conducts its research on the basis of empirical and theoretical methods. Without research methods, no science can achieve its goal of determining the essence of the object of study. Therefore, the allocation of natural and social phenomena as the object of this or that science, the discovery of regularities specific to them, and the generation of scientific and philosophical ideas about them are undoubtedly carried out by certain methods. (Rasulov, R., 2010, p. 291)
The empirical method, which is based on observation and experimentation, comprises a series of steps, including planning, description, and the use of statistics.
Theoretical methods include analysis, synthesis, abstraction, induction, deduction, and analogical modeling. All theoretical methods proceed through a series of stages, including comparison, generalization, classification, and evaluation.
It is evident that comparison represents a fundamental stage of all theoretical scientific methods. Consequently, prior to undertaking a comparative analysis, it is imperative to conduct a comprehensive examination of the scientific research methods employed and to gain an understanding of their role in comparison.
Let us briefly elucidate the meaning and essence of the names of theoretical methods. Analysis refers to the process of dividing a subject into its constituent parts. Synthesis, in contrast, involves the act of generalizing a subject. Abstraction, meanwhile, is the act of removing a subject from its original context and examining its essential characteristics. Induction, on the other hand, is the process of moving from the general to the particular. Deduction, in contrast, is the act of moving from the particular to the general. Finally, analogy is the process of analyzing similar properties. Modeling, in turn, is the act of creating a model or prototype. This can be exemplified by the artistic model of the world or the electronic model of a textbook. 48
The application of each of these theoretical methods allows for the transition from comparison to the subsequent stages of analysis. In comparative analysis, the elements of analysis, synthesis, deduction, and induction are indispensable, as they are prerequisites for the successful completion of comparative analysis. For instance, the process of deduction entails the decomposition of events into their constituent elements. Without the results of this process, comparative analysis is unfeasible.
Accordingly, comparative analysis pervades all theoretical methodologies designed to comprehend and alter the phenomena of reality. In light of the aforementioned, it can be posited that the scientific community has developed a number of concepts, including comparative synthesis, comparative induction, and comparative deduction. For instance, comparative synthesis is the process of identifying similarities and differences between phenomena. It is based on the integration of knowledge about the constituent elements. In essence, comparative synthesis addresses the question of what the differences are between the objects of comparative analysis. Comparative induction, in contrast, represents a progression from the specific to the general, whereby similarities and differences between the compared literary phenomena are identified.
The comparative-historical and comparative (contrastive) methods are two distinct approaches to comparison. The methodology of comparison includes the comparative-historical and comparative (or comparative-comparative) methods, which are among the most fundamental approaches. These methods are similar in nature, yet they exhibit certain differences.
The comparative-historical method is a method of comparing general and particular aspects of literary phenomena in their relationship to the process of historical development. The first theoretical ideas based on the comparative-historical method were formulated by Aristotle in his work Poetics. In the process of categorizing literary works into three distinct types (epic, lyrical, and dramatic), the philosopher employs a comparative approach to elucidate their essential characteristics.
In the scientific literature there are a number of theoretical remarks on the comparative-historical method. In particular, the literary scientist B. Karimov emphasizes that with the help of the comparative-historical method it is possible to conduct scientific research in the following directions
- Masterpieces of world literature or the best examples of national literature are compared;
- Literary works are compared and studied according to the period of their creation;
- The works of representatives of national literature are used as a basis for comparison;
- to consider samples of national literature in the context of world literature;
- study different and similar aspects of literary phenomena characteristic of the literary process or literary history;
- to consider the works of writers whose themes or problems are close to one another;
- in order to observe the literary and aesthetic development, the works of a certain author are chosen as the object. (Karimov B., 2011, 74) The theoretical bases of the comparative-historical method are very well covered by such scholars as A.N. Veselovsky, V.M. Zhirmunsky, N.I. Konrad, A. Dima, A. Durishin, V.R. Amineva, A. Eshonboboev.
The method of comparison is a method based on systematic comparison of philological phenomena. This method is primarily employed to identify differences, which is why it is also known as the contrastive method in linguistics. Despite the fact that its theoretical foundations have not yet been developed, works aimed at comparing various philological phenomena have been published since ancient times. Alisher Navoi's work, "Muhokamat ul-lugatain," which aims to compare Persian and Turkic languages, provides a clear illustration of the application of this method.
