1.Translation as getting the meaning across languages & cultures.
Scholars consider the translation to be the 5th type of speech activity because of its specific character. The translation as a kind of speech activity is different because it’s not natural as the participants of communication know neither languages nor cultures. But there is a person who acts as a mediator who makes communication possible.
The theory of translation deals with the problem of untranslatability.   The term “tr-n” is most misleading. Scholars use it to denote the process of written tr-n, or sometimes it stands for written or oral tr-n. Sometimes “rendition” is used as general, tr-n – written, interpretation - oral. Many people say  that tr-n is impossible as it is.
1) no 2 lan-ges have the same phonology; 2) no 2 la-ges have the same syntax; 3) no 2 lan-ges have the same vocabulary; 4) no 2 lan-ges have the same literary history; 5) no 2 lan-ges have the same prosody.
To translate we shd analyse ST and SC:
SL text -> analysis -> transfer -> restructuring - > assembling -> TL text
We take things apart, restructure them according to the laws of TL. Then we assemble things and get TL text. The effect of communication depends on the quality of tr-n.
Tr-n is more about: people than words, jobs people do and the way they see their world  than registers, creative imagination than rule-governed text analysis.
To produce a good tr-n we must understand the process of tr-n. Tr-n is a complex / cumulative process which involves a host of activities related to language, writing, linguistics and culture. 3 major activities: 1) transfer of data from SL to TL; 2) synchro-analysis of text and tr-n and researches of subject matters; 3) continuous self-development and learning
Tr-n as communication involves the transfer of a message from a SL to TL. Text linguistics (the way the parts of text are organized and related to one another in order to form a meaningful whole) is useful for the analysis of the tr-n process and the transfer of meaning from one l-ge to another. The process of tr-n results in creating a text in TL and from this perspective a text as a notion shd be defined. To define we shd consider several standards of textuality: 1) cohesion (all the parts shd be connected and this makes the text itself a self-contained unit); 2) coherence (not a single part contradicts any other part); 3) intentionally(every text may be regarded as a communicative block that answers the author’s intention); 4) acceptability (the wording is responsible for the form of the text which must be understood by every reader); 5) informativity (information); 6) situationality (communicative situation that is described in the text: characters, author’s intension to impress the reader); 7)intertextuality (the relationship b/w the text you’re tr-ting and other text on a similar topic that you’ve translated already or will tr-te); 8) intratextuality (every text can be regarded as a set of communicative blocks which are related to one another).
Words may have secondary meanings, & these are dependent on the context. Second lng will always have an equivalent of the primary meaning, but the translator should be careful as the secondary meaning can not match at all. E.g. take Russian word “родители” (the interaction of the meanings “parents” & “ancestors”).
It’s the case of metonymy, which appears in many lngs, but not every lng will have exact equivalent in the other.
* The kettle is boiling (but it’s the water!) – чайник закипел
* плавать на экзамене – to get lost at the exam
Lexical items may also reflect attitudes, emotions in addition to purely factual information.
*Inquisitive vs. curious (любознательный / любопытный)
As to collocations that belong to the same group every lexical item will tend to occur in the lng with a particular range of other lexical items. The meaning is practically the same but different words are combined to indicate this meaning. Each word has different collocational possibilities & a collocational range of equivalent words between lngs will not be identical especially in secondary meanings.
*Tailor / dressmaker /seamstress
*Handsome man / beautiful woman
*A pack of wolves / a school of fish / a flack of birds
Sometimes the preposition may change the meaning of the whole structure.
*Anxious about / anxious for It’s not enough for the translator to learn isolated words & phrases. He should know words in contexts (collocations). Only 4% of lng units are phraseological. Collocation challenges are far greater in number. The translator should learn the most frequently used patterns.  E.g. colour+with+emotion *Red with anger *Blue with cold
BUT when we speak about collocations we should assume that they do not coincide in different lngs:
слабые успехи = poor progress правильные черты лица = regular features Collocations in different lngs have different structures use different prepositons.
Confident of himself=уверен в себе Jumped with joy=подпрыгнул от радости Sometimes a shade of meaning may present a certain challenge. We should do our best to prevent a riot. I should do my best to prevent my sister from dating this man. Sometimes every shade of meaning may have a collocation of its own. He started smoking. - He started to smoke. He is a free man. – He is free of money.  I’m mad about the movie. – I’m mad of his tone.
(Схема процесса коммуникации в двух словах – You have an idea & want to express it & so, we have a purpose. Then the desire to express it arises. The process of communication depends upon modes of discourse (description, narration, exposition, argumentation, см лекция 1) It also depends upon the qualities of participants (their level of competence, level of motivation, attitude to what is being spoken of, social status etc.); & conditions of communication (time, place, direct or indirect interaction, official or casual etc).

