English Predicate and its Translation Properties into Uzbek

There is a pencil in her hand.

We haven't any coffee in the house. = There isn't any coffee in the house.

However the verb to have can be used not only with the subject, expressed by the noun, denoting person (the meaning of the verb itself - possession- presupposes it), but it can be used in relation to the objects too. In such cases its meaning is identical to the meaning of the construction of `there is', and they are interchangeable. For example:

Some houses had quite wide grass round them. = There was quite wide grass round some houses.

Jack's eager conspirator voice seemed very close to his ear, and it had a kind of caress, a sort of embrace. = ...there was a kind of caress, a sort of embrace in Jack's voice.

To have, analogous with the verb to be, though more seldom, is used as a link-verb in composite predicate. This can be seen in such word combinations with nouns as как to have dinner- tushlik qilmoq- обедать, to have a talk -gaplashmoq-поговорить, to have a quarrel- urishib qolmoq- поссориться, to have a rest- dam olmoq- отдыхать, to have a walk -sayr qilmoq-прогуляться, to have a smoke - chekmoq-покурить, to have a good time- vaqtni yahshi o'tkazmoq хорошо провести время and etc. The verb to have loses its main meaning and serves as only indication for using something only once, committing any limited action.

If one looks carefully at these cases of using the verbs to be and to have and takes into account their active presence in English, then he cannot leave it unnoticed the manifestation of systematic peculiarities of English language. Actually, Englishman can say to rest, but he nevertheless prefers complicated form -- to have a rest. The main point is that, in any verb, expressing concrete action and reflecting definite qualitative side of the action or state the quantitative side, the very fact of this action is included. Analytical tendency of English generate the aspiration to separate formal expression of general and concrete, qualitative and quantitative side of these actions. And then, naturally the composite predicate with the verb to have and nominal expression of quality (adjective, participle, noun) replaces the concrete verb.

A number of stable word combinations with the verb to have were formed which are translated into Uzbek and Russian with the help of action verbs in English. For example:

She has a perfect command of English. U Ingliz tilini mukammal egalagan.-Она прекрасно владеет английским языком.

I wish you to have a good time. Sizga vaqtingizni yahshi o'tkazishingizni tilayman. -Желаю вам хорошо провести время (повеселиться).

In conclusion we should state that as the verb to be with adjectives, participles, or nouns acquires the meaning of the appropriate verb, so the verb to have in the combination with the noun is often used instead of simple verbal predicate, expressed by the action verb. For example:

But if they were under the impression that they would get any information out of him he had a notion that they were mistaken.- Но если им казалось, что им удастся выудить из него какие-то сведения, то он считал, что они ошибаются.

Не had a longing to smoke. - Uni juda ham chekkisi kelyapti.-Ему страшно хотелось курить.

But this kind of word combinations is less frequent than with the verb to be.

2.2 Transitivity of verbs in English and the problems of translating them into Uzbek and Russian language

It is significant to note that there is an inner division both in action verbs and the verbs of existence, the division which is stipulated by, as it is called in grammar, the transitivity and intransitivity

Actually, this can be seen between the verbs to be and to have. The first one does not transfer the action to another object, but as if it encloses the action with the subject; the second one must be followed by the object. In all languages- both in analytical and synthetic languages- the meaning of transitivity and intransitivity of the verbs is established as a semantic connection and it goes back to the history of that language. But systematic peculiarities of the languages even to some extent are reflected in their formal possibilities of expressing this meaning. Thus, for example in Russian the fixing up of this or that semantic nuance, semantic direction of the verb is obtained with the help of prefixes and suffixes. Here we can note the formation of intransitive verbs from the transitive verbs with the help of ending -ся: начинать -- начинаться, открывать -- открываться and etc. In Uzbek language also verbs can be added the endings in order to change their voice and tense. In English (analytical) prefixes and suffixes do not carry out grammatical function on the modern stage; if they are available in the word then they are kept as historically formed parts of it. One can acknowledge the fixed prepositions of the verbs as the outer formal indication of intransitivity (to listen to, for example).