The theoretical foundations of this method in science were developed by the linguist I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay in the nineteenth century. The scientific work in this direction was continued by such scientists as E. D. Polivanov, L. V. Shcherba, S. I. Bernstein, A. A. Reformatsky, and Sh. Bally. (Polivanov, 1933; Reformatsky, 1962; Yartseva, 1988)
The scientist-linguist R. Rasulov's scientific conclusions indicate that the comparative method is a method of comparing two or more related or unrelated languages, linguistic phenomena. This method differs from the comparative-historical method, which compares only related languages. Additionally, the comparative-historical method does not consider the history of languages, their origin, genetic processes, or development. (Rasulov, 2010, 263)
If we apply the above theoretical provisions to the study of literature, then the comparative-historical method is used in the analysis conducted within the framework of the literature of one nation or one region. In this context, attention is paid to the genetic aspects of literary phenomena. For instance, the comparative-historical method is employed in the analysis of symbols in Uzbek classical literature. Additionally, it is utilized in the study and analysis of the literatures of different nations, such as Russian and Uzbek, English and Spanish. This method allows for the identification of the specific features of a given literary phenomenon.
The following criteria will be employed in order to evaluate the results of the comparison. The evaluation of comparison results is contingent upon the manner in which the aforementioned tasks of comparative analysis are approached. The
50
scientific literature identifies a number of criteria for objective evaluation of the results of comparison, including historical, epistemological, logical, methodological, spiritual, and worldview criteria. To provide a more detailed understanding, we will examine a few of these criteria.
The historical criterion pertains to the extent to which the outcomes of comparative analysis align with historical facts.
An epistemological criterion assesses the results of a comparative analysis in terms of their compliance with the laws and principles of the theory of cognition.
The logical criterion is to evaluate the conformity of the results of the comparative analysis to the requirements of the laws of logic.
Methodological criterion. The results of the comparative analysis are evaluated in terms of their compliance or non-compliance with the method.
The spiritual-ideological criterion is an assessment that considers the extent to which the results of the comparative analysis align with the moral and ideological objectives of society.
The aforementioned criteria permit the evaluation of the results of comparative analysis and the determination of the scientific and theoretical aspects of comparative research.
The necessity for ensuring the reliability of the results of comparative analysis. In order to achieve a reliable and objective result of comparative analysis, it is necessary to pay attention to the following.
Firstly, a researcher engaged in comparative analysis must possess a comprehensive understanding of the theoretical and methodological foundations of comparative literary studies and its methodology. In this context, the researcher should be able to utilize the theoretical and empirical ways of cognition effectively.
Secondly, it is essential to consider the specific characteristics of the environment in which the objects of comparative analysis existed, exist, or may exist. In other words, the scholar should consider all cases that could potentially influence the process of comparative analysis.
Third, the act of comparison should not be confined to the mere collection and presentation of statistical information. The objects of comparison are in a state of constant flux, and researchers must take this into account. In order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the objects under study, it is essential to supplement the static picture with their dynamic characteristics and demonstrate their gradual development. Otherwise, the results of the comparison will be incomplete and not entirely impartial. Consequently, the statistical data obtained should be subjected to analysis and interpretation in conjunction with the dynamics.
Fourth, we should not allow subjectivism in analysis. Falsified comparison results may serve certain personal interests but not the development of science. The
51
fact that some researchers compare completely incompatible philological aspects leads to such unreliable comparison results. As a result, the content and results of comparative analysis are distorted, and the wrong concept is introduced into people's minds. For example, the comparison of the romantic story of Otabek in Abdullah Kadiri's "Days Gone By" with the romantic adventures of George Byron's character Don Juan does not give the expected result. Therefore, if the basic rules and requirements of comparative analysis are violated, the process of comparing literary phenomena will not yield a valid result.
Translation as an Object of Comparative Literary Studies A historical analysis of translation reveals its origins in the Bronze Age. The first written translation was produced by the ancient Roman poet, playwright, and translator Livius Andronicus (280-205 BC). He is renowned for his translation of Homer's poem "The Odyssey" from Greek into Latin, which was the first translation of a Greek poem into Latin.
The earliest theoretical views on translation were recorded in the writings of Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC) in the first century BC. In his view, the objective of translation is to convey the content, not the form. A literal translation is indicative of the translator's limitations. (Garbowski, 2007)
The necessity for translations arose during the Middle Ages due to the need to translate religious works. During the Renaissance (late 13th - early 14th centuries), not only religious works but also artistic works were translated in Europe.
By the 20th century, translation theory had reached a point of maturity, with several foundational theoretical works having been produced in this field. One of the most notable contributions to the field of translation theory in Uzbek literary studies is the scientific work of G. Salomov, entitled "Fundamentals of Translation Theory." (Salomov G., 1983) This book addresses a number of key issues in translation theory, including cultural-scientific interaction and translation, literary relations and artistic translation, translation history, the preservation of style in artistic translation, the transfer of content and the inner essence of national color, and principles of national adaptation. This latter topic concerns the adaptation of the creative product of another nation to the character of its own nation. For example, Russian poems by Navoi in translation become the property of the Russian nation. The book also considers the transformation of the peculiarities of versification in poetic translation. B. Ilyasov's scientific works are devoted to the fundamentals of poetic translation and the skill of the translator. (Ilyasov B., 1995a; 1995b; 2000; 2007)
In contrast, scientific works on modern translation theory tend to focus more on translation methods, translation studies, translation as an object of intercultural communication, and comparative literary studies. (Toper P., 2000; Belik E., 2013; Utrobina A., 2006; Musaev K., 2005)
52
The most important concepts in translation theory. Translation theory is divided into two categories: general and specialized. General translation theory encompasses the regularities that are common to a language and encompasses all types of translation. Specialized translation theory is concerned with the linguistic aspects of translation from one language to another.
