Introductory Notes. It has been mentioned (see p

It has been mentioned (see p. 24) that the source language may have a number of grammatical forms and structures which have no analogues in the target language, and some procedures were suggested for dealing with such equivalent-lacking elements.

The English grammatical form that has no direct equivalent in Russian may be a part of speech, a category within a part of speech or a syntactical structure. A lack of equivalence in the English and Russian systems of parts of speech can be exemplified by the article which is part of the English grammar and is absent in Russian. As a rule, English articles are not translated into Russian for their meaning is expressed by various contextual elements and needn't be reproduced separately. Translating the phrase " the man who gave me the book" with the Russian «человек, который дал мне книгу» the translator needn't worry about the definite article since the situation is definite enough due to the presence of the limiting attributive clause. There are some cases, however, when the meaning of the article has an important role to play in the communication and should by all means be reproduced in TT. Consider the following linguistic statement: 'To put it in terms of linguistics: a sentence is a concrete fact, the result of an actual act of speech. The sentence is an abstraction. So a sentence is always a unit of speech; the sentence of a definite language is an element of that language." It is obvious that an entity cannot be both a concrete fact and an abstraction. The difference between " a sentence" (любое отдельное предложение) and 'the sentence" (предложение как понятие, тип предложения) should be definitely revealed in the Russian translation as well.

Even if some grammatical category is present both in SL and in TL, its subcategories may not be the same and, hence, equivalent-lacking. Both the English and the Russian verb have their aspect forms but there are no equivalent relationships between them. Generally speaking, the Continuous forms correspond to the Russian imperfective aspect, while the Perfect forms are often equivalent to the perfective aspect. However, there are many dissimilarities. Much depends on the verb semantics. The Present Perfect forms of non-terminative verbs, for instance, usually correspond to the Russian imperfeclive verbs in the present tense:

I have lived in Moscow since 1940. 102

Я живу в Москве с 1940 г.

Progressive organizations and leaders have been persecuted. Прогрессивные организации и передовые деятели подвергаются преследованиям.

The Past Indefinite forms may correspond either to the perfective or to the imperfective Russian forms and the choice is largely prompted by the context. Cf.:

After supper he usually smoked in the garden.

После ужина он обычно курил в саду.

After supper he smoked a cigarette in the garden and went to bed.

После ужина он выкурил в саду сигарету и пошел спать.

The Past Pefect forms may also be indifferent to these aspective nuances, referring to an action prior to some other action or a past moment. Cf.:

I hoped he had read that book.

(а) Я надеялся, что он читал эту книгу, (б) Я надеялся, что он (уже) прочитал эту книгу.

And, again, the broader context will enable the translator to make the correct choice.

Of particular interest to the translator are the English syntactical (infinitival, participial or gerundial) complexes which have no parallels in Russian. Translating sentences with such complexes always involves some kind of restructuring.

A special study should be made of the translation problems involved in handling the Absolute Participle constructions. To begin with, an Absolute construction must be correctly identified by the translator. The identification problem is particularly complicated in the case of the " with" -structures which may coincide in form with the simple prepositional groups. The phrase " How can you play with your brother lying sick in bed" can be understood in two different ways: as an Absolute construction and then its Russian equivalent will be «Как тебе не стыдно играть, когда твой брат лежит больной (в постели)» or as a prepositional group which should be translated as «Как тебе не стыдно играть с твоим больным братом».

Then the translator should consider the pros and cons of the possible translation equivalents. The meaning of the Absolute Participle construction can be rendered into Russian with the help of a clause, an adverbial participle (деепричастие) or a separate sentence. Each of these methods has its advantages and disadvantages. Using a clause involves the

identification of the specific adverbial function of the construction: " Business disposed of, we went for a walk." - Когда (так как) с делом было покончено, мы отправились погулять. This can be avoided by using an adverbial participle, but then care should be taken to refer it to the subject: Покончив с делом, мы отправились погулять. (Dangling participles are common in English but are usually not used in literary Russian. Cf.: " But coming from West Indies, his chances were very slim" and «Подъезжая к станции, у меня слетела шляпа».)

The same sentence can be rendered into Russian by two separate sentences: Работа была закончена. Мы отправились погулять. This method is not infrequently used by the translators, whenever it suits the style of the narration.

Specific translation problems emerge when the translator has to handle a syntactical complex with a causative meaning introduced by the verb 'to have" or " to get", such as: " I shall have him do it" or " I shall have him punished". First, the translator has to decide what Russian causative verb should be used as a substitute for the English " have" or " get". Depending on the respective status of the persons involved, the phrase " I shall have him do it" may be rendered into Russian as «Я заставлю его (прикажу ему, велю ему, попрошу его и т.п.) сделать это» or even «Я добьюсь (позабочусь о том, устрою так и т.п.), чтобы он это сделал». Second, the translator must be aware that such complexes are polysemantic and may be either causative or non-causative. The phrase 'The general had his horse killed" may refer to two different situations. Either the horse was killed by the general's order (Генерал приказал убить свою лошадь) or he was killed in combat and the general was not the initiator of the act but the sufferer (Под ним убили лошадь). An error in the translator's judgement will result in a distorted translation variant.

Many equivalent-lacking structures result from a non-causative verb used in the typical causative complex. Preserving its basic meaning the verb acquires an additional causative sense. Cf.:

They laughed merrily.

Они весело смеялись.

They laughed him out of the room.

Они так смеялись над ним, что он убежал из комнаты.

In such cases the translator has to choose among different ways of expressing causative relationships in TL. Cf.:

The US Administration wanted to frighten the people into accepting the militarization of the country.

Администрация США стремилась запугать народ, чтобы за-

ставить его согласиться на милитаризацию страны. Не talked me into joining him. Он уговорил меня присоединиться к нему.

It should be noted that such English structures are usually formed with the prepositions " into" and " out of as in the above examples.