Lexical issues of translation of industry text in the construction industry. Historical concepts and universal models of translation equivalence The concept of dynamic equivalence

One of the main tasks of the translator is to convey the content of the original as completely as possible, and, as a rule, the actual commonality of the content of the original and the translation is very significant.

It is necessary to distinguish between potentially achievable equivalence, which is understood as the maximum commonality of the content of two multilingual texts, allowed by the differences in the languages ​​in which these texts are created, and translation equivalence - the real semantic closeness of the original texts and the translation, achieved by the translator in the process of translation. The limit of translation equivalence is the maximum possible (linguistic) degree of preservation of the original content during translation, but in each individual translation the semantic closeness to the original to a different degree and in different ways approaches the maximum.

The concept of dynamic equivalence was introduced into linguistics by the American scientist Y. Naida.

Usually, the equivalence of a translation is established by comparing the source text with the translated text. Y. Naida proposes to compare the reactions of the recipient of the translated text and the recipient of the text in the source language (i.e., the reaction of the one who receives the message through the translator and the one who receives the text directly from the native speaker of the source language). If these reactions in their essential features (both intellectually and emotionally) are equivalent to each other, then the translated text is recognized as equivalent to the source text. It should be emphasized that the equivalence of reactions means their similarity, but by no means identity, which, quite obviously, is unattainable due to differences in ethnolinguistic, national and cultural plan between representatives of different linguistic communities.

The concept of dynamic equivalence basically corresponds to the concept of functional equivalence put forward by the Soviet linguist A.D. Schweitzer: "By translating the original message into another language, the translator measures the extralinguistic reaction to the translated message on the part of its recipient with the reaction to the original message of the recipient, who perceives it in the source language."

Obviously, the problem of achieving an equivalent response in the recipient of the translation is most directly related to the problem of transferring the content of the source text. This makes it necessary to clarify what elements it consists of. HELL. Schweitzer identifies four such elements:

Denotative (i.e., subject-logical) meaning associated with the designation of certain subject situations;

Syntactic meaning, determined by the nature of the syntactic links between the elements of the statement, i.e., its syntactic structure;

Connotative meaning, i.e., a meaning determined by the functional-stylistic and expressive coloring of a linguistic expression;

Pragmatic meaning, determined by the relationship between the linguistic expression and the participants in the communicative act (i.e., that subjective attitude to linguistic signs, to the text, which inevitably arises among people using language in the process of communication).

An important place in the concept of A. D. Schweitzer is occupied by the concept of a communicative attitude and the function of a speech work. The communicative setting is determined by the goal pursued by the author of the statement. “This goal can be a simple communication of facts, the desire to convince the interlocutor, induce him to certain actions, etc. The communicative attitude determines both the choice of certain language means and their share within the framework of a particular statement.

Considering a speech act from the point of view of its communicative setting, one can single out a number of functional characteristics in it, the consideration of which is of paramount importance for the translation process. To describe these characteristics, A. D. Schweitzer uses the classification of speech functions created by R. Jacobson:

1) "referential" or "denotative function" - a description of objective situations;

2) "expressive function", reflecting the attitude of the speaker to the statement;

3) "poetic function", focusing the attention of the participants of the speech act on the form of speech utterance (i.e., cases when the linguistic form of the utterance becomes communicatively significant);

4) “metalinguistic function” (when certain properties of a given language code acquire the rank of semantic elements; for example, when we are dealing with puns);

5) "phatic function" associated with establishing and maintaining contact between communicants.

In a speech work, as a rule, several functions are presented, and the role of these functions is not the same. The elements of the language that embody the dominant function are called the functional dominant. From one speech work to another, from text to text, functions and, accordingly, functional dominants change. Based on this, translation is seen as a process of finding a solution that meets a specific set of varying functional criteria.

