Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews eISSN: 2395-6518, Vol 7, No 6, 2019, pp 984-987 https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.76146 984 |www.hssr.in © Yerbulatova et al. NATIONAL AND CULTURAL REALIAS OF TRANSLATIONS INTO TATAR Ilmira K. Yerbulatova 1 , Zoya N. Kirillova 2* , Liaisan Sahin 3 1,2 Kazan Federal University, Russia, 3 Marmara University, Turkey. Email: * zkirillova@yandex.ru Article History: Received on 17 th October 2019, Revised on 27 th November 2019, Published on 23 rd December 2019 Abstract Purposes: This article is devoted to the study of realityн translation, the identification of the main types and difficulties of translation based on the material of literary works translated from Russian into Tatar. Implication/Application: Among the objective difficulties of the works of Russian writer translation into the Tatar language, one can note the mismatch of Russian and Tatar words or phrases expressing realities. It is especially difficult to translate those words and expressions that are close in meaning, but differ in “volume”. Results: The authors show the dependence of translation strategy choice on external sociocultural and pragmatic factors. The study also found out what problems may arise during the transfer of realities in translation, and the main difficulties are highlighted that arise during the translation of realities, in particular, during the absence of an equivalent, correspondence or analogue in the translated language, the need to convey not only the meaning of reality but also its color. Novelty: In our work, the essence of the realities was determined, the main aspects of reality transfer during translation were analyzed, the types of correspondences by a value between the realities, which can be grouped into three main ones, are considered: full, partial correspondence and its absence. Keywords: Realities, National-cultural Specificity, Translation, Equivalent Translation. INTRODUCTION In fiction, the choice of a word plays a large semantic and expressive role. Stylistic coloring can express a lot - the author’s irony and the irony of the characters, historical and national color, especially the realities of public life, etc. There is a number of lexical units that cause certain difficulties in translation, they include proper names, borrowed international and pseudo-international vocabulary, paronyms, realities, semantic gaps, phraseological units, terms, etc. Among them, realities occupy a special place. Realities are “nonequivalent” vocabulary, which expresses objects, phenomena, customs, national and ethnic characteristics, rituals, as well as historical processes or facts, etc., which have no equivalents in the translated language. Realities usually determine national holidays, rituals, costumes, jewelry, dishes and drinks, the names of some posts, monetary units, vehicles, etc. During the translation of such special phenomena and words expressing them that are absent in the translated language, they use transcription or transliteration or resort to a descriptive translation. METHODS The following methods were used in the study: descriptive method (used to describe realities and their features); the method for analyzing the original and its various translations (the realities in literary translations from Russian into Tatar were analyzed), comparative method (used in the study of Tatar translations as compared with originals in order to determine an equivalent translation of realities), etc. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In the theory and practice of translation, a rather large place is occupied by studying the specifics of realities and attempts to solve a rather complicated problem, namely, translation of realities as accurately as possible so that readers can understand the whole text in the smallest details and get acquainted with a foreign and previously incomprehensible culture, thinking, everyday life, etc. of other countries and peoples. The author of many works on translation theory, Irina Alekseeva defines exotisms, or words, realities, as “the lexemes in the language that denote the realities of everyday life and social life, specific to any people, country or locality” (Alekseeva, 2004). Translation of realities remains one of the difficult, but urgent problems for the translator; therefore, many theorists and practitioners have addressed this problem in the translation studies. The study of realities has been the subject of many works. This issue is covered in the works of many scholars from different branches of knowledge, since the study of realities is at the junction of such scientific areas as translation studies, linguoculturology, linguistic regional studies, the history of language, sociology, etc. Among many works, let's note some devoted to the problems of