Nominalization as a translation method.

 NOMINALIZATION The concept of nominalization is derived from the fact that many words in English have various grammatical forms, including a noun form and a verb form.

 (TO) DECIDE verb DECISION noun He decided to take the train. (verb) The decision was made yesterday. (noun) Nominalization occurs when a writer expresses an idea by using the noun form, rather than the verb form, of one of these versatile words. Such constructions often involve using a verb in the passive voice or using a “weak verb” (a linking verb, or verbs like to have).

The politician had an obstruction of justice situation on his hands. A rapid response to this request is advised.

 Joseph Williams’ Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace is an excellent in-depth analysis of nominalization and other stylistic and rhetorical choices, with a focus on those choices that work against the clarity of a piece of prose. Here are some examples he gives of nominalization; contrast them with revisions that aim at expressing the same idea with agent/actors and verbs that express the action under consideration

 4 Nominalized: There is a need for an analysis of library use to provide a reliable base for the projections of needed resources. 1 Active:

 We need to know which parts of our library are being used most extensively so that we can project what resources are most needed.

Here’s another example from Williams (in addition to the nominalization, there are obviously other stylistic infelicities in this passage). See how many nominalizations you can spot, as well as weak verbs or verbs in the passive voice: The importance of language skills in children’s problem-solving ability was stressed by Jones (1985) in his paper on children’s thinking. Improvement in nonverbal problem solving was reported to have occurred as a result of improvements in language skills. The use of previously acquired language habits for problem articulation and activation of knowledge previously learned through language are thought to be the cause of better performance....

 2 Now, compare the original with this revision: In his paper on children's thinking, Jones (1985) stressed the importance of language skills in accounting for the success children have in solving problems. When children increased their language skills, they simultaneously improved their skills in solving nonverbal problems. Children became better problem-solvers, Jones concludes, because they used language to articulate such problems and because, in using language, they activated knowledge they had previously acquired through language.

 If you compare these versions, you can see that nominalizations can turn an active picture (with things or human beings actually doing something) into a static state of being or into an abstraction. As we’ve already noted, nominalization can also be used to downplay individuals’ responsibility for an action, or completely remove human beings or agents of any sort from the picture. It is not unusual to find readers’ labeling highly nominalized prose as “dull, dry, and boring.”

 

8Komissarov`s model: levels of eq.

Translation equivalence is defined as a measure of semantic similarity between ST and TT.

According to Komissarov there are five types of equivalence in translation.

The first type consists of preserving only the part of the original's content constituting the aim of the communication.

Ex: 1. Maybe there is some chemistry between us that doesn't mix. = Character clashes are frequent.

Ex 2: That's a pretty thing to say. = You should be ashamed!

The second type of equivalence is represented by translations whose proximity to the sense in the original is not based, not even in this case, on the shared meanings of the linguistic means employed.

Ex:1. He answered the telephone. = He lifted the receiver.

Ex: 2. You are not fit to be in a boat. = You are not to be allowed to get on a boat.

In the third type, there is no lexical or syntactic parallelism, the two structures are not amenable to a simple syntactic transformation, communication aim and situation are unvaried and situation are preserved, while general concepts through which the description of the original's situation is realized are preserved, i.e. the "means of description of the situation" is preserved (62).

Ex: 1. Scrubbing makes me bad-tempered. = My mood grows bad due to floor washing.

Ex: 2. London saw a cold winter last year. = Last year winter in London was cold.

Ex: 3. That will not be good for you. = This business might end badly for you.

On the fourth level (which is called TRANSFORMATIONAL EQUIVALENCE), the target and the source language sentences manifest grammar transformations: the passive predicate can be translated by the active: The port can be entered by big ships only in tide. – Большие корабли могут заходить в порт только во время прилива. Likewise, part of speech can be changed in translation: We had a long walk. – Шли мы долго. Or the structure of the sentence can be modified: Jane was heard playing the piano. – Было слышно, как Джейн играла на пианино, where the sentence is translated by a complex one). Any other change of the grammar meaning within the sentence testifies to the equivalence on the transformational level, which is called by V. Komissarov the level of the invariant meaning of the syntactic structure.

This level of equivalence presupposes retention of the utterance function, the description of the same situation, the same meaning of the source and target sentences, and a very close (but variable) grammatical meaning.

On the fifth level (which implies lexical and grammatical equivalence), the most possible semantic semilarity between the source and target sentences is found: Every mother loves her children. – Каждая мать любит своих детей. I will write you every week. – Я буду писать тебе каждую неделю. As a matter of fact, this is a word for word translation where each word and the whole structure retains its lexical and grammatical meaning, the situation designated by the sentences is identical, and the communicative function of the utterances is the same. Every form of the target sentence is equal, with no variations, to that of the source language sentence. Therefore, this level might be called the level of formal equivalence.