The study of the specifics of oral translation is carried out in three main areas. The first aspect of the study deals with the factors that influence the translator's extraction of the information contained in the original. Oral translation is the translation of oral speech into a foreign language, the perception of oral speech is short, disposable and discrete, and therefore the extraction of information in the translation process is carried out differently than in the visual perception of the text. The completeness of understanding depends on the rhythm, pauses (the number and duration of pauses), and the rate of speech; the extraction of information occurs in the form of separate portions as the chain of linguistic units unfolds in the speaker's speech, the perception is carried out on the basis of "semantic strongholds". The translator predicts the subsequent content of the text on the basis of already perceived "quanta" of information, refining his forecast in the process of further perception, which involves the accumulation and retention of previous information in memory. The theory of oral translation describes the psycholinguistic features and linguistic prerequisites for probabilistic forecasting in translation, its dependence on the relative semantic independence of minimal speech segments in different languages, as well as the nature of information loss when listening to significant segments of speech. Factors that compensate for such losses are also described: knowledge of the subject and the situation of speech, which allows one to guess the content of the omitted, intonation, emotional coloring of speech, etc.

The second aspect of the study of oral translation is related to its consideration as a special type of speech in TL. The theory of oral translation describes the specifics of the translator's oral speech, which differs from the usual "non-translated" speech. The existence of distinctive features is due to the fact that the translator's speech is focused on the original and is formed in the process of translation. In simultaneous translation, the process of speaking proceeds in parallel with the process of listening (perception of the speaker's speech), although part of the translation is “spoken out” in pauses in the speech of the Source. An important aspect of the linguistic description of simultaneous translation is to identify the size (duration) of the minimum interval between the beginning of the generation of the original segment and the beginning of the translation of this segment. The value of such an interval is determined by two series of linguistic factors. Firstly, it depends on the features of the structure of the foreign language, which determine the length of the segment of speech, within which the ambiguity of its constituent units is removed. For many languages, such a segment most often includes the structural basis of the SPO sentence (subject-predicate-object) and, first of all, the verb-predicate. Often the translator is forced to delay the beginning of the translation, waiting for the verb to appear in the speaker's statement. Secondly, the value of the lag interval also depends on some features of the TL structure, which determines the degree of dependence of the form of the initial elements of the utterance on its subsequent elements. For example, when translating into English the beginning of the Russian sentence “Friendship with the Soviet Union... (we deeply appreciate)”, the translator will have to wait for the Source to pronounce the subject and predicate in order to begin translating: We highly appreciate our friendship... At the same time time, translating the same sentence into German, he could start translating after the very first words: Die Freundschaft mit der Sowjetunion... The existence of synonymous statements in the TL that differ in structure also affects the size of the lag interval. Instead of waiting for the subject and predicate to appear in the Russian utterance, the translator into English could immediately translate the beginning of the sentence as The friendship with the Soviet Union..., hoping that he could use a different structure in the translation, for example: ... is of great value to us.

Within the framework of the special theory of oral translation, a number of other features of the translator's speech are also noted. This includes slower articulation associated with the so-called hesitation pauses, fluctuations in the choice of options, leading to a sharp increase (by 3-4 times) in the interval behind erroneous options, as well as the total duration of pauses in relation to the pure sound of speech. The interpreter’s speech is less rhythmic, the simultaneous interpreter often speaks at an increased pace, trying to “speak” what is already understood faster, and with consecutive interpreting, the tempo of speech is significantly reduced, since the interpreter at the same time understands his record, restoring the content of the original in memory. Particular attention in the theory of interpretation is paid to the normative requirements for the translator's speech, the fulfillment of which in extreme conditions of simultaneous and consecutive translation requires special efforts: ensuring clear articulation, uniform rhythm, correct placement of accents, mandatory semantic and structural completeness of phrases and other elements of the "delivery" of the translation. ensuring its full perception by listeners. The central aspect of the study of oral translation is its consideration as a special type of translation, i.e. as opposed to written translation. Here, the special theory of oral translation reveals both quantitative and qualitative features. In simultaneous translation, the volume (number of words) of the target text depends on the length of the segments of speech being translated. When translating short phrases, the number of words in simultaneous translation, on average, is greater than in written translation, due to the greater number of elements of description and explanation. When translating long phrases, these values ​​are equalized, and when translating paragraphs and larger sections of text, simultaneous translation turns out to be less verbose, both due to conscious compression (compression) of the text during the translation process, and due to a certain number of omissions. A decrease in the volume of the translated text compared to the written translation of the same original is noted in all cases and in consecutive translation. The number of skips increases with the speaker's speech rate. Therefore, the theory of oral translation pays special attention to the causes, methods and limits of speech compression. The need for compression is determined by the fact that the conditions of oral (especially simultaneous) translation do not always allow transferring the content of the original as completely as in written translation. Firstly, with the fast pace of the speaker's speech, it is difficult for the translator to have time to pronounce the full text of the translation. Secondly, the speed of the speech-thinking process for each translator has its limits, and he often cannot speak as quickly as the speaker. Thirdly, the hasty pronunciation of speech statements often affects their correctness and completeness, as a result of which their perception by the Translation Receptor and the entire process of interlingual communication are disturbed. Speech compression in interpreting is not an easy task. This is not just about skipping a part of the original, but about such a compression of the translated message, which preserves all the important elements of meaning. Compression becomes possible due to the information redundancy of speech. The statement often contains elements of information that duplicate each other, and when translating, some of them can be omitted, preserving the content of the message. For example, if the interpreter completely translated the question "When will the implementation of this plan begin?" and he has to translate the answer "The implementation of this plan will begin in 1990," he can condense it to "in the nineties." The statement may sometimes contain side information (politeness formulas, random remarks, deviations from the topic), the omission of which will not interfere with the implementation of the main task of communication. In some cases, the situation of communication makes it unnecessary to transfer some part of the information in verbal form and thus allows for the reduction of information in translation.