More interesting and significant differences in the matter of transitivity and intransitivity of the verbs between English and Uzbek and Russian in are in the plan of content. So, some transitive English verbs have intransitive verb correspondences in Uzbek and Russian, comp.:

to follow (smb.. smth.)- ergashmoq- следовать за (кем-л., чём-л.)

to approach (smb., smth.)- yaqinlashmoq- приближаться к (кому-л.,

чему-л.)

to watch (smb., smth.)- kuzatmoq- следить за (кем-л., чём-л.)

and vice versa :

to listen to (smb., smth.) - tinglamoq-слушать (кого-л., что-л.)

to wait for (smb., smth.) - kutmoq-ждать (кого-л., чего-л.)

It is obvious, that the possibility of two-fold “solution” of any action (either as transitive or as intransitive) is put in the fact of the connection of the verb with two poles: the bearer of the action and its object. Therefore there cannot be absolute border between transitive and intransitive verbs. Thus the verb to watch can be translated not only as `kuzatmoq' следить, but also as `tomosha qilmoq' наблюдать.

In comparing Uzbek, Russian and English one can note that in English the differentiation of transitive and intransitive verbs is much less tough than in Uzbek and Russian. Thus, in most cases two Uzbek and Russian verbs(transitive and intransitive) have one English correspondence:

Ochmoq (transitive) - to open She opened the door.- U eshikni ochdi

Ochilmoq (intransitive) - to open The door opens easily.- Eshik osonlik bilan ochiladi.

Boshlamoq (transitive) - to begin Will you begin reading?- Uqishni boshla.

Boshlanmoq (intransitive)- to begin Our journey began like this.- Bizning sayohatimz huddi shunday boshlangan.

Tushirib qo'ymoq (transitive) - to drop She dropped her handkerchief.- U ro'molchasini tushirib qo'ydi.

Tushib ketmoq (intransitive) - to drop Another leaf dropped on the ground.- Yana bitta barg yerga tushdi.

Yetishtirmoq (transitive)- to grow They grow rice there. -Ular u yerda sholi etishtirishadi.

Usmoq, ulg'aymoq (intransitive)- to grow Children grow fast.- Bolalar tez ulg'ayishmoqda.

In order to understand why English, usually striving for formal completeness and logical exactness of expressing, in this case it is going along contrary way , we must remember the aspiration of Englishmen to compensate syntactical constraint of their speech with more freedom in morphological and semantic relations. It is obvious, that the rubbing off the borders between transitive and intransitive verbs is one those compensating means, which expand and enrich the opportunities of the language. As a result the broadening of the meaning of many verbs occurs. Here we can also observe the influence of grammatical structure of the language on the character of its lexicon. For example:

She laughed unwillingly, and the laughing reflection under the green hat decided her instantly. U hohlamagan holda kulib yubordi, uning yashil shlyapasi ostidagi kulayotgan chehrasining oynadagi aksi uni qaror chiqarishiga majbur qildi.-Она невольно рассмеялась, и отражение в зеркале ее смеющегося лица под зеленой шляпой моментально заставило ее решиться.

You don't know what a life she led me. - Sizlar uni mening hayotimni do'zzahga aylantirganini bilmaysizlar. Вы не знаете, что за жизнь она мне устроила.

It is typical for English the constructions, in which intransitive verb becomes transitive in causative meaning “kimnidir biror ishni bajarishga majburlamoq”, for example: to fly a plane, to run a pencil and etc. The possibility of this kind of constructions has led to the wide use of laconic and expressive word combinations like: to laugh smb. out of the room (literally.: «ustidan kulib honadan chiqarib yuborish- заставить кого-л. выйти из комнаты, засмеяв его»), to wave the question away (literally.: «savolga javob berishda o'zini olib qochmoq- отмахнуться от вопроса») and etc.

Sometimes the verb- intransitive in its main meaning- becomes transitive in derivative meaning 'biror- bir narsani(fikrni) qaysidir yo'l bilan ifodalamoq-выразить что-л. каким-л. способом', for example:

Не nodded his assent. - U boshini egib uz roziligini berdi- Кивком головы он выразил согласие.

Valentin looked his query at the proprietor. - Valentin savol nazari bilan ho'jainga qaradi.- Валентин вопросительно взглянул на хозяина.