Translation is a communicative process, and as such, it is characterised by two distinct groups of characteristics.
1. Intralinguistic aspects pertain to the text style and linguistic features associated with the text.
2. Non-linguistic aspects pertain to the degree of reflection of linguistic and cultural features and cultural traditions in the original and translation. It is well established that a lack of awareness of non-linguistic aspects (an inability to comprehend another's culture) can have a detrimental impact on translation.
As translation studies have developed, the theory of regular correspondences has emerged. The primary tenet of this theory pertains to translation between languages that are either closely or distantly related.
Translation theory distinguishes between four distinct models: transformational, semantic-semiotic, situational, and communicative.
The transformational model of translation considers the extent to which the features of the original language are retained when translating into another language.
The semantic-semiotic (iconic) model of translation is defined by the extent to which the original work's semantics are preserved in the translated text.
The situational model of translation posits that translation must consider certain contextual factors, such as national and cultural nuances.
The communicative model of translation entails consideration of the cultural nuances of the source language and their adaptation to the target language.
The field of translation theory identifies four distinct linguistic aspects:
1. Lexico-semantic.
2. Phraseological.
3. Grammatical.
4. Stylistic.
The lexico-semantic aspect of translation is to preserve the original meaning and linguistic structure as much as possible.
The phraseological aspect pertains to the identification of an equivalent for phraseology in the target language. One significant challenge in this regard pertains to the capacity to convey the national and cultural nuances in translation.
The grammatical aspect is related to the grammatical regularities of the original and translation, as well as the correspondence or inconsistency in sentence construction.
The stylistic aspect of translation pertains to the extent to which the emotional coloring and writing style are preserved and conveyed in the translation. For instance, in Shoislam Shomuhammedov's translation of Omar Khayyam's rubaiyat, the stylistic elements of the original work are preserved to the greatest extent possible.
The means of achieving adequacy in the process of translation.
An adequate translation is one that takes into account all the requirements, including communicative dialogue.
The means of achieving adequacy in the translation process include:
Reference tools. These are signs, certain symbols and other means. Referential means are mostly found in scientific literature or historical works, the process of their translation is relatively uncomplicated.
Pragmatic tools are stylistic and emotional means in the speech process. These tools are predominant in the communicative process. For example, dialogues, speeches, inner speech, etc. Grammatical tools are the tools that help each translator to translate based on the grammatical rules of their language.
When translating poetic works, it is necessary to pay attention to equirhythmicity. Equirhythmia (Latin for "correct rhythm") means translation with preservation of rhythm (melody).
The translation should be as accurate and close to the original work as possible. Incorrect translation leads to misinterpretation of the work. Of course, translation is not without "sacrifices", but even without taking into account the above aspects, the translation will be far from the original.
Translation is a subject that falls within the purview of both linguistics and literary studies, including comparative literature. In this case, the basis for comparison is the work itself and its translation. A researcher engaged in the study of translation from the perspective of comparative literary studies should be familiar with the theoretical literature on the subject, understand what exactly should be compared in the original work and in the translation, and be able to apply the appropriate methodology. The peculiarities of translation as an object of comparativism are well described in the scientific work of literary scholar P.M. Toper, "Translation in the system of comparative literary studies" (Toper P., 2000). Translation essentially consists of two processes: communication (interaction) and reception (perception of translation). The same processes are characteristic of comparative literary studies, and in the process of comparing literary works belonging to two different nations, these very components are necessarily analyzed. For example, novels by Nasir Zahid and American writer Victoria Schwab with the same title "Revenge" are perceived by both Uzbek and foreign readers. This is the reception. The transition to the comparison of both novels is a communication between two peoples, two cultures, two writers.
54
Therefore, only translation, which relies simultaneously on the concepts of communication and reception, provides a comprehensive basis for studying it as an object of comparative literary studies. According to P.M. Toper, the methodology of comparative literary studies allows for the comparison of different samples of national literature as part of world literature, thereby increasing the attention paid to translation studies. (Toper P., 2000, 19)
A researcher who wishes to examine the translation of a work of fiction may typically concentrate on the comparative analysis of the following elements:
1. The correspondence between the original work and the translation.
2. The creative individuality of the writer and the translator.
3. The literary connections between the original work and the translation.
4. The work and its reception, in whatever form it takes—that is, how the work has been received by readers.
5. The issue of translation and the problem of literary influence.
6. The examination of inter-genre translation encompasses the similarities and differences between translations of works belonging to the lyrical, epic, and dramatic genres.