Message compression during translation is a variable value. It depends on the rate of the speaker's speech and on the ratio of the structures of the FL and the TL. The theory of oral translation describes the methods of speech compression for each pair of languages ​​using both structural and semantic transformations. The most typical compression methods are synonymous replacement of phrases and sentences with shorter words, phrases and sentences, replacement of the full name of an organization, state, etc. with an abbreviation or abbreviated name (The United Nations - UN), replacement of a combination of a verb with a verbal noun with a single verb , denoting the same action, process or state as the noun being replaced (to render assistance - help), omission of connecting elements in the phrase (the policy pursued by the United States - US policy), replacement of the subordinate clause with participial or prepositional phrase (When I met him for the first time - at the first meeting with him), etc. When the speaker speaks quickly, the use of various methods of speech compression can reduce the text of the translation by 25 - 30% compared to the written translation of the same original.

An important section of the theory of oral translation is the study of the nature of equivalence achieved in various types of such translation. As already mentioned, there is sometimes a loss of information in interpretation compared to the level of equivalence established in translation. Observed deviations are reduced to omissions, additions or erroneous replacements of information contained in the original. Each type of deviation includes smaller categories, differing in the degree of importance of information not transmitted or added. Passes include:

1) the omission of an insignificant single word, mainly an epithet;

2) the omission of more important and large units, associated with the translator's misunderstanding of part of the text;

3) omission of a part of the text due to the restructuring of the text structure during translation;

4) omission of a significant part of the text due to the lag of the translation from the speech of the speaker. Additions are classified according to the nature of the added redundant elements: separate determinants, additional clarifications, clarifying connections between statements, etc.

And, finally, errors are divided according to the degree of importance: a small error in the translation of a single word, a gross semantic error in the translation of a single word, a small error due to a slight change in structure, a gross semantic error with a significant change in structure, etc. When assessing the quality of an oral Translation takes into account the specifics of the oral form of communication: with direct contact between communicants, the establishment of equivalence at a lower level in some cases does not prevent their mutual understanding, which to a certain extent compensates for the loss of information in the process of interpreting. These two methods of classifying translations (by the nature of the translated text and by the form of perception of the original and the creation of the translated text) are based on different principles, and the types of translation distinguished in each of them, of course, do not coincide. Theoretically, any type of text can be translated both orally and in writing. In practice, however, the specificity of oral translation imposes certain restrictions on the degree of complexity and volume of translated texts, which in a certain respect is associated with their functional and genre characteristics. Works of fiction, in general, are not translated orally, although individual quotations from such works may be given in oral presentations and translated simultaneously or sequentially. Ensuring artistic and aesthetic impact in oral translation with its rigid temporal framework is a very difficult task, especially if poetic works are quoted, the translation of which is unknown to the translator in advance. Large-scale works of informative genres are also not translated orally, since the duration of oral translation is limited not only by the possibilities of translation, but also by the short duration of oral communication in general: it is physically impossible to speak, listen and memorize continuously for a long period of time.

