American Journal of Interdisciplinary Research and Development ISSN Online: 2771-8948 Website: www.ajird.journalspark.org Volume 35, December - 2024 106 | P a g e TRANSLATION PROBLEMS OF ENGLISH BORROWINGS RELATED TO THE FIELD OF EDUCATION Boymurodova Marvaridbonu Sayfulla qizi Termez University of Economics and Service Master Student Vocational School No.1 in Jarkurgan District A Head Teacher, Tel: 94 425 73 33 boymurodovamarvarid0903@gmail.com Supervisor, Madiyeva Madina Yusupovna PhD., Termez University of Economics and Service Tel.: 93 794 50 00, E-mail: madinayusupovna1984@gmail.com Abstract This study explores the challenges of translating English borrowings in the educational field, focusing on semantic, linguistic, and cultural issues. Drawing on the perspectives of both international and Uzbek scholars, it identifies common translation errors and proposes practical strategies for improving accuracy and contextual relevance. Examples of terms like “curriculum” and “credit hours” in Uzbek educational texts illustrate these challenges. Keywords: Curriculum, credit hours, assessment, syllabus, liberal arts education, online learning, rubrics. Introduction The globalization of education has introduced numerous English borrowings into the lexicon of non-English-speaking countries. Scholars such as Baker (2018) and House (2015) argue that English has become the dominant source of academic terminology, but uncritical borrowing often creates confusion due to linguistic and cultural differences [1, p.45-46]. In Uzbekistan, where significant educational reforms have been implemented since independence, English terms like “assessment,” “syllabus,” and “credit hours” have become commonplace in policy documents and curricula. However, as Uzbek scholar Quronboyev (2020) notes, these terms are often poorly translated, leading to inconsistencies in understanding and implementation [2,p.56]. For instance, the term “assessment” is typically translated as “baholash” in Uzbek, a rendering that overlooks critical distinctions between formative and summative assessment. Similarly, Toshpulatova (2021) highlights the challenges of adapting terms like “liberal arts education,” which have no direct equivalent in the Uzbek context. She stresses that without American Journal of Interdisciplinary Research and Development ISSN Online: 2771-8948 Website: www.ajird.journalspark.org Volume 35, December - 2024 107 | P a g e localization, these borrowings can lead to misunderstanding among educators and students [3, p. 122]. This paper combines insights from international research and the perspectives of Uzbek educators and linguists to propose strategies for improving the translation of English borrowings in education. Methods This study used a qualitative approach, including: 1. Literature Review: Key works by Baker (2018), Crystal (2012), and Newmark (1988) were reviewed to understand global perspectives on translation. Uzbek studies, such as Quronboyev`s (2020) analysis of educational terminology in policy documents, provided local context. 2. Document Analysis: Policy documents, curricula, and textbooks translated from English into Uzbek, Russian, and Spanish were analyzed. For instance, the Uzbek State Educational Standard (O‘zDSt) frequently uses English borrowings without sufficient contextualization, creating inconsistencies in interpretation. 3. Expert Interviews: Interviews were conducted with Uzbek linguists, including Dr. Toshpulatova, who emphasized the role of cultural adaptation in successful translation efforts. Results 1. Semantic Ambiguity. International scholars have frequently noted the semantic challenges posed by English borrowings. House (2015) explains that terms like “assessment” often carry multiple meanings, making direct translation difficult [4,p.89]. Uzbek linguist Quronboyev (2020) observes that in Uzbek translations, “assessment” is commonly rendered as “baholash,” which often focuses on summative evaluation while neglecting formative aspects (Quronboyev, 2020, p. 62). For example: English Context: Assessment: Refers to a comprehensive process that includes both formative and summative evaluations. Uzbek Context: The translation “baholash” is usually understood as a final grading process, leading to misunderstandings about continuous assessment methods in modern pedagogy. 