Translating Deontic Modality: Semantic and Formal Convergences and Discrepancies

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Modality is a challenging phenomenon for translators since languages have modality systems that differ in terms of the degree of grammaticalization. The article aims to analyze and summarize strategies used in translating deontic modal operators from Russian into English. Based on the theory of modality developed within Functional Linguistics, the article is intended to analyze the deontic modal forms in the presidential addresses delivered in 2015-2022 in an attempt to explore formal and semantic convergences and discrepancies between the Russian and English parallel texts. To achieve this purpose, the research seeks to identify modal operators used to express deontic meanings in Russian and English, to reveal semantic and formal similarities and discrepancies between the deontic modal forms in the parallel texts, and to summarize translation strategies employed to render the Russian deontic modal forms into English. The novelty of the research is due to scrutinizing discrepancies between deontic modal forms in the Russian and English texts and analyzing translation choices. The article contributes to the research on deontic modal operators that need to be thoroughly investigated in Russian and English due to semantic and syntactic differences among the Germanic and Slavic languages. Three types of translation strategies were identified: semantic and grammatical equivalence, grammatical transformation, semantic and grammatical transformation. The results can be used in training translators and preparing manuals for translation courses.

About the authors

Olga A. Boginskaya

Irkutsk National Research Technical University

Author for correspondence.
Email: olgaa_boginskaya@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9738-8122
SPIN-code: 1370-7025
Scopus Author ID: 56049693200
ResearcherId: O-4217-2014

Dr.Sc. (Philology), Professor at the Department of Foreign Languages, Institute of Linguistics and Intercultural Communication

83, Lermontova Str., Irkutsk, Russian Federation, 664074

References

  1. Szymański, L. (2019). The Semantic Field of the English Modal Auxiliary Can Interacting with the Grammatical Aspect of the Main Verb in Contemporary American English. Brno Studies in English, 45(1), 75–94. https://doi.org/10.5817/BSE2019-1-5
  2. Garner, B. (1995). A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage. New York: Oxford University Press.
  3. Nuyts, J., & Byloo, P. (2015). Competing Modals: Beyond (Inter) subjectification. Diachronica, 32(1), 34–68. https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.32.1.02nuy
  4. Nuyts, J., Byloo, P., & Diepeveen, P. (2010). On Deontic Modality, Directivity, and Mood: The Case of Dutch Mogen and Moeten. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 16–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.05.012
  5. van Linden, A. (2012). Modal adjectives: English Deontic and Evaluative Constructions in Synchrony and Diachrony. Topics in English Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  6. Verhulst, A., Depraetere, I., & Heyvaert, L. (2013). Source and Strength of Modality: an Empirical Study of Root Should, Ought to AND BE Supposed to in Present-Day British English. Journal of Pragmatics, 55, 210–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.05.010
  7. Quirk, R., Greenbaum S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1989). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. Harlow: Longman.
  8. Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  9. Downing, A., & Locke, P. (1992). A University Course in English Grammar. Hemel Hempstead: Phonix ELT.
  10. Shatunovsky, I.B. (1996). Semantics of the Sentence and Non-referential Words. Moscow: Languages of Slavic Culture. (In Russ.). EDN: RMIRJF
  11. Paducheva, E.V. (2016). Modality. In: Materials for the Project of Corpus Description of Russian Grammar. Moscow: Academy of Science. (In Russ.).
  12. Zolotova, G.A. (1998). Communicative Grammar of the Russian Language. Moscow: Moscow University publ. (In Russ.). EDN: PWOOKJ
  13. Sytko, A.V. (2019). Semantic Components of the Deontic Utterance. Bulletin of Minsk State Linguistic University. Philology, 2(99), 82–94. (In Russ.). EDN: DTXADR
  14. Sytko, A.W. (2019). Speaker as a Deontic Agent in Political Speech (on the Material of German and Russian Languages). RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics, 10(4), 1003–1030. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2299-2019-10-4-1003-1020 EDN: QLRXBB
  15. Palmer, F.R. (2003). Modality in English: Theoretical, Descriptive and Typological Issues. In: R. Facchinetti, M. Krug, & F.R. Palmer (eds.) Modality in Contemporary English (pp. 1–17). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  16. Parrott, M. (2000). Grammar for English Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  17. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
  18. Peters, P. (2004). The Cambridge Guide to English Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511487040 EDN: QRFQRX
  19. Ehrman, M. (1966). The Meanings of the Modals in Present-Day American English (Janua Linguarum). The Hague: Mouton.
  20. Coates, J. (1983). The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm.
  21. Leech, G., & Coates, J. (1980). Semantic Indeterminacy and the Modals. In: Studies in English Linguistics for Randolph Quirk (pp. 79–90). London: Longman.
  22. Palmer, F.R. (2001). Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139167178
  23. Smith, N. (2003). Changes in the Modals and Semi-Modals of Strong Obligation and Epistemic Necessity in Recent British. In: Modality in Contemporary English (pp. 241–266). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110895339.241
  24. Vinogradov, V.V. (1950). On the Category of Modality and Modal Words in Russian. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.).
  25. Dobrovolskij, D.O., & Zalizniak, A.A. (2022). Evaluation as a Source of Deontic Modality. Critique and Semiotics, 1, 52–72. https://doi.org/10.25205/2307-1737-2022-1-52-72 (In Russ.). EDN: LWXTHP
  26. Baker, M. (1992). In other words. London: Routledge.
  27. Abdel-Fattah, M.M. (2005). On the Translation of Modals from English into Arabic and Vice Versa: The Case of Deontic Modality. Babel, 51(1), 31–48. 10.1075/babel.51.1.03abd' target='_blank'>https://doi: 10.1075/babel.51.1.03abd
  28. Lian, Z., & Jiang, T. (2014). A Study of Modality System in Chinese-English Legal Translation from the Perspective of SFG. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(3), 497–503. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.4.3.497-503
  29. Pei, J., & Li, J. (2018). A Corpus-Based Investigation of Modal Verbs in Chinese Civil-Commercial Legislation and Its English Versions. International Journal of Legal Discourse, 3(1), 77–102. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2018-2003
  30. Imre, A., & Beno, A. (2012). Translating Modal Verbs with the Help of Translation Environment. Communication, Culture and Translinguistics in Europe. Kolozsvár: Scientia Kiadó.
  31. Jaskot, M.P., & Wiltos, A. (2017). An Approach to the Translation of Deontic Modality in Legal Texts. The Case of the Polish and English Versions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Cognitive studies, 17, 12–34. https://doi.org/10.11649/cs.1454
  32. Bognskaya, O. (2021). A Contrastive Study of Deontic Modality in Parallel Texts. ELOPE: English Language Overseas Perspectives and Enquiries, 18(2), 31–49. https://doi.org/10.4312/elope.18.2.31-4 EDN: UPQLXX
  33. Malmkjaer, K. (1998). Love Thy Neighbor: Will Parallel Corpora Endear Linguists to Translators? Meta, 43(4), 534–541. https://doi.org/10.7202/003545ar

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).