The concept of dynamic equivalence, which was first identified by Eugene Nida, is similar to the concept of functional equivalence by the Russian researcher A. D. Schweitzer. We are talking about the coincidence of the reaction of the recipient of the source text and a native speaker of one language with the reaction of the recipient of the translated text, a native speaker of another language. According to A. D. Schweitzer, the content to be conveyed consists of four elements or four meanings: 1) denotative; 2) syntactic; 3) connotative and 4) pragmatic meaning ("determined by the relationship between the linguistic expression and the participants in the communicative act").

Equivalence levels

According to the theory of V.N. Komissarov “the equivalence of a translation lies in the maximum identity of all levels of the content of the texts of the original and the translation” ..

The theory of equivalence levels by V.N. Komissarov is based on the allocation in terms of the content of the original and the translation of five content levels:

1. the level of linguistic signs;

2. level of utterance;

3. message level;

4. level of description of the situation;

5. level of purpose of communication;

The original and translation units may be equivalent to each other at all five levels or only at some of them. The ultimate goal of translation is to establish the maximum degree of equivalence at each level.

In translation studies, there is often the thesis that the main defining principle of text equivalence is a communicative-functional feature, which consists of the equality of the communicative effect produced on the recipients of the original and translated texts.

However, when interpreting communicative-functional equivalence, it is argued that when creating a text in language B, the translator constructs it in such a way that the recipient in language B perceives it in the same way as the recipient in language A. In other words, ideally, the translator himself should not to introduce into the text of the message an element of one's own perception, different from the perception of this message by the recipient to whom it was addressed. In fact, the perception of the interpreter and any of the recipients of speech is not able to be the same due to a variety of personal, cultural and social reasons.

Obviously, the main goal of translation is not to adjust the text to someone's perception, but to preserve the content, functions, style, stylistic, communicative and artistic values ​​of the original. And if this goal is achieved, then the perception of the translation in the language environment of the translation will be relatively equal to the perception of the original in the language environment of the original. The exaggeration of the role of the communicative-functional factor in translation leads to the blurring of the internal content, the informative essence of the text itself, the original and the translation, to the replacement of the essence of the object by the reaction of the perceiving subject to it. It is not the text itself that becomes decisive, but its communicative function and the conditions for the realization of the semantic content of the text; transmission of content by equivalent (that is, performing a function similar to the expressive function of the language means of the original) means.

Communicative-functional equivalence in modern translation studies is considered in a wide field translation pragmatists- that is, a combination of factors that determine the orientation of the translation to its recipient, in other words, the “approximation” of the translation to the recipient. A reasonable balance of approaches involves three main factors that determine the equivalence of translation.

4. The concept of dynamic (functional) equivalence. The concept of dynamic equivalence, which was first identified by Eugene Nida, is similar to the concept of functional equivalence by the Russian researcher A. D. Schweitzer. We are talking about the coincidence of the reaction of the recipient of the source text and a native speaker of one language with the reaction of the recipient of the translated text, a native speaker of another language. According to A. D. Schweitz

The concept of equivalence, both from a functional and from a substantive point of view, is considered differently by the theorists of translation of the twentieth century, however, from our point of view, almost all the variety of approaches can be reduced to two main types - this is equivalence tied to linguistic units, and equivalence, not tied to linguistic units.

What are the requirements for the equivalence of two texts - the text of the original and the text of its translation? According to L.K. Latyshev, there are three such requirements:

Both texts should have (relatively equal communicative-functional properties (they should “behave” in a relatively identical way, respectively, in the sphere of native speakers of the source language and in the sphere of native speakers of the target language);

To the extent permitted under the first condition, both texts should be as similar as possible to each other in a semantic-structural sense; AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

With all the "compensating" deviations between the two texts, there should not be semantic-structural discrepancies that are not allowed in translation.

L. K. Latyshev believes that the equivalence of the source text and the text of its translation is achieved (that is, the equality of communicative effects is achieved) when the differences in the linguo-ethnic communicative competence of the two recipients are neutralized. At the same time, the task of ensuring the equality of communicative situations of the recipients of the source and translated texts or the task of equalizing communicative competencies (with the help of a preliminary commentary or notes to the text) is not the task, it is enough to “create (relatively) equivalent linguo-ethnic prerequisites for the perception of the message (in its multilingual versions) and the reaction on him.

L. K. Latyshev distinguishes between small-scale and large-scale equivalence, saying that a characteristic feature of translation is the often occurring discrepancy between the equivalence of individual segments of the source text and the translated text and the equivalence of these tests as a whole. The point here is that, ultimately, translational equivalence must be established at the level of two texts, and large-scale equivalence allows for the sacrifice of small-scale equivalence.

