CC BY
40LINGUOSTYLISTIC PECULIARITIES OF STYLISTIC OF INVERSION AND
TRANSLATION PROBLEMS
Nigora Kamalova Dilbar Khojieva
Karakalpak state university
ABSTRACT
This article analyses peculiarity of inversion style in linguoculturology and the relationship between style and translation from two complementary perspectives that how the style of original texts fares in translation and how the style of individual translators or groups of translators sharing a common poetics becomes visible in their translated work.
Keywords: word order, inversion, translation, language, sentence, peculiarity, problems, style.
Word o r d e r is a crucial syntactical problem in many languages. In English, it has peculiarities, which have been caused by the concrete and specific way the language has developed. English language has developed a tolerably fixed word order, which in the great majority of cases shows without fail what is the Subject of the sentence. The most conspicuous places in the sentence are considered the first and the last: the first place because the full force of the stress can be felt at the beginning of an utterance and the last place because there is a pause after it. This traditional word order has developed a definite intonation design. Through frequency of repetition, this design has imposed itself on any sentence even though there are changes introduced in the sequence of the component parts. Hence the clash between semantically insignificant elements of the sentence when they are placed in structurally significant position and the intonation which follows the recognized pattern. For example: "Talent Mr. Micawber has; capital Mr. Micawber has not."
The first and the last positions being prominent, the verb has and the negative not get a fuller volume of stress than they would in ordinary word order, in the traditional word order the predicates has and has not are closely attached to theirobjects talent and capital. English predicate-object groups are so bound together1 that when we tear the object away from its predicate, the latter remains dangling in the sentence and in this position sometimes calls forth a change in meaning of the predicate word. In the inverted word order, not only the objects talent and capital become conspicuous but also the predicates has and has not. In this example, two other stylistic devices back up the effect of the inverted word order: antithesis and parallel construction. Unlike grammatical inversion, stylistic inversion does not change the structural meaning of the sentence, that is, the change in the juxtaposition of the members of the sentence does
SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS
VOLUME 2 I ISSUE 6 I 2021 ISSN: 2181-1601
not indicate structural meaning but has some super structural function. S t y l i s t i c Inversionaims at attaching logical stress or additional emotional colouring to the surface meaning of the utterance. Therefore, a specific intonation pattern is the inevitable satellite of inversion. Stylistic device of inversion in Modern English should not be regarded as a violation of the norms of Standard English. It is only the practical realization of what is potential in the language itself.
Inversion as a stylistic device is always sense-motivated. There is a tendency to account for inversion in poetry by rhythmical considerations. This may sometimes be true, but talented poets will never sacrifice sense for form and in the majority of cases, inversion in poetry is called forth by considerations of content rather than rhythm.
Inverted word order, or inversion, is one of the forms of what are known as emphatic constructions. What is generally called traditional word order is nothing more than emphatic construction. Emphatic constructions have so far been regarded as non-typical structures and therefore are considered as violations of the regular word order in the sentence. However, in practice these structures are as common as the f i x e d or traditional word order structures. Therefore, inversion must be regarded as an expressive means of the language having typical structural models.
Stylistics is about style, but it is not easy to say what style is about. Like so many other terms that tend to be used rather loosely, style can be made to mean almostanything, depending on the interests of the user. There are at least two reasons for this.
Firstly, it is easier to handle words - to do things with them - than to determine their semantic scope; and secondly, we run into problems as soon as we begin to attempt a definition, for there are other, neighboring terms with which the one under scrutiny seems partly to overlap. In our present case, for instance, what are the similarities and differences between styles, on the one hand, and register, dialect or idiolect, on the other, it is not the aim of this article to seriously tackle terminological differences, but some interesting suggestions may be found.
One of the peculiarities of the model outlined earlier is that of identifying and predicting translation problems. In the domain of translation practice, it may help the translator spot stylistic nuances she may have overlooked so far; in translator training, it may serve as a sort of backbone in syllabus design.
Transitivity belongs to the linguistic analysis level of the model and plays acentral role in realizing the ideational function of language. It has attracted much attention from stylisticians in general, to the extent that, in the framework of a functional stylistics, it is hard to imagine a brand of textual analysis, which does not consider transitivity. Transitivity has been used to demonstrate how some meanings are foregrounded, whereas others are obfuscated or suppressed. It is therefore a key aspect of the relationship between language and ideology. Since it is so well-known among
stylisticians, I will not go into the details and implications of transitivity, but merely point out that transitivity structures yield answers to such questions as: who does what, for material processes; how does x respond to y, for mental processes, and so on. The information yielded by such answers may not be very relevant when clauses are taken in isolation, but it does throw light on key aspects of a text when transitivity structures are seen to cumulatively build patterns: that is when they become interesting both for stylisticians and for translators and translation scholars. It is only recently that the study of transitivity has been taken on board by translation studies as part of the analyst's toolkit. It may come, as a surprise to some that translated literature was the area of the literary system where writers and translators felt more at ease to experiment. As a result of these transitivity shifts, the governess wins back some of the protagonist that source text transitivity denied her, since she is presented as more responsible for her actions. Having said this, however, one must hasten to add that this remark is not intended as a criticism at all. It is a well-known fact that one of the challenges facing the translator -and the literary translator in particular - is that of
striking a balance between the demands of the source text - of its style - and a sense of naturalness and acceptability of the target text in the receiving culture. The kind of stylistic analysis advocated here, when applied to an original text, must aim to throw into relief stylistic features, ways in which meaning is built; how that meaning is relayed in the target text is quite another matter, since it depends not only on source text requirements but also on many other factors, among which the norms of the target language and culture figure prominently. Preserving the transitivity patterns identified in the source text will in some cases imply an excessive processing effort on the part of the target reader, but in other cases it will be essential when trying to reflect in the target text the pragma semiotic factors of context words, the 'mind-style' of the original work as a whole. In the case of 'The Turn of the Screw', the depersonalizing effect created by transitivity patterns plays a central role in maintaining the sense of ambiguity and indeterminacy.
REFERENCES
1. Screbnev. The fundamentals of English stylistics.Moscow,2000.
2. Znamenskaya T.A.Stylistics of the English Language
3. Baker, M. (2000) 'Towards a Methodology for Investigating the Style of a Literary Translator' Target
4. Calzada Pérez, M. 'Transitivity in Translating: The Interdependence of Texture and Context.
