2. Transformation of some idioms in the process of translation.

Taking into account the aims pursued and the contextual environment

of the idiom, there must be acknowledged at least two main levels of translating

the national idioms:

1) the level of the interlinear rendering, i.e., sense-to-sense translation

only, which is quite sufficient to faithfully express the lexical meaning of most

of these phraseologisms/idioms;

2) the literary/literary artistic level, at which not only the sense but also

the expressiveness, the vividness, the picturesqueness and the aphoristic

nature (if any) of the idioms should possibly be conveyed as well.

Compare the examples of translation with the help of transformations

of particularly English phraseologisms performed first (1) at the interlinear

(sense-to-sense rendering) level and then (2) at the literary/literary artistic

level:

He that doesn’t respect, isn’t respected – 1. хто інших не поважає, сам

поваги не має; 2. поважатимеш інших, поважатимуть і тебе;

It’s an equal failing to trust everybody and to trust nobody – 1. однакова

вада – довіряти всім і недовіряти нікому; 2. довіряти кожному і

недовіряти нікому – однакова вада;

The pleasures of the mighty are the tears of the poor – 1. Розваги

багатих – то сльози бідних/знедолених; 2. вельможні скачуть - убогі

плачуть; що панські жарти, то людські сльози.

Transformations become absolutely inevitable when the English

phraseologisms or mots contain a passive voice structure, the introductory

it/there, or some other analytical constructions, as for instance, those with

the auxiliary verbs (do, does, etc.): There is no love lost between them –

вони недолюблюють одне одного/глек розбили; Does your mother know

you are out? – Молоко на губах ще не висохло/ще не доріс. Can the

leopard change his spots? – Горбатого могила виправить.

29.1. . Factors predetermining the ways of rendering meanings of English Verbals (general characteristics).

Common English and Ukrainian non-finite forms of the verb, i.e., the infinitive and both participles, are characterized by identical functions in the sentence. Some of their lexico-grammatical mean­ings, however, are considerably broader in English than in Ukrainian and include the combined tense and aspect or tense, aspect and voice forms of the infinitive as well as of the present participle de­rived respectively from the intransitive and from transitive verbs (cf. to live - to be living, to have lived; but: to do - to be done, to be doing; doing - being done, having been done, etc.)

To render faithfully some of these lexico-grammatical mean­ings (semes) of English verbal paradigms into Ukrainian is not al­ways possible. An exception make the simple paradigms, which usu­ally have semantic and structural equivalents in both languages. For

example:

English Ukrainian to ask —to be asked Запитувати - бути

запитаним,

working (Participle I) - працюючий, працюючи; having worked (Perfect Participle) - попрацювавши, пропрацювавши.

Translation of verbals depends not only on their structural, i.e., paradigmatic forms but also on their nature. Thus, a special approach is needed to render in Ukrainian the complexity of meanings con­tained by some paradigms of the English gerund (or to render the meanings of the Ukrainian diyepryslivnyk in English).

Consequently, the ways of rendering the meanings of verbals are predetermined by some factors which include a) the structural form of the verbal and b) the function of the verbal in the sentence,