2. Equivalence, precision & adequacy in translation.
All of them are used when we try to render the same meaning factual and emotional in another language. If we can’t find equivalents we produce an adequate text, which fulfils the same function. Eq-ce can be said to exist only between factors equally present in SL and TL texts. Those TL factors requested that are not contained in the SL text can hardly be said to be equivalent, because there’s no textual basis of comparison. Here adequacy is the better term. Eq-ce in meaning can’t be taken as a satisfactory criterion for a correct translation. We can’t even accept that equivalence in meaning is provided by synonymy, since it is commonly accepted that there are no complete synonyms in a language. “Father=/= daddy=/= papa” Eq-ce on the different levels is different. What is being carried onto the TL text is the united semantic-pragmatic function of the S text. It means that the original text is being reconstructed in a new semantic-pragmatic entity, redesigned within the textual universe of the TL community. Precision depends upon the type of the text. For example, scientific texts require more precision.
E. Nida Argued there’s 2 diff. types of equivalence:
1) Formal = formal correspondence - focuses attention on the message itself in both form and content. Consists of a TL item which represents the closest equivalent of the SL word or phrase. There is no always FE b/w lang pairs. But FE may be used wherever possible if the tr-n aims at achieving formal rather than dynamic eq-ce. As FE distorts the gram-l and stylistic patterns of TL and distorts the message so the recipient of the message shd try hard to understand what is said or written -> the 3-rd l-ge is invented.
2) Dynamic- tr-n principle according to which a tr-or seeks to tr-te the meaning of the original and he does in such a way that the wording will trigger the same impact on the Target culture audience as the original wording did on SC audience. Thus often the form of the original text is changed. Nida says dynamic eq-ce is > important than mere correct communication of info. N. tr-ted the Bible- sh have the same impact as the original text. E.g. ‘vanity of vanities’=’суета сует’.
Jakobson “Eq-ce in difference” invented a theory concerning conceptual differences between langs, introduced the notion of equivalence in difference. Jakobson’s approach – a semiotic one (the tr-or has to recode the ST first & only then he has to transmit the text into an equivalent message for the Tculture) . He suggests 3 kinds of tr-n: 1. intralingual (within one lang, i.e. rewording or paraphrase) - cases of ambiguity, a difference in experience that doesn’t allow a person to understand the message. To explain rephrase the message, say the same in other words; 2. interlingual (between 2 langs) - the transfer of info b\w 2 lang-s. the tr-or makes use of synonyms in order to get the ST message across =>in an interlingual tr-n there’s no full equivalence between code units (tr-n involves 2 equivalent messages in 2 different codes);  3. intersemiotic (between sign systems) - sign-lang-ge (сурдо-перевод) as a means of translating ideas for deaf & numb people. From a gram-l p of v lang-s can differ from one another to a greater or lesser extent, but this doesn’t mean that the tr-n may face the problem of not finding the necessary equivalent. So in this case the tr-or resorts to loan tr-ns (borrow), neologisms, semantic shifts  (gives new shades of meaning to the word already known, depends on the context), “circumlocution” - Рассуждение, пояснение. => Similarity between Vinay
linguistic tr-n is not possible or linguistic approach is not possible, tr-or can rely on other procedures, such as loan tr-ns, neologisms & the like. Both theories recognize the limitation of linguistic approach. Both theories argue that a tr-n can never be impossible since there’re several methods that a tr-or can choose.
John Catford - the introduction of types & shifts of tr-n. 3 criteria of tr-n: 1. the extent of tr-n: full tr-n vs partial tr-n 2. the gram-l rank at which the tr-n eq-ce is established => rank-bound tr-n vs unbounded tr-n. 3. Levels of l-ge involved in tr-n => Total tr-n vs restricted tr-n. 2-nd criterion deals with formal correspondence & textual eq-ce. Formal correspondence- rank-bounded tr-n- the tr-or looks for an eq-t in the TL for each word in the SL; even each morpheme. In unbound tr-n we can find additional eq-ces at s-ce, clause and other levels.  Textual eq-ce - TL text or some part of it is observed on a particular occasion to be eq-ce of a given SL text or its portion. To estimate the validity of tr-n -> the instrument of commutation => he asks competent bi-lingual informant. Tr-n-shifts- departures from formal correspondence in the process of going from  SL to TL. (if formal correspondence is impossible!) 2 types of tr-n shifts: 1. level shifts- the SL item at 1 linguistic level has a TL eq-t at different level. “I’ve done it” (the rank is Grammar) – я уже сделал это (lexics). 