7. Translation and intercultural communication.
8. The issue of accurately replicating linguistic peculiarities in literary translations represents a persistent challenge for translators.
9. The issue of writer and translator mastery is one that requires further investigation.
In all the above-mentioned aspects, such as those relating to the leaving techniques and methodologies of comparative analysis, including synthesis, induction, deduction, modeling, and other theoretical methods, these techniques are applied.
When translation is the object of study in comparative literary studies, this research is evaluated in accordance with the criteria of historical, epistemological, logical, methodological, spiritual, and worldview analysis.
Consequently, in order to create a translated text that accurately and fully reflects the spirit of the original, the translator must possess both artistic and scholarly talents. (Musaev K., 2005, 334).
CONCLUSION
As one of the universal scientific methods, the comparative method in the analysis of literary facts and phenomena has a number of features, the definition and consideration of which contribute to the reliability and objectivity of the results obtained in the course of its application. First of all, it is necessary to take into account the complex structure of the object of research - the text of a work of fiction,
55
clearly adhering to the logic of comparison of elements that are homogeneous in nature (theme is compared with theme, plot with plot, etc.). Secondly, when analyzing literary facts, it is impossible to consider literature as a closed system that is not influenced by social and economic relations, philosophical and scientific views characteristic of a particular epoch. It is especially important to take this fact into consideration when comparing and contrasting literary facts and phenomena of different epochs and peoples. Third, comparative analysis should not be limited to listing similarities and differences.
These mechanical observations must be interpreted, that is, their origins and causes must be explained, and one must give one's own reasons for the emergence of the similarities and differences found. Fourthly, when analyzing the works of foreign authors written in foreign languages, special attention should be paid to the reflection in them of the cultural peculiarities and worldview of this or that nation, in order to assess the adequacy of their transmission in translations, as well as to take into account the specifics of the process of reception of the works of foreign authors by the bearers of a different culture.
REFERENCES
1. Mineralov, Yu.I. (2019) Comparative literature (Comparative studies): textbook. M., Yurayt, 328 p.
2. Zhirmunsky, V.M. (1979) Comparative literature. East and West. M., Nauka Publ., 496 p.
3. Kokorin, A.A. (2009) Comparative analysis: theory, methodology, technique. M., MGOU Publ., 152 p.
4. Ivanov, S. Alisher Navoining "Lison ut-tair" poem. Available at: https://ziyouz.uz/ilm-va-fan/adabiyot/cergey-ivanov-alisher-navoiyning-lison-ut-tayr-dostoni/
5. Rasulov, R. (2010) General linguistics. Tashkent, 2010, 327 p.
6. Karimov, B. (2011) Methodology of literary studies. Tashkent, Muharrir Publ., p. 87.
7. Eshonboboev, A. (2008) About the comparative-historical method. Uzbek language and literature, No. 4, pp. 38-46.
8. Polivanov, E.D. (1933) Russian grammar in comparison with the Uzbek language. Tashkent, State Publishing House of UzSSR, 183 p.
9. Reformatsky, A.A. (1962) About the comparative method // Russian language in the national school, No. 5, pp.23-33.
10. Yartseva, V.N. (ed.) (1988) Methods of comparative study of languages: collection of articles. M., Nauka Publ., 93 p.
11. Garbovsky, N.K. (2007) Translation theory. M., MSU Publ., 544 p. Available at: https://studfile.net/preview/5022370/page: 11/
12. Salomov G. (1983) Foundations of translation theory. Tashkent, Teacher Publ., 102 p.
13. Ilyasov B. (1995) Free verse and translation. Termez, Jayhun Publ., 1995.
14. Ilyasov B. (1995) The author's concept of the original and the skill of the translator. Tashkent, 1995.
15. Ilyasov B. (2000) The author's intention and translation pleonasms. Zundelovich readings: Materials of the international conference. Samarkand, pp. 102 - 105.
16. Ilyasov B. (2007) The art of poetic translation. Tashkent, Fan, 124 p.
17. Toper P.M. (2000) Translation in the system of comparative literature. M., Heritage Publ., 254 p.
18. Belik E.V. (2013) Translation as a type of intercultural communication. Teacher XXI. No. 2, pp.289-294.
19. Utrobina A.A. (2006) Translation theory: lecture notes. M., Prior-izdat, 144 p.
20. Musaev K. (2005) Fundamentals of translation theory. Tashkent, Science Publ., 352 p.
