Comparative Study on Morphologically Motivated Lacunae (English-Ukrainian Language Pair).pdf Introduction Occupying a specific niche within nonverbal semiotics, translation studies and modern linguistics, nowadays, lacunae are often viewed as gaps between the compared languages, basic elements of the linguistic and cultural community which complicate translation and make a non-native speaker fail to understand the target text notions due to the lack of corresponding concepts, categories, associative reactions, and nonverbal resources [1. P. 369]. The issue of selecting an adequate equivalent for a distantly related language when translating language units has been hotly debated in numerous linguistic discussions, particularly in the fields of translation studies (Catford, 1965, Nida, 1969, Kirkwood, 1989, Krzeszowski, 1990, Pym, 1993, Komissarov, 2002), contrastive linguistics (Makhonina, 2002, Sterni-na, 2002, Bykova, 2003, Korunets, 2004, Sternin, 2004, Kocherhan, 2006, Panasiuk, 2007), lexicography (Szerszunowicz, 2015), cognitive linguistics (Bykowa, 1999, Anokhina, 2013), ethnolinguistics (Sorokin, Markowina, 2010), and glotodidactics (Turunen, 2006). The notion of lacuna as a linguistic phenomenon was introduced by J.P. Vinay and J. Darbelnet (1958) in terms of stylistics and translation studies which basically referred to the gaps or the lack of equivalents (one L1 word with no word L2 correspondence). A wide range of terms is used to describe non-translatable units: untranslatable lexis (L. Barkhudarov); realias (Y. Vereshchagin, V. Kostomarov); sememes without lexemes (G. Bykova); ethnodeims (N. Varych, L. Shei-man); antiwords (Y. Stepanov); black spaces (R. Budagov); intercultural communication gaps (G. Gachev); gap (К. Hale); random holes in patterns (Ch. Hocket). The article aims at analyzing non-equivalent TL nouns in the contrasted English and Ukrainian languages, the material consisting in derivatives and their word-building properties in the lexical-semantic system of the language. Therefore, we assume that the peculiarity of word-formation gaps can be determined by a structural motivation and identified through comparison between languages. In the research, we apply the methodology of contrastive analysis, viewing equivalence as a useful category for describing formal correspondences. The paper proves that both linguistic and cultural incompatibilities might cause certain implications during literary translation. The theoretical framework employed is based on J.P. Vinay and J. Darbelnet's equivalence theory [2], which allows for conducting comparison, since non-equivalent lexis and lacunae are usually handled in pairs: a lacuna in the SL presupposes the availability of non-equivalent lexis in TL. Applying this translation mode to the subject matter of the present work means a constructive discussion of non-equivalent language units through a deliberate selection of lexical correspondences and translation examples (the English- Ukrainian language pair) at the word level where the asymmetry appears the most obvious. The suggested study examines structural differences between non-equivalent units in the contrasted language and ways of their meaning elimination which fully account for translation as a particular form of interpersonal communication where translators associate words and ideas [3]. In the article, we hypothesize that lacunae constitute a special domain in any language, which involves lexical units whose structural and content properties can be revealed by implementing a comparative analysis. Since comparative studies clearly testify to the possible variations between meanings in the domain of transposition, word-formation and semantics structures [4. P. 122], in the word-formation domain there seem to be mismatches caused and even complicated by the insufficient level of elaboration in the contrasted English and Ukrainian languages. This points to the important considerations that, in respect to a interlanguage, the morphological properties of SL are to be prime for investigating lacunarity as a purely linguistic phenomenon, the specificity of at the lexical level originates from its word-formation potential. The lacunarity study is primarily focused on reviewing its derivational potential, the entities' ability to formulate and express certain derivational categories using the morphological motivation