So, we have considered various aspects of equivalence. It can be argued that this is a multi-valued concept in translation theory. Each time it is necessary to distinguish whether we are talking about content or functional equivalence, and what level of equivalence is meant.

LK Latyshev distinguishes four types of translation equivalence. Let us briefly characterize these types.

The equivalence of translations of the first type lies in the preservation of only that part of the content of the original, which is the purpose of communication:

The purpose of communication is the most general part of the content of the statement, characteristic of the statement as a whole and determining its role in the communicative act. The relationship between originals and translations of this type is characterized by:

The absence of real or direct logical connections between the messages in the original and the translation, which would allow us to assert that in both cases "the same is reported";

Least commonality between the content of the original and the translation compared to all other translations recognized as equivalent.

Thus, in this type of equivalence, the translation seems to say “not at all” and “not at all about that” that in the original. This conclusion is true for the entire message as a whole, even if one or two words in the original have direct or indirect matches in the translation.

Translations at this level of equivalence are performed both in cases where a more detailed reproduction of the content is impossible, and when such reproduction will lead the translation receptor to incorrect conclusions, cause it to have completely different associations than the original receptor, and thereby interfere with the correct transmission. goals of communication.

The second type of equivalence is represented by translations, the semantic proximity of which to the original is also not based on the commonality of the meanings of the language means used.

In the equivalent multilingual statements, most of the words and syntactic structures of the original do not find a direct correspondence in the translated text. At the same time, it can be argued that there is a greater commonality of content between the originals and translations of this group than with the equivalence of the first type.

The relationship between originals and translations of this type is characterized by:

Incompatibility of lexical composition and syntactic organization;

The inability to link the vocabulary and structure of the original and the translation with the relations of semantic paraphrasing or syntactic transformation;

Preservation of the purpose of communication in translation, since the preservation of the dominant function of the utterance is a prerequisite for equivalence;

The preservation in the translation of an indication of the same situation, which is proved by the existence of a direct real or logical connection between the multilingual messages, which makes it possible to assert that in both cases “the same is reported”.

The third type of equivalence can be characterized as follows:

Lack of parallelism in lexical composition and syntactic structure;

Impossibility to link the structures of the original and the translation by syntactic transformation relations;

Preservation in the translation of the purpose of communication and identification of the same situation as in the original;

Preservation in the translation of general concepts, with the help of which the description of the situation in the original is carried out, i.e. the preservation of that part of the content of the original text, which is called the "way of describing the situation."

In the three types of equivalence described above, the commonality of the content of the original and the translation was to preserve the main elements of the content of the text. As a unit of verbal communication, the text is always characterized by communicative functionality, situational orientation and selectivity in the way of describing the situation. These features are also preserved in the minimum unit of the text - statements. In other words, the content of any statement expresses some goal of communication through a description of some situation, carried out in a certain way (by selecting some features of this situation). In the first type of equivalence, only the first of the specified parts of the original content (the purpose of communication) is preserved in the translation, in the second type - the first and second (the purpose of communication and a description of the situation), in the third - all three parts (the purpose of communication, the description of the situation and the way it is described). ).

Concepts of equivalence L.K.Latysheva.

Russian translation scholar Lev Konstantinovich Latyshev identifies four basic concepts of equivalence:

- The concept of formal compliance:

“Everything that can be transferred is transmitted (including, to the extent possible, the structure of the source text). Only those elements of the source text are transformed, replaced, omitted, which cannot be reproduced “directly” at all (L . K. Latyshev, 1981. - S. 6). This practice originally took place in the translation of sacred texts.

- The concept of normative and substantive compliance:

“The translators of this direction sought to fulfill two requirements: 1) to convey all the essential elements of the content of the source text and 2) to comply with the norms of the translating language (TL)” (Ibid., p. 7).

- The concept of a full (adequate) translation :

The authors of this concept A. V. Fedorov and Ya. I. Retsker defined the following qualities of an adequate translation: 1) an exhaustive transfer of the semantic content of the text; 2) the transfer of content by equivalent (that is, performing a function similar to the expressive function of the language means of the original) means (Ibid., p. 7).

