Graduation qualification paper

Nexlyudovga do’ppi kiydirsang, Kareninaga paranji yopintirsang, o’zbek bo’lib qolmaydi. (240 b) here the words “do’ppi” and “paranji” are cultural words . You can these words in dictionary. The first word “do’ppi” has one translation. It is embroidered skullcap. The second word “paranji” has two words translation. There are yashmak and paranja. Now we will refer to the meaning of these words. For this we refer to English-English dictionary: embroidered skullcap- a rounded brimless hat the crown of the head (worn by Uzbek and Tajiks) yashmak or paranja- the face veil worn by Muslim women when in public (from Arabic) You can find these words Uzbek-English dictionary by Sh.Butaev and A.Iriskulov. It gives the following translation: embroidered skull-cap( 559 p), paranji, woman’s veil (654 p). Into English we translated “If you wear to Nekhloodov skullcap, cover to Korenina yashmak , they won’t become Uzbek.”

Conclusion

Having analyzed the equivalence by cultural substitution in translation we’ve come to conclusion that:

Cultural knowledge and cultural differences have been a major focus of translator training and translation theory for as long as either has been in existence. The situation of transfering cultural elements from the SL to the TL is the situation of making important decisions. We’ve got to decide which word of the TL can function as an equivalent of the original word, which one will render the meaning of the original word. We must always look for cultural equivalents – our world is made up of cultural equivalents, morphs, mutations and organic melds. That is what makes all languages so rich and beautiful. Many of the words, expressions, idioms we use today are concepts taken from other languages and put into our own. What happens with the language is not decided by translators but decided by the users of the language. The concept of equivalence is central in translation although its definition, relevance, and applicability within the field of translation theory have caused heated controversy. If an original was written centuries ago and the language of the original is difficult to comprehend for modern readers, then a simplified translation may well have greater impact on its readers that the original had on the readers in the source culture. No translator would hinder the reader's comprehension by using absolute expressions in order to achieve equivalent effect.
Indeed, “Equivalence” has provided a useful theoretical and pragmatic foundation for translation processes. But if equivalence is the essence of translation, non-equivalence constitutes an equally legitimate concept in the translation process. The rationale for this position is that languages articulate or organize the world differently. Equivalence at the word level is often extremely difficult to achieve. As has been mentioned above, problems of equivalence occur at various levels, ranging from word to textual level. The equivalence problems emerge due to semantic, socio-cultural, and grammatical differences between the source language and the target language. These three areas of equivalence problems are intertwined with one another.
In the theory of and practice of translation there are two understanding of equivalent. Not often under equivalent is meant any correspondence of a word on a phrase of original in a given concrete context, or, by other words, any found correspondence of micro unite of translation.
In the Final part I gave an effort to provide examples on this particularly interesting topic and explain the ways which I implemented to translate those units and justify my choices.