criterion. From a theoretical standpoint, comparative linguistic studies interpret lacunae as linguistic units that do not necessarily carry explicit information about real phenomena. This is mainly due to the ability of one language to linguistically formalize certain aspects of this reality, while the other distinguishes other features [4. P. 61; 5; 6. P. 37; 7. P. 95], which enables the study of lacunary units at various language levels. Compounding, which has a syntactic character, is considered more productive in English, whereas the suffixation closely related to morphology, is more intrinsic to Ukrainian. Method and Materials Primarily, the application impact of contrastive analysis in regard to investigating linguistic peculiarities of lacunary units in translations [8. P. 46] is still questioned. Moreover, we assume that some overlaps are related to specific difficulties in identifying a common ground for English and Ukrainian correspondences. Firstly, the study material bases on reviewing the English structurally motivated nouns' lexicographical and textual representation in the Ukrainian language. We apply a text corpora as data for conducting a comparison in order to tackle mutual comparability in translation [9. P. 20]. Secondly, derivational categories are taken as a tertium com-parationis; the contrastive analysis involves formal correspondence and textual equivalence that can be abundantly illustrated from a wide range of English-Ukrainian noun correlates. Meanwhile, the consistent specificity of the languages under consideration can be traced through the prism of their word-formation techniques, determined by structural differences in the contrasted languages since translation procedures can be systematically described from a linguistic point of view [10. P. 24]. The derivation potential of the English language is described within the framework of the general dynamic model based on the concept of derivation introduced by A. Levitskyi [11. P. 42], who takes it as a process of transforming the function of the basic model, which causes a change of both the outer form and its value, the derivational relations being applied both to one-level and multi-level units. M. Halliday approaches meanings realized through wordings [12. P. 17], the contrastive-typological aspect involves the identification among possible regular and occasional correlates of lacunary units within the lexical-semantic paradigm, as well as the description of semantic transformations determining the emergence of linguistic specifications [13. P. 175; 14. P. 42] which can be explained through derivational processes. Once the need appears for a corresponding token in the contrasted language, its communicative necessity can be eliminated at the syntactic level. The meaning of a compactly expressed SL notion is conveyed by means of a paraphrase in TL. According to Olena Snitko [15. P. 45], the presence of inner form (hereafter-IF) is considered a word's natural property, reflecting those structural relations through which a word can enter a language system. The most important thing is the interlanguage comparison via IF, which aims to establish similarities and differences at the interlanguage level regarding lexico-grammatical manifestations of nouns. The process of identifying the IF of lacunary units consists of a number of successive procedures, among which we distinguish the following: a) the stage of determining the correlation word combination; b) analysis of the reference situation with further determination of the correlation value for the lacunary unit; c) setting a ratio for the lacunary unit value and the corresponding word combination or paraphrase in the contrasted Ukrainian language. Without denying the influence of extralingual factors on the misunderstandings and discrepancies which occur in communication between representatives of different cultures, we purposely narrow the scope of our research and focus on lexical lacunae which constitute the derived noun nominations. Findings and Discussion The types of interlanguage lexical correlates under investigation are morphologically motivated derivatives that are established when conducting a bilingual comparative alignment whose meaning is conveyed using a descriptive phrase that usually «involves a generic term, focusing on the aspect of the surface form, or of function, of the concept