- The concept of dynamic (functional) equivalence:

The concept of dynamic equivalence, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ, was first identified by Eugene Nida, similar to the concept of functional equivalence by the Russian researcher A. D. Schweitzer. We are talking about the coincidence of the reaction of the recipient of the source text and a native speaker of one language with the reaction of the recipient of the translated text, a native speaker of another language. According to A. D. Schweitzer, the content, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ, is extremely important to convey, consists of four elements or four meanings: 1) denotative; 2) syntactic; 3) connotative and 4) pragmatic meaning (“determined by the relationship between the linguistic expression and the participants in the communicative act”) (Ibid., p. 10).

According to L. K. Latyshev, this concept does not contradict the previous two, but includes them as more particular cases (Ibid., p. 27).

5. Essence of the concept of dynamic equivalence.

We tend to regard the concept of dynamic equivalence as the most promising one. What are the requirements for the equivalence of two texts - the text of the original and the text of its translation? According to L. K. Latyshev, there are three such requirements (D. K. Latyshev. 1988, p. 39):

Both texts should have relatively equal communicative-functional properties (they should “behave” in a relatively identical way, respectively, in the sphere of native speakers of the source language and in the sphere of native speakers of the target language);

To the extent permitted under the first condition, both texts should be as similar as possible to each other in a semantic-structural sense;

With all the "compensating" deviations between the two texts, there should not be semantic-structural differences that are not allowed in the translation.

Only on the basis of the concept of dynamic equivalence, as L. K. Latyshev believes, are the provisions of the modern theory of translation about translation equivalence built, since it is precisely this concept that makes it possible to explain many translation techniques, in some cases providing an equivalent translation, for example, replacing the original content.

Another problem, from the point of view of L. K. Latyshev, is the clarification of the concept of "reaction". Individual reactions "are not objects of comparison in order to assess the quality of translation" ( OK. Latyshev, 1988. - S. 20). The objects of comparison can be constructs as some average reactions: the reaction of a Russian and a German, a Russian and an Englishman, etc. As the researcher himself writes, “these constructs are in the nature of a forecast and are abstractions created by “subtracting” components from potential real reactions due to personal beliefs, personal experience, emotional type of the recipient, etc., that is, they are “linguo-ethnic” reactions (Ibid., pp. 20-21). The linguistic-ethnic reaction is, of course, an abstraction, in fact, a forecast of a translator based on knowledge of national psychology. At the same time, from our point of view, it is also possible to measure such reactions or the “communicative effect” (as a more capacious concept, from the point of view of Latyshev), namely, by the methods of linguo-psychosociology. Individual responses resulting from appropriate research based on evidence-based sampling and statistical analysis.

L. K. Latyshev believes that the equivalence of the source text and the text of its translation is achieved (that is, the equality of communicative effects is achieved) when the differences in the linguo-ethnic communicative competence of the two recipients are neutralized. At the same time, the task of ensuring the equality of communicative situations of the recipients of the source and translated texts or the task of equalizing communicative competencies (with the help of a preliminary commentary or notes to the text) is not set, it is enough to “create (relatively) equivalent linguo-ethnic prerequisites for the perception of the message (in its multilingual versions) and reactions to it (L.K. Latyshev 1981. - P. 25).

L. K. Latyshev solves the problem of translation equivalence on the basis of a distinction between the concepts of "text function" and "text content". In different situations of communication, a text with the same content may have different functions (communicative tasks). Conversely, texts of different content can have the same function. OK. Latyshev, within the framework of his concept, distinguishes two types of equivalence in translation (functional and functional-content) and four types of text content (denotative, significative, content at the interpreter level, intralinguistic content). L.K. Latyshev refers to the divergence of the systems of FL and TL, the divergence of norms of FL and TL, the divergence of speech norms of FL speakers and TL carriers operating in collectives, the divergence of pre-information stocks of FL carriers and TL carriers, including cultural and historical information and information about current current events. Actions aimed at neutralizing the factors of the linguistic-ethnic barrier form a certain hierarchy. As a determinant of translation actions, the linguo-ethnic barrier determines the quality, "intensity" and number of modifications of the broadcast content necessary to equalize the ethnic prerequisites for the perception and interpretation of IT and PT. In the works of L.K. Latyshev, who put forward and substantiated the doctrine of the social purpose of translation, clearly shows a tendency to "immerse" translation in a wider communicative context. The social purpose of translation, being its constant, classification feature, present in all its implementations, is, according to L.K. Latyshev, in order to bring bilingual communication as close as possible (under the given linguistic and extralinguistic conditions) to "natural", monolingual communication in terms of both the communicative functions performed and the means of their implementation.