ethnocultural identity and interlanguage communication (Gilazetdinova et al., 2014), the reflection of the paremiological foundation of the Tatar people in the ethnolinguistic aspect (Mugtasimova et al., 2014), the study of a man as an object of evaluation in the phraseological picture of the Tatar language world Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews eISSN: 2395-6518, Vol 7, No 6, 2019, pp 984-987 https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.76146 985 |www.hssr.in © Yerbulatova et al. (Sibgaeva et al., 2017), and the identification of lexical difficulties in Russian - Tatar translations (Salakhova & Sibgaeva, 2014), the study of the translation features of comparative constructions in the works of art (Khasanzianova et al., 2018), etc. Classifications of various ways of conveying realities are reflected in the works by S. Vlakhov and S. Florin, V.S. Vinogradov, I.A. Alekseeva, A.V. Fedorov and other scholars (Vlakhov & Florin, 1980; Vinogradov, 2004; Vinogradov, 2001; Alekseeva, 2004; Fedorov, 2002). S. Vlakhov and S. Florin define the following two main difficulties in translation of realities: 1) the lack of correspondence (equivalent, analogue) in the translated language due to the lack of native speakers of this language denoted by realities and 2) the need to convey and color (connotation) - it's national and historical coloring along with the objective meaning (semantics) realities (Gilazetdinova et al., 2014). At the same time, it must be noted that some realities in the language of translation have single correspondences, which is expressed in the possibility of a given lexical unit translation by the same unit of translation language. Usually, when they translate such realities that have single correspondences, there are no special difficulties. To date, there are rather different points of view in translation studies on the methods of reality translation. In this work, we relied on the techniques that were proposed by such scholars as V.S. Vinogradov, S. Vlakhov and S. Florin. V.S. Vinogradov identified five ways of reality translation: transcription (transliteration), hypo-hyperonymic translation, assimilation, periphrastic (descriptive, explicative) translation and calquing (Vinogradov, 2004; Vinogradov, 2001). S. Vlakhov and S. Florin offer the following techniques for reality translation in a literary text: 1. Transcription. 2. Translation (replacements): 1) neologism: a) calquing, b) half-calquing, c) development, d) semantic neologism. 2) approximate translation: a) generic replacement, b) functional analogue, c) description, explanation, interpretation. 3) contextual translation (Vlakhov & Florin, 1980). Next, we will consider some of these methods and techniques for reality translation on the material of translations into the Tatar language of the works of Russian writers. In the translation of realities, transcription means the mechanical transfer of reality using graphic means of a translated language with the most accurate transmission of the phonetic form of the source language of the translation. There are many examples of this translation method. Here are some of them: young lady, lady, gentleman, sir, countess, nun, governess, footman, valet, uniform, clerk, serf, bailiff, attorney, nobleman, chapel, estate, fair, estate, purse, ball, curtsy, general, baron, admiral, gentleman, etc. Such Russian national holidays as Easter, Christmas, Ascension, and Great Lent were not translated in any other way than transliteration since this method is the most successful. But at the same time, it is worth noting that there is the translation of the word Christmas as “Raştua” in modern dictionaries, but until the 90s of the last century, this word was translated by the transliteration of the Russian version. When the transcription of realities is impossible or is not successful or desirable, translation is used as the transmission of realities. Consider some of them with the examples from translations into the Tatar language. After transcription or transliteration, the introduction of neologism is the most suitable way of preserving the meaning and color of reality. The creation of a new word or a phrase sometimes makes it possible to achieve almost the same effect in translation: a Dinner party. - Çakırulı aşlar (lit. dinner party). Get lost my cart, all four wheels. - Bette ğaziz başkayım, qaldı muyın utırıp (lit. my dear head has disappeared, my neck has remained). Twenty-two misfortunes! - Adım sayın bäla (lit. Trouble at every turn)! Made fool. - Axmaqlıq eşlädem (lit. perform some stupidity). Kalashny row - Aq söyäklär arası (among white bones (in the sense of nobility)), etc. The next method of reality translation is mastering, that is, a foreign-language reality adaptation, giving it the appearance of a native word using the material of