which appears the most relevant in the context» [16. P. 80]. The suggested research focuses on the comparative study of interlanguage equivalence of derived nouns, considering their formal correspondence in the bilingual dictionary. According to J. Szerszunowicz [17], lexicographic analysis discusses types of equivalents such as borrowing and an explanation, translation equivalent, an explanatory definition, a substitution with a hyperonym, followed by additional information, and a functional equivalent. Lacunary derivatives are identified in the study as «motivated non-equivalents» which are interpreted in terms of SL as lexical units those without one-word objectivation due to their different word-formation potential. Accordingly, we can account for apparent irregularities in the data in terms of lexicalization [18. P. 95]. Primarily, absolute one-word equivalents are not considered in the study, therefore, two main types of approximate correlations are distinguished: 1) those which share common components; 2) those which are semantically close. In the research, the inner form is defined as universal [19. P. 76] being treated as the semantic and structural correlation of the morphemes which make up the word together with other morphemes. According to V. Rusanivskyi [20], motivation consists in establishing the interrelation / interlink between the meaning and inner form. The latter enables identification of typological properties and prioritizing in selecting the ways of nomination in the contrasted languages. It also provides answers to narrow research questions on structural and systemic language description, which goes considerably beyond mere linguistic analysis and supplies us with diverse data. In the proposed study, the IF of substantive gaps is considered as a dynamic component of the derivatives' value (both according to the morphological composition and the meaning) of the comparable linguistic units. Lexicographical representation of morphologically motivated lacunae In the study, we adhere to Olena Kubriakova's approach, according to which derivation is defined as the process and result of the formation in language of any secondary sign that can be interpreted using the adopted form of the SL, or derived from it by the application of certain TL rules [21. P. 64; 22]. Created by a particular model, the value of lacunae seems relatively easily decoded. Among regular type correlates of this linguistic stratum are word forms that undergo a syntactic objectification in the contrasted language. Applying a comparative analysis of derivatives enables a linguistic description of lacunae that belong to various morphological derivational categories. When it comes to the systemic relations, the noun paradigm is represented by various types of referentially transparent language units. Compare: Eng. afterlife - Ukr. життя тсля CMepmi; Eng. afterglow - Ukr. приемне вiдчуття тсля пережитог подп; Eng. camper - Ukr. особа, яка зупинилася чи тимчасово перебувае в HaMemi; Eng. counterattraction -Ukr. мiсцe чи тип розваг, який змагаеться з тшим з метою привернути увагу вiдвiдувaчiв та збтьшити гх юльюсть; Eng. northerly - Ukr. вi-тер, що дме з пiвночi; Eng. forethought - Ukr. слушна думка, яку слid врахувати на майбутне зараз, плануючи перед тим, як щось зробити; Eng. foregone (conclusion) - Ukr. результат, очевидний для вах до його офщйного оголошення; Eng. foreknowledge - Ukr. передчуття того, що мае вiдбуmися etc. The instrumental derivational category is represented by noun, adjectival and verbal bases having concrete meaning with a transparent IF. Compare: Eng. unlike - Ukr. предмет, який не нагадуе тший; Eng. allowable -Ukr. те, що дозволяють робити i яке вважають прийнятним та за-конним; Eng. nutrient - Ukr. лтарський зааб, який впливае на процеси травлення; Eng. inflow - Ukr. дИ людей тсля прибуття в якесь мiсцe; Eng. walk-in - Ukr. мiсцe, куди можна прийти без попередньог домовле-носmi; Eng. walkout - Ukr. вихiд з офiцiйног зусmрiчi людини з метою висловити свою незгоду або залишити роботу для початку страйку; Eng. influx - Ukr. прибуття великог кiлькосmi людей чи речей в один пeрiод etc. Equally motivated substantives differ in both nominal attachment and significance, although they are characterized by a common concept and united by morphological motivation whose encoded meaning can easily be deduced from its