The problems of translation modal verbs from English into Uzbek Contents: Introduction

Conclusion
In this qualification paper we’ve analyzed meaning of frequent verbs and their problems in the process of translation by analyzing the works of O. Henry and other fiction books.
Translation unifies two different language speech acts in one communicative situation. It can be defined as a special type of communication intended to convey information between the participants speaking two different languages. Translation does not exist outside of society. It appeared in society when communities began to trade and exchange ideas. At the same time, translation helps the world community develop. Translation could not have developed without culture. Literature, science, and philosophy influence translators’ conceptualizations. On the other hand, culture could not have developed without translation, since translations enrich nations with the cultural values of other nations. So, Uzbek and English people and their culture, language structure and vocabulary system are different. Translation reflects the source text but it does not copy it. To translate adequately, a translator must do his or her best to find a proper means of expression. A translator bears in mind that the receptor has a cultural background other than that of a receptor of the original text; therefore, s/he has to be very resourceful in producing the same impact upon the receptor as that of the source text. Special problems arise in translating dialects, foreign speech, puns, poetry, etc. And a translator is in constant search for new tools to solve translation problems. In this qualification paper we have tried to find and analyze such problems of frequent verbs in translation.
Having written this qualification paper we’re come to the following conclusion:

1. 
   The linguistic science at present is not able to put forward a definition of meaning of meaning which is conclusive. However, there are certain facts of which we can be reasonably sure, and one of them is that the very function of the word as a unit of communication is made possible by its possessing a meaning.
   
2. 
   The choice of a suitable equivalent will always depend not only on the linguistic system or systems being handled by the translator, but also on the way both the writer of the source text and the producer of the target text, that is the translator, choose to manipulate the linguistic systems in question.
   
3. 
   The number of meanings does not correspond to the number of words; neither does the number of notions. Their distribution in relation to words is peculiar in every language.
   
4. 
   Componential analysis helps to differentiate between words (especially between synonyms) the difference between small and little lies in the presence of an additional seme (pleasant, nice) in the word “little” → not absolute synonyms.
   
5. 
   Cultural issues may arise from differences between cultural references, such as names of food, festivals and cultural connotations, in general. The translator will use language localization to correctly adapt the translation to the culture targeted. 
   
6. 
   Equivalent-lacking words signify notions lacking in the target language and culture. The term of culture-bound word is of narrower meaning than the term of equivalent-lacking word. A culture-bound word names an object peculiar to this or that ethnic culture.
   

In addition to the priority of the work, there is a serious side to verbs. It is a work about how the translator comes across problems with verbs in translation, adequateness of words in both of cultures and ambiguity in translation. In conclusion, we worked on different linguistic literature on meaning, lexical meaning of verbs and their semantic structure, translation problems of frequent verbs by using componential and translation analyses.