She cried herself to sleep.- U yig'lab -yig'lab uhlab qoldi.- Она так много плакала, что наконец уснула.

Speaking about the verbs of existence, we have already stated that they can be used not only independently but also as a link- verb, proper meaning of which is graded and has become the part of the composite predicate. The same thing can occur with some verbs of action. Such possibility is provided by the circumstance that syntactical tie of these verbs with the following members of the sentence (particularly, their meaning of transitivity and intransitivity) remains much less determined and regulated than that Uzbek and Russian have. The object in the above mentioned examples is the thing which cannot be in reality (literally: `savol qaramoq-взглянуть вопрос', `rozilik egmoq -кивнуть согласие»), and this transmits the speech expressive and imagery character. Thus together with the loss of syntactical independence the verb of action undoubtedly expands the semantic opportunities and gains great specific gravity as the center of the entire semantic complex (composite predicate).

Especially flexible in the relation of the category of transitivity-intransitivity are the verbs to look, to sound, to feel and some others. Thus to look has the meaning not only 'qaramoq- смотреть', but also 'ko'rinmoq-выглядеть', and it is not only applied to the acting person and also irrelatively to any person, in impersonal sentences.

Не looks well. - Uning ko'rinishi yahshi-Он хорошо выглядит.

It looks like rain. -Yomg'r yog'sa kerak.Похоже, что будет дождь.

He sounded on edge. - Ovozidan achchiqlanish sezilardi.-Он говорил раздраженно.

It sounds like a good idea to me. Bu fikr menga yahshi tuyulyapti.-Это кажется мне хорошей мыслью.

Не feels well. U o'zini yahshi his qilmoqda.-Он чувствует себя хорошо.

His hands felt so warm and strong, so comfortable to cling to. Uning qo'llari shunchalik illiq va kuchli ediki, unlarga yopishib olish shunchali yoqimli edi.- Руки его были такими теплыми и сильными, к ним так приятно было прильнуть.

How does it feel, my dear, to have the woman you hate stand by you and cloak your sins for you?- Sen yoqtirmagan ayollni seni himoya qilishi va gunohlaringni yashirishga urinishiga , jonim sen qanday qaraysan? Ну, так как тебе нравится, моя милая, что женщина, которую ты ненавидишь, защищает тебя и прикрывает твои грехи?

The same can be applied to the verb to show, which is used not only as transitive in its main meaning 'ko'rsatmoq- показывать', but also as intransitive verb with the meaning 'ko'rinmoq-виднеться', comp.:

Show me the way. Menga yo'lni ko'rsating-Покажите мне дорогу.

Не had rank showing on his shoulders. Uning mansabini pogonlaridan ko'rish mumkin edi.-Его чин можнобыло увидеть на погонах.

Не is drunk. It shows. -U mast. Bun ko'rinib turibdi.- Он пьян. Это видно.

Some transitive verbs can be used in analogous way in the role of reflexive ones: to read, to sell and others.

The book reads well. - Bu kitobni yahshi uqishmoqda.- Эта книга хорошо читается.

Newspapers sell well in the evening.- Gazetalar kechqurunlari yahshi sotiladi.- Вечером газеты хорошо продаются.

It is not accidental that the pair of verbs in Uzbek and Russian: hidlamoq- hid taratmoq-нюхать--пахнут;, ta'm bilmoq- ta'mga ega bo'lmoq- пробовать на вкус--быть... на вкус; ushalb ko'rmoq- his qilmoq-ощущать -- быть... на ощупь and etc. are transformed into English not by two appropriate verbs but by one:

Smell these flowers. Mana bu gullarni hidlab ko'r.-Понюхай эти цветы.

The coffee smells good. Qahva hushbo'y hid taratmoqda.-Кофе хорошо пахнет.

Taste the cake. - Pirogdan tatib ko'ring.-Попробуйте пирога.

How much better fresh food tastes than food that has come from tins! - Konserva bankalaridan chiqqan mahsulotlarga qaraganda yangi mahsulotlar qanchalik yahshi ta'mga ega.-Насколько же вкуснее свежие продукты, чем консервы!

These poodles must feel very cold. Bu pudellarga sovuq bo'sa kerak.-Этим пуделям, должно быть, очень холодно.