2. category shifts- divided into 4 types: 1. structure-shifts- involve a gram-l change b\w the structure of the ST & that of TT. 2.Class-shifts-  SL item is translated with TL item which belongs to different gram-l class (I’m hungry = я хочу есть) 3.Unit-shifts-  involve changes in rank (a sent-ce may be tr-ted as a phrase; structure as as single word) 4.Intra-system shifts - SL an TL have corresponding items, but when tr-n selects a non-corresponding item in the TL system (1001 nights = 1001 ночь). Catford was criticized: his theory is simplification, we shd also take into consideration other factors: textual, cultural & situational aspects. Juliane House - semantic & pragmatic eq-ce ; ST & T text shd match 1 another in function=>possible to characterize the function of text by determining the situational dimensions=>every text should be placed within a particular  situation which has to be correctly identified by the tr-or => tr-n text should not only match its ST in function but employ equivalent situational dimensional means to achieve that function. Concept of overt & covert tr-ns: 1. overt  tr-n- TT audience is not directly addressed 2. covert tr-n- production of text which in functionally equivalent to the ST. House theory is more flexible than Catford’s=>she gives more authentic examples, uses complete texts. This functional theory is of great importance. Mona Baker - eq-ce : gram-l, textual, pragmatic & several others. The notion of eq-ce in relation to tr-n process putting together linguistic & communicative approach=> distinguishes between eq-ce  that can appear on word-level & above word-level. Eq-ce at word-level - 1-st element to be taken into consideration: word can be assigned different meanings in l-ges & might be regarded as more complex unit or morpheme => pay attention to: number, gender & tense. Gram-l eq-ce when  - tr shd add\omit info in the TT because of the lack of gram-l devices in TL: number, tense, aspect, voice, person, gender. Textual eq-ce  - helps to produce a cohesive text for the TC audience  in a specific context. Pragmatic eq-ce – tr-r shd recreate the author’s intension in author’s culture so that the TC reader  could understand it clearly.

3.Direct & indirect methods in translation.
Each method corresponds to a certain level of complexity or to higher degree of complexity. They can be used on their own or be combined with one or more of the others. The modern scholars divide tr-n into 2 groups: direct and oblique (косвенный).
The cases when direct literal tr-n is possible; 1) the message is based either on parallel categories in which we can speak about structural parallelism (if-clause in SL can be tr-ted by if-clause in TL); 2) the case when the concept in the TL corresponds to the concept in the SL. Kinds: 1) Borrowing. May have a stylistic effect, to introduce the flavour of the SL or SC into a tr-n (dacha, oblast, ruble, vodka, babushka). Borrowings may become a part of the voc stock of the TL (парикмахер, меню). Tr-n shd be interested in modern borrowings, even personal ones, bcos they’re not registered in dictionaries. Mind false-ami (он носил эспаньолку – he had a Spanish beard).  2) Calque – a l-ge borrows an expression and then translates litereary each element (Дворец культуры – Palace of Culture). Structural calque – a new construction introduced in the l-ge (Are you OK? – Ты в порядке?).  3) Literal tr-n (word-for-word) – the direct transfer of the SL text into a grammatically and idiomatically appropriate TL text. To observe the adherence to the linguistic pattern of the TL (the train starts at 10-30 – поезд отходит в 10-30). It’s possible bcos of common metalinguistis concepts.
If after trying the 3 methods above translator regards literal translation unacceptable, he must turn to the method of oblique translation.
Oblique tr-n is used if direct tr-n: 1) gives another m-g; 2) has no m-g; 3) is structurally impossible; 4) does not have a corresponding expression within the cultural experience of the TL; 5) has a corresponding expression, but not within the sane register. Kinds: 1) Transposition – replacement of one word class with another without changing the m-g of the message (It rains (V) a lot  - Часто идут дожди (N)). From the stylistic p of v the basic and the transposed expression don’t necessarily have the same value. 2) Modulation - a variation of the form of the message obtained by a change in the p of v. When although a literal or even transposed tr-n is possible and gram-ly correct, but considered to be unsuitable, unidiomatic or awkward in the TL. (Shake hands – пожать руки). A whole text can be modulated. A case of modulation is antonymic tr-n (keep off the grass – по газонам не ходить). Modulation can be free (unique in senses, not yet fixed in sanction of usage) and fixed (in a dictionary). 3) Equivalence  - the phenomena that are used in different l-ges to carry the same m-g, and in this respect the same function. It’s the pivot that makes tr-n right. The classical example - reaction to certain physical actions (ой! – ouch!; тьфу! – oops!). Some of them are not very well known (cocadududu – кукареку!; bow-waw – гав-гав!). Most equivalents are fixed and belong to a phraseological stock (idioms, clichés, proverbs, nominal and adjectival phrases) (birds of feather flock together – рыбак рыбака видит издалека). 4) Adaptation – when the type of situation being referred to, when we consider the SL, is unknown in the TLCulture. Frequently used in tr-n of books and movie titles (A square peg in a round hole – М-р Питкин в тылу врага). Some tr-r are against it, bcos they say, it violates tr-n. but sometimes it’s the only way out if you don’t want to use all sorts of footnotes and explanations.