2. Cultural Mismatch. Cultural differences pose significant challenges for terms rooted in Anglo-American educational practices. Crystal (2012) emphasizes that translating culturally specific concepts often requires extensive explanation to avoid misinterpretation [5, p. 213]. For example: American Journal of Interdisciplinary Research and Development ISSN Online: 2771-8948 Website: www.ajird.journalspark.org Volume 35, December - 2024 108 | P a g e Liberal Arts Education: Quronboyev (2020) points out that the Uzbek education system lacks an equivalent concept, and attempts to translate this term as “erkin san’at ta’limi” fail to convey its interdisciplinary nature [6, p. 67]. Toshpulatova (2021) suggests describing the concept as “Fanlararo yondashuvga asoslangan ta’lim tizimi” to better capture its essence [7,p. 125]. Credit Hours: This term is often rendered as “kredit soatlar” in Uzbek, but as noted by Baker (2018), its practical implications require clarification to ensure educators understand its role in workload calculation (Baker, 2018, p. 49). 3. Overreliance on Calques. Both international and Uzbek scholars warn against direct loan translations. For instance: Online Learning: The term is often translated as “onlayn o‘qitish” in Uzbek, which Toshpulatova (2021) argues fails to encompass the broader spectrum of synchronous and asynchronous learning methods (Toshpulatova, 2021, p. 118). Rubrics: A key term in modern assessment practices, frequently mistranslated as “baholash qoidalari” in Uzbek. Quronboyev (2020) recommends using “baholash mezonlari” to align with its intended meaning. Discussion The results emphasize the importance of adopting dynamic equivalence, cultural adaptation, and standardized glossaries in translation. The perspectives of international scholars like Newmark (1988) and Uzbek researchers such as Quronboyev and Toshpulatova provide valuable guidance: 1. Semantic Precision: Newmark (1988) advocates for dynamic equivalence, where the focus is on the intended meaning rather than a literal translation. For example, translating “formative assessment” as “rivojlanishga yo‘naltirilgan baholash” could help clarify its purpose in Uzbek educational contexts [8, p. 65]. 2. Cultural Adaptation:Toshpulatova (2021) stresses the importance of localizing culturally specific terms. For instance, “liberal arts education” can be rephrased as “turli fanlarni o‘z ichiga oluvchi keng qamrovli ta’lim tizimi”.[9, p.129] 3. Glossary Development: Crystal (2012) suggests that creating standardized glossaries is crucial for maintaining consistency in translations across educational systems. In Uzbekistan, the development of such glossaries could be a collaborative effort between linguists and educators. American Journal of Interdisciplinary Research and Development ISSN Online: 2771-8948 Website: www.ajird.journalspark.org Volume 35, December - 2024 109 | P a g e Conclusion Translating English borrowings in education presents linguistic and cultural challenges that require nuanced solutions. By integrating international and Uzbek scholars’ insights, this study underscores the importance of dynamic equivalence, cultural adaptation, and glossary development to ensure clarity and coherence. Future research should explore how technology and collaboration can further enhance translation accuracy in the field of education. References 1. Baker, M., In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. (3rd ed.). Routledge. 2018, 45-49 pp. 2. Quronboyev, Q., Ta’lim jarayonida tarjimaning dolzarb masalalari. Toshkent: O‘zMU Nashriyoti. 2020, 56-67 pp. 3. Toshpulatova, N., O‘zbek tiliga inglizcha atamalarni moslashtirishda tilshunoslik yondashuvlari.Toshkent: Innovatsion Ta’lim. 2021, 118-129 pp. 4. House, J., Translation as Communication Across Languages and Cultures. 2015, 78-89 pp. 5. Crystal, D. English as a Global Language.(2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. 2012, 213-217 pp. 6. Quronboyev, Q.Ta’lim jarayonida tarjimaning dolzarb masalalari. Toshkent: O‘zMU Nashriyoti. 2020, 57-67 pp. 7. Toshpulatova, N., O‘zbek tiliga inglizcha atamalarni moslashtirishda tilshunoslik yondashuvlari. Toshkent: Innovatsion Ta’lim. 2021, 125 p. 8. Newmark, P., A Textbook of Translation, Prentice Hall. 1988, 65-67 pp. 9. Toshpulatova, N., O‘zbek tiliga inglizcha atamalarni moslashtirishda tilshunoslik yondashuvlari. Toshkent: Innovatsion Ta’lim. 2021, 129 p.