Her hands felt so soft. Uning qo'llari shunchalik yumshoq ediki.-Руки ее были такими мягкими.

3.2 Predicate as the center of the sentence

As we have already said the predicate in English is factual center, which gravitates all the parts of the sentence. Particularly it is interesting to mark the fixed place of the negation before the predicate, not depending on to which part it belongs by the meaning.

We do not advocate the rights of black Africans in order to drive white Africans. Biz qora Afrikaliklarning huquqini ularni bu yerlardan quvg'in qilish maqsadida himoya qilayotganimiz yo'q.- Мы защищаем права черных африканцев не для того, чтобы изгнать белых африканцев.

"Не wasn't born here," Leo said. "He was born in New York." “U bu yerda tug'ilmagan- dedi Leo.- U Nyu-Yorkda tug'ilgan”- «Он родился не здесь, -- сказал Лео. -- Он родился в Нью-Йорке».

One can conclude fro here, that in Uzbek and Russian sentence the negation belongs to the word, but in English it belongs to the whole sentence. Consequently, in English the negation is syntactical, and in Uzbek and Russian- morphological.

Indicative example of the fact that in English negative sentence the negation belongs to the entire sentence, not to its separate parts is referring the negation in compound sentence to the main part, though by sense it belongs to the subordinate clause:

I don't think we've been to the theatre for two or three years.- Menimcha biz teatrda 2-3 yil davomida tushmadik.- Думаю, что мы не были в театре в течение двух-трех лет.

"Do you think he'll pay the money back?" "No, I don't

think he will. (...) -Seningcha u pulni qaytaradimi? -Yo'q menimcha u pullarni qaytarmaydi. -Нет, думаю, что не отдаст.

Adverbs of indefinite tense (often, never, ever and etc.) also precede, as a rule, the predicate. We must note that all of the quantitative adverbs, in contrast to the qualitative, which come in the end of the sentence. Only, also being quantitative adverb comes in most cases before the predicate, irrespective of what word of the sentence it (in Uzbek and Russian the place of the adverb `faqat- только' is stipulated by the meaning).

I've only been along this road once. Men bu yo'lad faqat bir marotaba yurganman- Этой дорогой я ездил всего один раз.

It only blooms tonight. Bu faqat bugun kechqurun gulladi.- Он цветет только сегодня ночью.

We can suppose, that taking the preposition to the end in special questions (What are you looking at?) and in the attributive clauses without conjunction at the end of the sentence (The book you are looking for is on my desk) is explained by the gravitation of the preposition to the verb- predicate, which controls this preposition.

But not only qualitative adverbs and prepositions gravitate to the verb -predicate. All kind of determiners belonging to it are also closely connected with it. Thus, in nominal composite predicate, expressed by the combination of the verb «to be + adjective», the modifiers of measure or the quantity are wedged into two components of the predicate- between the link-verb to be and the predicative, which they determine.

The postman was an hour late. -Pochtalon bir soatga kech qoldi.Почтальон опоздал на час.

The snow was three feet deep.- Qor qalinligi uch fut edi.- Снег был глубиной в три фута.

The aspiration to introduce the determiner, which is factual modifier or the object, into the group of is clearly seen in the sentences like:

Не was mountain born. - U tog'da tug'ilgan.- Он родился в горах. (literally: «- Он был горнорожденным».)

Не was house proud. - U o'z uyi bilan g'ururlanadi. -Он гордился своим домом. (literally: «Он был домом гордый».)

Sometimes the group of the predicate can be very large because of adverbial meaning (manner) which it contains. This happens in composite predicates like:

I am horrid to say such things.

I was surprised to find Elliott very spry.

The elements of these composite predicates are closely connected between each other, but while translating them into Uzbek or Russian they have to be torn, breaking to pieces the predicate into predicate and the modifier of manner, or dividing the simple English sentence into the main and subordinate parts.

Bunday narsalani gapitishim juda ham dahshatli.- Ужасно, что я говорю такие вещи.

Eliot o'zini tetik tutayotganligidan men hayron qoldim.-Я был удивлен, что Эллиотт держался так бодро.