constituents, e.g. Eng. amputee - Ukr. людина з ампутованими юн^вками; Eng. appraiser - Ukr. людина, яка хвалить когось чищось; Eng. achiever - Ukr. переможець; той, що досяг устху; Eng. underwork - Ukr. праця менш квaлiфiковaнa чи гiршоl якосmi; Eng. bypath - Ukr. бокова стежка (дорога); Eng. pounder -Ukr. предмет вагою один фунт; Eng. half-pounder - Ukr. щось вагою пiвфунma etc. The selected data of derivatives within the attributive derivational category represent specific state or condition nouns which embrace affixals: Eng. nuttiness - Ukr. приемний присмак горiхiв; Eng. standout - Ukr. щось, надзвичайне за яюстю; Eng. septuagenarian - Ukr. людина у вщ мiж 70 та 90 роками; Eng. torporific - Ukr. те, що спричиняе aпamiю; Eng. downer - Ukr. те, що гнтить та спричиняе депреаю; Eng. aftertaste - Ukr. присмак, що залишаеться у pomi (тсля гж1, куртня тощо); and compounds Eng. backtalk - Ukr. зухвала вiдпoвiдь; Eng. intangible -Ukr. дещо незрозумте, невловиме; Eng. spender - Ukr. щось неекономне, яке потребуе великих затрат; Eng. six-footer - Ukr. щось довжиною в шiсmь фуmiв. Primarily, the quality denoted by the base is frequently used in a figurative sense and clearly derived from the meaning shown in the root morpheme. The agentive derivational category takes up the biggest share of the lacunicon, being diverse in the range of word-building formants and shifts in morphological status. Despite its formal modification, the lacunae of this categorical meaning retain their inner form, inherent in the original unit, thus indicating the same denotate: Eng. alarmist - Ukr. паткер; поши-рювач чуток; Eng. remonstrant - Ukr. той, хто протестуе (заперечуе); Eng. allottee - Ukr. той, хто одержуе земельну дыянку; Eng. аppoin-tee - Ukr. призначувана особа; Eng. adulterer - Ukr. той, хто порушуе подружню вipнiсmь; Eng. backer - Ukr. той, хто допомагае комусь (стоть за, тдтримуе, субсидуе когось); Eng. haggler - Ukr. той, хто посттно торгуеться, сперечаеться з приводу цт, умов; Eng. hazer -Ukr. той, хто насмiхаеmься з новеньких etc. Meanwhile, the compounds usually constitute interesting examples of cross-linguistic gaps whose motivation is not explicitly represented in the contrasted language: Eng. barnstormer - Ukr. мандpiвний (посеред-тй) актор; Eng. one-aloner - Ukr. щлком самотня людина, одинак; Eng. president-maker - Ukr. впливова полтична особа, представник дтових чи фтансових юл, який у змoзi впливати на результати президентских вибopiв. Thus, in finding a translational equivalent, a metaphorical meaning is added. Furthermore, derivatives with human denotata are often characterised by ethnospecific nomination: Eng. coroner - Ukr. судовий ^iдчий в АнглИ' i США, який проводить роз^дування у випа-дках насильницьког смеpmi; Eng. alderman - Ukr. олдермен, член мут-ципалтету; Eng. back-bencher - Ukr. рядовий член партИ' (в парламе-нmi) etc. Still, definite shortcomings of lexicographic descriptions are observed due to the cultural reference impact, which determines the lacuna's representation by applying a descriptive phrase or a definition to interpret the meaning. Transposition of lexico-grammatical properties is observed in the structurally and semantically specific nouns, preserving similar inner form but different outer. Their morphological motivation is primarily transparent, which makes it possible to establish regular correlates in the Ukrainian language (compare: Eng. catcher - Ukr. бейсбoлiсm, в обов 'язки якого входить втймати м 'яч, який невдалося пробити нападнику) as well as non-transparent ones (compare: Eng. finery - Ukr. красивий одяг чи ювелipнi вироби, як одягають з нагоди особливого свята; Eng. claimer - Ukr. кть, якого можна придбати тсля перегомв; Eng. underbill - Ukr. 3aci6, який чинить меншу шкоду, тж передбачалось; Eng. offprint - Ukr. окремий вiдбиток (статтi тощо); Eng. throwaway - Ukr. рекламне ого-лошення, проспект (безкоштовний); Eng. walkabout - Ukr. стлкування високог посадовог особи з громадсьюстю etc. The study revealed an intralingual lexicographic predominance of motivated derivational meanings, with the application of previously implemented elements of both form and content, compare: Eng. angler - Ukr. людина, хобi яког е рибалка; Eng. batsman - Ukr. гравець крикету, завдання якого регулярно вдаряти по м'ячу; Eng. bylaw - Ukr. закон, прийнятий мiсцевим урядом, який стосуеться лише цього регiону; Eng. detainee -Ukr. особа, яка перебувае тд вартою, особливо з полтичних причин; Eng. jugful - Ukr. ктьюсть чогось, що мiститься в глечику etc. When dealing with the word-building properties of the contrasted languages, it is worth mentioning that Ukrainian differs from English in its more flexible organization of the affixation techniques which make it possible to express particular shades of meaning. Characteristic features are traced among other types of word formation, in particular, different range of distribution in the nominating space. This also applies to different amounts of semantic value and the difference in syntactic properties of expressing meanings, compare: Eng. giver-up - Ukr. той, хто вiдмовився i не хоче продо-вжувати ^ to give up здаватися; Eng. do-gooder - Ukr. той, хто ро-бить добро ^ to do goodробити добро); Eng. babe-in-arms - Ukr. дуже мала дитина; Eng. wallflower - Ukr. сором 'язлива людина, здебiльшого дiвчина чи жтка, яка уникае участi в сощальних заходах i не викликае особливого ттересу чи уваги; Eng. he-man (coll.) - Ukr. сильний мужчина, який полюбляе демонструвати уам свою силу; Eng. work-to-rule -Ukr. ситуащя, в якт люди чтко дотримуються правил та ШструкцШ, як дають щодо гхньог роботи з метою оптимiзацiг кiлькостi викону-ваног ними роботи; Eng. queue-jumping - Ukr. самовтьно просуватися поза чергою з метою якнайшвидшого обслуговування; Eng. standstill -Ukr. стан, у якому вс дИ i рухи зупиняються; Eng. whistle-stop (tour) -Ukr. низка короткотривалих вiзитiв вiдомого полтичного дiяча до рiз-них мiсць etc. It is worth noting that in terms of lacunary units, the idiomatically-oriented derivatives also manifest their potential, compare: Eng. booty - Ukr. грошi та цтт речi, викрадет армieю чи злодiями тд час вiйни; Eng. burn-out - Ukr. сильна втома, спричинена надмiрною працею; Eng. firebrand - Ukr. особа, яка спричинюе сощальш та полтичн суперечки, виступаючи проти влади, тдбурюючи тших чинити те саме; Eng. whiteout - Ukr. погодн умови, за яких стг та хмари змтюють залом-лення свтла так, що можна побачити лише темн предмети etc. Following the productive word-formation processes, the lacunary units acquired additional emotional colouring, thus signaling the specificity of the language under a contrastive analysis. Constituents of this type are predominantly characterized by the IF commonality of multi-language correlates that are accompanied by the value adequacy with a transparent motivation. Still, a comparative analysis of definitions reveals the nontransparent character of derived lacunary units which might be determined by a considerable influence of semantic derivation. Textual correlates during literary translation During literary translation one cannot expect a complete correlation between the form and content of the English and Ukrainian word-formation systems. Based on J. Catford's theory of meaning at a word level [23], we employ the linguistic approach to descriptive translation study. Moreover, we fully support M. Hoey and D. Houghton who view the contrastive analysis as an effective assistant for interpreting structurally different units [24]. Comparing the inner form of distantly-related linguistic cultures, we can conclude that every nomination sign encodes the specific features most relevant for the community's consciousness, being individual and representing specific word perception by representatives of different ethnolinguistic communities. Primarily, correlative lexemes constitute the lexicographic correspondence, the comparison of which assisted in establishing full and partial equivalence of the inner form in the contrasted lacunary units under various word-formation models. Mona Baker advocates for the absence of one-to-one correspondence between orphographic words and elements of meaning across languages, supporting her argument by the linguistic system's non-obligatory function to provide for a suitable equivalent, but also the way both the writer of the ST and the TT producer who sometimes «choose to manipulate the linguistic systems in question» [25. P. 18]. Let us compare the textual correlates for the agentive derivational category and its exponents in the contrasted languages and pay attention to the difference in the use of word-formation potential within the two language worldviews. The agentive derivative with verbal base confider (Eng. to confide

Скачать электронную версию публикации