The thesis about the social purpose of translation is concretized in a number of theoretical provisions:

1) The translation is intended to provide approximately the same opportunities for regulatory impact on the addressee as the original;

2) The equality of the regulatory impact of IT and PT is achieved by neutralizing the linguistic-ethnic barrier, i.e. inequality of prerequisites for the perception of the message by native speakers of the original language and the translation at the level of the linguo-cultural community (and not at the social group and individual levels);

3) The linguo-ethnic barrier is overcome either by "aligning" the linguistic and cultural situations of multilingual communicants in the form of translator's comments and notes, or by purposefully creating compensating discrepancies between the original text and the translation.

Since the linguistic and cultural situations of multilingual communicants never coincide, L.K. Latyshev makes a logical conclusion, which is of great methodological significance for the theory of translation, that structural-semantic discrepancies between the source and translated texts are the same essential element of translation as structural-semantic parallels.

4) The translated text should maximally represent the content of the original, the author's characteristic way of expressing thoughts, his communicative strategy, which is achieved by maintaining the maximum possible structural and semantic proximity of the source and translated texts.

5) The contradiction between the requirement to preserve the structural and semantic proximity of multilingual texts and the requirement of equality of regulatory impact is resolved in accordance with the principle of motivation for translation transformations, according to which all deviations in translation from objectively existing linguistic parallels should be motivated by the need to achieve equivalence of the regulatory impact of the source and translated texts on their addressees.

• - the theory that the embryo sac of angiosperms originated from forms like Gnetum, in which all cells of the embryo sac are morphologically equivalent ...

  Glossary of botanical terms

• - the cohomology of a dynamical system, is one of the invariants in ergodic theory, the construction of which resembles the construction of the cohomology of a group...

  Mathematical Encyclopedia

• - on a semigroup - binary relations defined as follows: means that chi y generate coinciding left principal ideals...

  Mathematical Encyclopedia

• - the equivalence class for the recursive equivalence relation, i.e. the set of all subsets of the natural series, every two of which can be brought into one-to-one correspondence using ...

  Mathematical Encyclopedia

• - (T t) with phase space X and invariant measure - a common name for various spectral invariants and spectral properties of the corresponding group of unitary shift operators = f in a Hilbert space...

  Mathematical Encyclopedia

• - Equivalence range - a form of cognitive style - by H. Gardner. The prevailing tendency to see similarities or differences between objects or phenomena...

  Psychological Dictionary

• - Isolation in the activity of any living organism and in the formation of its inherent behavioral acts of closed formations with the obligatory presence of a channel of reverse afferentation, informing about the results of the action ...

  Explanatory Dictionary of Psychiatric Terms

• - a parameter characterizing the resistance of liquids and gases to slip or shear. Expressed in pascal seconds.

  Construction dictionary

• - indicator of fluid viscosity, Pa s, equal to the ratio of the stress causing a shift of adjacent layers of a liquid or gas to the rate of this shift ...

  Encyclopedic Dictionary of Metallurgy

• - defines one of the most important psychophysiological characteristics of brain activity, based on the dialectical unity of two main aspects: the specialization of the hemispheres and their interaction in providing ...

  Gender Studies Terms

• - methodological principle, according to which, with the complication of the structure, additional properties appear in it. Closely related to the systems approach...

  Ecological dictionary

• - the principle formulated by W. Tishler, according to which, in geographically different, but ecologically convergent biotopes, identical ecological functions are performed by different species, ...

  Ecological dictionary

• - I Equivalence principle in economics, the principle according to which a certain amount of labor in one form is exchanged for an equal amount of labor in another ...

  Great Soviet Encyclopedia

• - 1. There are the following five types of equivalence: denotative, providing for the preservation of the subject content of the text ...
• - the same as the concept of dynamic translation equivalence...

  Explanatory Translation Dictionary

• - V.N. Komissarov distinguishes five so-called levels of equivalence, of which the first two correspond to direct interlingual transformations, and the rest suggest a fairly free interpretation...

  Explanatory Translation Dictionary

"the concept of dynamic (functional) translation equivalence" in books