The use of such many-componential predicates with the adverbial meaning in English is stipulated by briefness of the means of expression, compactness of English sentence.

Не seemed to recognise her at once. - Bir qarashda u uni birdaniga tanib qolgan degan hayol keladi.-Казалось, он сразу же узнал ее.

I happened to meet him there.- Shunday bo'ldiki, men uni o'has yerda uchratib qoldim.-Случилось так, что я его

там встретил.

She appeared to misunderstand me.- Menimcha, u meni tushunmadi. -По-видимому, она не поняла меня.

As we can see these simple sentences are translated into Uzbek and Russian either by compound sentence or by introductory word.

The close connection of the predicate with the modifier can be seen in other kind of word combinations, which have become common for English, but still keeping its imagery character.

She was stung out of her fear.- Bu uning nafsoniyatiga shunchalik tegdiki, u hattoki qo'rqishni bas qildi.- Это так уязвило ее, что она перестала бояться.

This shocked Mr Campbell into speech. -Bu janob Kempbelni shunchalik hayratlantirib yubordiki, u hatto gapirib yubordi. -Это так потрясло м-ра Кэмпбелла, что он заговорил.

The new situation seemed likely to torture her into desperation. Ishning bunday tus olishi uni qayg'uga botiradi degan hayolga olib keldi.-Изменившееся положение дел, казалось, доведет ее до отчаяния.

In such word combinations the meaning of the modifier of manner is always present.

to frown -- humrayib qaramoq- взглянуть исподлобья, глядеть хмурясь

to scowl -- jahl bilab qaramoq-сердито смотреть

to stare -- baqrayib qaramo-смотреть пристально, с изумлением уставиться

to smile -- iljayib qaramoq-с улыбкой взглянуть на кого-л.

to smirk -- o'ziga ishongan holda iljayib qaramoq-смотреть с самодовольной, деланной или глупой улыбкой

to grin --tishini ko'rsatib qaramoq- смотреть с ухмылкой

to squint --bilintirmay qaramoq- смотреть искоса, украдкой

to snub -- past nazar bilan qaramoq-смотреть свысока, с презрением an so on.

As it is clearly seen such verbs are translated into Uzbek and Russian not by a single word, but by the combinations of the words.

C O N C L U S I O N

Our qualification paper deals with the problems of the theory of translation and the theoretical grammar, and it was carried out at the interfaces between these two subjects, which shows their close connection.

The object of investigation was English predicate, its properties and the way of transforming it into Uzbek language, but we have also touched Russian.

In general while translating the predicate there are not any difficulties, if the predicate is expressed by the action verbs, therefore we have taken the most interesting and significant, and at the same time causing problems for the translator parts of the predicate, that is the link- verbs, to be and to have. Besides being a link verb they fulfill a greater number of functions, sometimes forming idiomatic expressions. Generally to be is not translated into Uzbek in present tense, but in the future and in the past tenses it appears. We have revealed the cases when one should use action verbs in translation. The same is with the verb to have, which besides its main meaning “ega bo'lmoq” have a number of different meanings, and most of them are idiomatic.

In the first chapter we have looked through the theoretical base of the predicate, the structure of the sentence, the interrelations of the predicate with other parts of the sentence and one problem that is typical to the predicate, its complication features. We have also discussed the types of complications.

As the main part of the sentence the predicate is in the center of attention, and there are many tasks and problems concerning it, and the research into it will be continued. And in our qualification paper we just tried to combine these all and approach to it from not only theoretical, but also from practical point of view.

T H E L I S T O F U S E D L I T E R A T U R E

Literature in Uzbek

1. Буранов Ж. Инглиз тили грамматикаси. Тошкент, 1974 (351бет)

2. Турсунов У. ?озирги Ўзбек адабий тили. Тошкент, 1992 (399 бет)

3. Абдурахмонов Г. Ўзбек тили ва адабиёти. Тошкент, 2002 (350 бет)

Literature in Russian

1. Ахманова О.С. и др. Современные синтаксические теории. М., 1963 (256ст.)

2. Аполлова М.А. Специфический английский язык (грамматические трудности перевода) М., 1977 (246ст.)

3. Бархударов Л.С. Структура простого предложения современного английского языка. М., 1966 (340ст.)

