Translation of English Physiological State Verbs Into Uzbek
Abstract
Translation studies concentrate on the intricacies of translating meaning and the semantic and grammatical differences between languages. Two separate languages: English and Uzbek differ in every aspect including grammatical structure, order and even most importantly, physiological state verbs that play an essential role in languages as they directly concern the process of the human body. What makes this work different from others is the differentiation of physiological state verbs in English and Uzbek. These verbs are stative in nature in English but are very often expressed in the form of an action verb (with a dynamic meaning), adjective or noun in Uzbek, thereby revealing a difference between these two typologically different languages. Although the translation of these verbs has been discussed, the effect of the aspectual meaning of modal verbs on translation from English to Uzbek in different contexts and culture are still neglected. The subject of this study is to analyze the translation of English physiological state verbs into Uzbek in terms of semantic, grammatical, and pragma, the challenges of such model and related strategies for accurate reachability and natural sounding. Translation of physiological verbs differs considerably, according to the study. A lot of verbs either omitted or substituted, Semantically lose its meaning, resulting in a less fluent narrative in Uzbek. This study enhances comparative linguistics by supplementing the previous research focusing on physiological state verbs used in translations to explore their syntactic, semantic, and cultural divergencies. This emphasizes that translation can neither be strictly linguistic nor cultural. They emphasise that someone who knows the text must translate it, the translation does not have to be literal, but should be functional in order to preserve the emotional and literary depth of the work.
References
J. C. Catford, A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: Oxford University Press, 1965.
E. A.Nida, Toward a Science of Translating: With Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1969.
J.-P. Vinay and J. Darbelnet, Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology for Translation. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1995.
P. Newmark, A Textbook of Translation. New York: Prentice Hall, 1988.
L.S. Barkhudarov, Yazyk i Perevod (Voprosy Obshchey i Chastnoy Teorii Perevoda). Moscow: Mezhdunarodnye Otnosheniya, 1975.
V. N.Komissarov, Sovremennoe Perevodovedenie: Uchebnoe Posobie. Moscow: ETS, 2002.
D.Crystal, The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
O‘zbekiston Milliy Ensiklopediyasi. Toshkent: O‘zbekiston Milliy Ensiklopediyasi Davlat Ilmiy Nashriyoti, 2005.
M. Baker, In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. London: Routledge, 1992.
J. House, Translation Quality Assessment: A Model Revisited. Tübingen: Narr, 2015.
E. Gentzler, Contemporary Translation Theories. London: Routledge, 2001.
G. Mounin, Les Problèmes Théoriques de la Traduction. Paris: Gallimard, 1963.
L. Venuti, The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge, 1995.
M.Snell-Hornby, Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 1988.
A.Lefevere, Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London: Routledge, 1992.