4. Types of translation.

Translation is the term for written translation. If one does it orally, the term is interpretation.
Literary and technical. Literary is not for everybody. You should be as talented as a writer. Technical is extremely broad. There is an overlap when it comes to such areas as social sciences, political subject and so on.
Characteristic feature of technical is specialized terminology. Technical texts have practically similar structures. They usually develop two modes of speech: exposition and argumentation. Description and narration are used to support the first two.
1) John Dryden’s classification: metaphrase – a type of tr-n which renders       exactly every word of the original; paraphrase – we retain the value of the original phrase by means of limiting or expanding definitions, the gist is there, but we don’t retain the spirit; imitation – presupposes that no phrase, sent, etc can be produced in another lang => prepare an imitation, i.e. a whole that is composed of parts noticeably different of the original ones, but the imagery, spirit, etc are preserved; adaptation – gives another vision of the text from the perspective of the TL culture; retelling – retell the content, but don’t preserve the structure or the wording; interpretation – not only explanation, but also tr-r’s ideas, attitudes given in the text or in the footnotes.
2) Kazakova’s classification: complete (=all but retelling) & abridged (=selective or searching tr-n). Abridged preserves the essence, disregarding some less important parts (compression). Another ex. – functional – rearrange the parts of the ST to make valid inf-n come first. W-for-w (c) – is necessary when dealing with scientific texts and texts of legal documents. Semantic (c) – based on rendering the contextual m-g of the text. Communicative (c) – to produce an adequate impression, some parts are rearranged and restructured.
3) Oral tr-n: consecutive – the translating starts after the original speech or some part of it (court tr-n, medical, business negotiations, teleconferences, escort int-n, OPI); simultaneous - the interpreter is supposed to be able to give his tr-n while the speaker is uttering the original message; sight tr-n & document comparison; signing tr-n – the lang of deaf and dumb people.

5. Translation techniques.
From gram. perspective:
1) Transposition – change in the order of ling elements (words, clauses, s-ces). (He trembled as he looked up – Взглянув на верх, он задрожал).
2) Replacement – can effect all types of ling units: a) word-form (plural by singular) -> novel about lives – роман описывает жизни; (past by present) -> he said he knew – он сказал, что знает. b) parts of speech (N->V) – it’s our hope that – мы надеемся, что; early-riser; (Adj->N) – Brazilian property – экономическое процветание Бразилии; (Comparative Adj->N) – better living conditions – улучшение уровня жизни; с) s-ce elements – changing the syntactic function of a word in a s-ce. The subject in E s-ce is often replaced by corresponding secondary element (objective adverbial modifier) in R (He was met by his sister – Его встретила сестра; The bed wasn’t slept this night). d) s-ce types – replacement of simple s-ce by complex one & visa versa in E -> infinitive, gerund, participle, in R we tr-te with a help of clause (S -> Complex) – I want you to – Я хочу, чтобы вы. Subtypes of the replacement on the level of s-ce types: unification (replacement of two simple s-ces by a compound) vs division (vise versa);
e) types of syntactic relations – (subordination -> coordination, tr-ting E->R) - He had a new father whose picture was enclosed – У него был новый отец, это он снят на карточке; tr-ting coordinate s-ce E->R we can’t use 2, 3 conjunctions in R.
3) Addition – to compensate words omitted in SL or gr forms in TL (Gun-license – лицензия на право ношения оружия; modern weapon – современные виды оружия).
4) Omission –to avoid redundancy (when where the phone was – пошел позвонить).
From lexical perspective:
1) concretization – frequent device in tr-n E→R, because there’re w of wide sem value, m-g is vague => in context the m-g shd be determined. Ex: He came in sight of the large, a long low, frowning thing of red brick. - Он увидел домик привратника, длинное, низкое, хмурое здание…
2) generalization – for stylistic reasons, in rendering non-equivalents; in R – more general words, in E – more specified. Ex: hands\arms = руки
3) antonymic tr-n (gr & lex) – substitution of an affirmative construction for a negative one or vv.
Ex: Keep the child out of the sun.
4) metonymic tr-n – substitution of related concepts.Ex: The advantages of sound… - Преимущества радио…
5) paraphrasing – rendering of m-g of some idiomatic phrase of SL by a phrase in the TL consisting of non-correlated lex units Ex: In for a penny, in for a pound – Назвался груздем полезай в кузов.
6) periphrasis – when there’s no definite equivalent in TL; effective when we deal with cultural phenomena which represent concepts that are diff. Ex: drugstore Transliteration – rendering SL letters by means of TL equiv. Ex: names of newspapers, magazines – Washington Post – Вашингтон Пост
Transcription – written representation in TL of SL sounds Ex: guardian – гардиан Descriptive tr-n. Ex: To feature a story – поместить репортаж на видном месте в газете.