4. Бархударов Л.С. и др. Грамматика английского языка. М.,1973 (590ст.)

5. Блох М.Я. Вопросы изучения грамматического строя языка. М., 1976 (378ст.)

6. Бурлакова В.В. Основы структуры словосочетания в современном английском языке. Л., 1975 (235ст.)

7. Воронцова Г.Н. Очерки по грамматике английского языка. М., 1960 (345ст.)

8. Денисенко Ю. О некоторых проблемах выбора слова в русско-английском переводе. «Тетради переводчика» №8, М., 1971

9. Иванова И.П. Вид и время в современном английском языке. Л., 1961 (345ст.)

10. Иванова И.П. и др. Теоретическая грамматика современного английского языка. М., 1981 (567ст.)

11. Кошевая И.Г. Грамматический строй современного английского языка. М., 1978 (356ст.)

12. Кутузов Л. Практическая грамматика английского языка. М.,1998 (600 ст.)

13. Каушанская В.Л. и др. Грамматика английского языка. Л. 1963 (567ст.)

14. Левицкая Т.Р., Фитерман А.М. Проблемы перевода. М., 1976. (67ст.)

15. Левицкая Т.Р., Фитерман А.М. Глаголы адвербиального значения и их перевод на русский язык. «Тетради переводчика», №2 М., 1964

16. Левицкая Т.Р., Фитерман А.М. Теория и практика перевода с английского языка на русский. М.,1963 (158ст.)

17. Прозоров В.Г. Основы теории и практики перевода с английского языка на русский. М., 1999 (221ст.)

Literature in English

1. Akhmanova O. et.al. Syntax: Theory and Method. Moscow, 1972 (256p)

2. Allen W.S. Living English Structure. Longmans, 1960 (270p)

3. Alksnis I. The Hazards of Translation. Geneva, 1980 (300p)

4. Blokh M.Y. A Course in Theoretical English Grammar. Moscow `Visshaya shkola'1983 (383p)

5. Close R.O. A Reference Grammar for Students of English. Ldn., 1967 (450p)

6. Chukovsky K. A High Art: the art of translation. USA,1984 (243p)

7. Deyeva I.M. Lexico-Grammatical Difficulties of English. Leningrad, 1976 (278p)

8. Ganshina M.A. English Grammar.Higher School Publishing House, 1964 (548p)

9. Gordon E.M. A Grammar of Present-day English M., 1974 (437p)

10. Graham J. Difference in Translation, Ithaca, 1985 (340p)

11. Francis W.N. The Structure of American English. New York, 1978 (283p)

12. Hill A.A. Introduction to Linguistic Structures. N.Y., 1958 (435p)

13. Holman M. Translation or Transliteration? Sofia, 1985 (235p)

14. Ilyish B. The Structure of Modern English. Leningrad, 1972

15. Koshevaya I.G. The Theory of English Grammar. Moscow “Prosvesheniye”, 1982 ()

16. Khaimovich B.S. A Course in English Grammar. Moscow,1967 (298p)

17. Morokhovskaya M. Fundamentals of Theoretical Grammar. Moscow, 1985 (367p)

18. Newmark, Peter. A Textbook of Translation. Phoenix, London, 1995 (291p)

19. Quirk R. The Use of English. London, 1984 (289p)

20. Quirk R. A Grammar of Contemporary English. London, 1972 (358p)

21. Rayevska N.M Modern English Grammar. Kiev, 1976 (304p)

22. Strang B. Modern English Structure. London, 1974 (299p)

23. Schibsbye Knud. A Modern English Grammar. Oxford,1970 (346p)

24. Toury G. In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv,1980 (289p)

25. Wilss W. The Science of Translation. Tubingen, 1982 (178p)

26. Zandvoort R.W. A Handbook of English Grammar. Longman,1958 (345p)

27. http://www.indiana.edu/~easc/resources/working_paper/noframe_2b_recen.htm

28. http://www.google.com/search?q=Theory+of+Predicate&hl=en&lr=

29. http://www.pupress.princeton.edu/predicate and their use/chap4.pdf

30. http://www.poetrymagic.co.uk/literary-theory/a-summing-up.html

Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5