וְעַתָּה֙ שָׂא־נָ֣א כֵלֶ֔יךָ תֶּלְיְךָ֖ וְקַשְׁתֶּ֑ךָ וְצֵא֙ הַשָּׂדֶ֔ה וְצ֥וּדָה לִּ֖י צֵידָה׃ (and is omitted) Now then, get your weapons – your quiver and bow – and go out to the open country to hunt (instead of and hunt) some wild game for me (Gen 27:3 NIV). וַיָּבֹ֥א אֶל־אָבִ֖יו וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אָבִ֑י וַיֹּ֣אמֶר הִנֶּ֔נִּי מִ֥י אַתָּ֖ה בְּנִֽי׃ And he came unto his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I; who art thou, my son? (Gen 27:18 KJV) He went to his father and said, "My father." "Yes, my son," he answered. "Who is it?" (Gen 27:18 NIV) І прибув він до батька свого та й сказав: Батьку мій! А той відказав: Ось я. Хто ти, мій сину? (Gen 27:18 UKR) ALTERATIONS. These changes have to be made because of incompatibilities between the two languages. There are three main types. 1) Changes due to problems caused by transliteration when a new word is introduced from the source language, e.g., the transliteration of Messiah in the Loma language, means death’s hand, so it was altered to Mezaya; or the Spanish verb alabar ‘to glorify’ the local Indians heard as a labar ‘to wash’; similarly Tiro y Sidon they understood as tiro y azadon ‘shot and hack’, etc. 2) Changes due to structural differences between the two languages, e.g., changes in word order, grammatical categories, etc. 3) Changes due to semantic misfits, especially with idiomatic expressions. One of the suggestions to solve this kind of problem is the use of a descriptive equivalent i.e., a satisfactory equivalent for objects, events or attributes that do not have a standard term in the TL. It is used for objects that are unknown in the target culture (e.g., in Maya the house where the law was read for Synagogue) and for actions that do not have a lexical equivalent (e.g., in Maya desire what another man has for covetousness, etc.)
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