another language. Some examples: Thank God! - Allağa şöker! Oh my God! - Yä Allam! God will help! - Alla teläsä (lit. If God wants)! Merciful God. - Märxämätle Xoda. The Lord is with you! - Xoday yuldaşıñ bulsın (lit. May the Lord be your companion)! For God's sake! - Alla xakı öçen (ext. For the sake of duty to God)! May God forgive me! - Ber Allam mine üze kiçersen (lit. let the God forgive me). The Lord is with you. - Xäyerle bulsın (lit. May all be well). The Lord is with you. - Sälamät bulıgız (lit. Bless you). Praying Mantis - ğıybadät. Kingdom of heaven to her! - Urını ocmaxta bulsın (lit. Let his place be in paradise)! God's will! - Xodaynıñ üz ixtıyarında! God is with her at all. - Kilmägäye (lit. Yes let him come). God save me! - Xodayım, üzeñ kotkar! If the Lord helped! - Alla yärdäm itä kürsen inde (may God help you!) Fear the God! - Beraz Alladan oyalıgız (lit. Be ashamed of God)! Madam - Bay bikä (lit. Rich woman). They got it. - Yäräşep quydıq. Madam. - Tutaş (lit. young lady). Lord! - Äfändelär! Kum. - Qoda. Wedding - niqax (wedding according to Muslim rites). Governess - tärbiyäläüçe (lit. Educator), etc. The next method of conveying realities is a semantic neologism. This is a new word or phrase, invented by the translator and giving the opportunity to convey the semantic content of reality. This technique should not be confused with calquing, in contrast to which semantic neologism does not have an etymological connection with the original word. At Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews eISSN: 2395-6518, Vol 7, No 6, 2019, pp 984-987 https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.76146 986 |www.hssr.in © Yerbulatova et al. that, one has to admit that this technique is less common, because unlike the people, in most cases, an individual author cannot be the creator of a language. As compared to other techniques, an approximate translation of realities is used more often. Using such a translation, one can convey the content of reality, although often this is not very accurate, and the color is almost always lost because the expected connotative equivalent is replaced by a neutral-style equivalent, that is, transmitted by a word or phrase with zero additional value. Generic replacement as the method of reality translation makes it possible to convey the approximate content of reality using a lexical unit with either a wider or narrower meaning. In other words, with this technique, the species concept is replaced by the generic one. On the examples of the transfer of the following realities, we can see that the translators used the generalization technique: Holy Week. - Pasxa, although Holy Week is the last week of Lent before Easter; harem pants - çalbar ‘trousers’, however harem pants are wide trousers, tucked into the shafts; In general, pants are wide, with a loose fit. When translating the sentence “... after the Holy One made me an offer”, the translator used the generalization technique and translated it as “... bäyrämnän soñ miña täqdim yasadı”, that is, in this case, the translator conveyed the name of the holiday with the general word bäyräm (holiday). The described methods of reality translation in practice are usually not isolated but are used in combination with each other. CONCLUSIONS In our work, we determined the essence of realities, analyzed the main aspects of the transfer of realities during translation, and examined the types of correspondences between realities by value, which can be grouped into three main ones: full, partial correspondence and its absence. During the study, we also found out what problems can arise during the transfer of realities in translation and highlighted the main difficulties that arise in the translation of realities, in particular, the absence of an equivalent, correspondence or analogue in the translated language, the need to convey not only the meaning of reality but also its color. In addition, the following methods of reality translation were considered in the examples: transcription or transliteration, the introduction of neologism as a translation (replacement), the development of neologism, semantic neologism and generic replacement. SUMMARY After consideration of these methods of reality translation on the material of literary translation from Russian into Tatar, we can come to the following conclusion: in order to choose the most suitable method of translation, we must take into account the way the author conveys the reality of the original text and the means used so that readers can understand the whole text with its semantic and connotative content in the smallest details and got acquainted with a foreign culture, thinking, way of life, etc. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The work is performed according to the Russian Government Program of Competitive Growth of Kazan Federal University. REFERENCES 1. Alekseeva, I. S. (2004). Introduction to Translation Studies. Textbook for the students of philological and linguistic faculties of higher educational institutions. - St. Petersburg: Faculty of Philology, St. Petersburg State University; Moscow: Publishing Center "Academy", 352 p. 2. Gilazetdinova, G. K., Edikhanov, I. Z., & Aminova, A. A. (2014). Problems of ethnocultural identity and cross- language communication. Journal of language and literature, 5(3), 39-42. https://doi.org/10.7813/jll.2014/5-3/7 3. Mugtasimova, G. R., Nabiullina, G. A., & Denmukhametova, E. N. (2014). Paremiological fund of the Tatar people in the ethno-linguistic aspect. Life Science Journal, 11(11), 409-412. 4. Sibgaeva, F. R., Nurmukhametova, R. S., Sattarova, M. R., & Smagulova, G. N. (2017). Man as an object of evaluation in the phraseological picture of the world (on the material of Tatar language). AD ALTA-Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 7(2), 267-269. 5. Salakhova, R. R., & Sibgaeva, F. R. (2014). Cross-linguistic differences as a type of lexical difficulties in Russian-Tatar translations. Journal of Language and Literature, 5(4), 325-328. 6. Khasanzianova, G. I., Bolgarova, R. M., & Islamova, E. A. (2018). TRANSLATION PECULIARITIES OF COMPARATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS IN LITERARY WORKSTEAL. IIOABJ, 9(2), 177-180. 7. Vlakhov, S., & Florin, S. (1980). Untranslatable in translation. Moscow: International Relations, 343 p. 8. Vinogradov, V. (2004). Translation: general and lexical issues. M.: Knizhniy dom. 240 p. 9. Vinogradov, V. S. (2001). Introduction to translation studies (General and lexical issues). M, 224. https://doi.org/10.7813/jll.2014/5-3/7 Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews eISSN: 2395-6518, Vol 7, No 6, 2019, pp 984-987 https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.76146 987 |www.hssr.in © Yerbulatova et al. 10. Fedorov, A. V. (2002). Fundamentals of the general theory of translation (linguistic problems): For institutes and faculties of foreign languages. Textbook. - 5th ed. - St. Petersburg: Faculty of Philology, St. Petersburg State University; M.: LLC Publishing House PHILOLOGY THREE, 416 p. 11. Yerbulatova, I., Gilazetdinova, G., Aminova, A., & Utegenova, K. (2018). The National Coloring as a Part of the Connotative Meaning of Realia. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 7(4), 102-108. https://doi.org/10.7596/taksad.v7i4.1820 12. Borisova, V. V. (2017). The Novel “Zuleikha Opens Her Eyes” by G. Yakhina: the Conflict of Receptions in the Context of the Regional, Russian and World Literature (on the Problem of National and Cultural Identity). https://doi.org/10.17516/1997-1370-0073 13. Nurtdinova, G. M. (2015). Semantic distance coefficient for semantic field of tatar culture specific concepts" family and human being environment" and their lacunas in English. Journal of Sustainable Development, 8(4), 169. https://doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v8n4p169 14. Ibrahimova, B., Tarasova, F., Yarullina, O., & Beisenbai, A. B. (2017). Proverbs and Sayings as reflection of National Character (In The Context of Tatar and English Proverbs and Sayings). Revista Publicando, 4(13 (2)), 626-633. 15. Nurtdinova, G. M., & Prosyukova, K. O. (2017). Semantic Distance Coefficient for Semantic Field ‘Food’of Tatar Culture-Specific Concepts and their equivalents in English. Revista Publicando, 4(13 (2)), 711-720. 16. Nurmukhametova, R. S., Zamaletdinov, R. R., & Sattarova, M. R. (2014). The vocabulary of Tatar literary language (the first half of the XX century). Life Science Journal, 11(10), 670-673. 17. Razumovskaya, V. (2014). Translating aboriginal Siberian and circumpolar cultures in Russia. In Translators, Interpreters, and Cultural Negotiators (pp. 190-212). Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137400048_12 18. Fattakhova, A. R. (2017). CULTURALLY MARKED LEXICAL UNITS AS A REFLECTION OF THE “OUTWORLD” REALITIES (BASED ON THE TRANSLATION OF “FAIRYTALE ABOUT TZAR SALTAN” BY AS PUSHKIN INTO TATAR). Polylinguality and Transcultural Practices, 14(4), 770-777. https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-8011-2017-14-4-770-777 19. Galiullina, G. R. (2018). The phenomenon of lexical interference in the modern spoken Tatar language. Editorial Board, 22. 20. Mukhamadiarova, A. F., & Ayupova, R. A. (2016). Concept" Love" in American and Tatar Female Poetry. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict, 20, 234. https://doi.org/10.7596/taksad.v7i4.1820 https://doi.org/10.17516/1997-1370-0073 https://doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v8n4p169 https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137400048_12 https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-8011-2017-14-4-770-777