516 AMERICAN Journal of Public Diplomacy and International Studies www. grnjournal.us AMERICAN Journal of Public Diplomacy and International Studies Volume 01, Issue 10, 2023 ISSN (E): 2993-2157 The Notion of Translation and its Basic Pecularities Dadajanova Aziza Karimullayevna English teacher at the National University of Uzbekistan named after Mirzo Ulugbek Abstract: This article is based on crucial facts about translation, its main models and some features that are important in translating. As we know, translation connects us to the world around us so that we can understand different perspectives and broaden our own. We live in a world where being connected to not only our community but also communities outside of our own is beneficial to our well-being. Because of technology, we are now able to reach people across the globe within seconds and this increase in ability to connect has increased the need and desire for translation. The translator has to ensure that the original intentions and influence of the author are preserved. While translating, steps have to be taken to preserve the original intentions and influence of the author. Keywords: Translation, basic models of translation, written and spoken translation, interpreter, interpretation. Translation is the bridge to difference. It is the transfer of knowledge from one way of understanding to another. This can mean from one language to another or from one discipline to another. For example, from Spanish to English or from a scientific way of speaking into simpler terms understood by the common person. Either way, through translation, more people can get exposed to and understand different writings, viewpoints, and information than would be available to them without it. There are multiple ways to translate a text into a different language and scholars debate which one is correct. The phrase “meaning can be lost in translation but also created by it” (Freeman 432) means that as the work is translated to a new language and the translator is putting in his or her own influence, the original and the translation could look different and provide different meanings and feelings about the topic, or elicit the same feelings with a different arrangement of words. It all depends on how the text is translated, what the goal of the translator is, and how he or she alters the original into the new translation. This transfer of information is important because it brings people from different cultures and places together. Even so, the phrase “lost in translation” can be valid in many cases, because while translation brings new information and makes it available to more people, there are some things lost along the way. (Freeman 430) [1]. Translation can be written or spoken, but there is a difference between the two. A translator takes a written work and translates it from a foreign language into his or her native tongue. There are a lot of considerations when translating a text that include what to leave out, what to do when there is not an exact translation between the languages, how to leave enough of the original culture and add in the culture of the translator so that the readers will understand, and more. The translator must decide between certain types of translation based on his or her goal. An interpreter translates spoken phrases between languages. (Schleiermacher 43-44) This is more of an immediate translation, so there are not as many considerations to be made on how to translate, because the interpreter does not have time to do so. The interpreter is more concerned with how 517 AMERICAN Journal of Public Diplomacy and International Studies www. grnjournal.us to get the same idea or meaning across in the next language. Interpreters need to be familiar with the technical details and terminology needed to be able to benefit the participants. If the interpreters have this knowledge, they will be able to work around the differences in languages and find an expression that gets the point across in the other language. (Schleiermacher 44) This type of translation can be done by anyone with enough knowledge of both languages according to Schleiermacher, but interpreting is actually a very challenging task. The interpreter has to have a high proficiency in both languages as well as have a vast knowledge of the cultures involved and how that language expresses meaning so that they can effectively translate, not only into a different language, but into a different culture as well. All these considerations have to be made immediately so that the conversation can continue. Interpreters do not always interpret the literal meaning behind the words of one language into the next because the literal meaning may not convey the correct meaning. They must deliver what was said accurately and in a timely manner while making those quick decisions on how to get the message across most effectively. It is a highly stressful field to work in as both parties involved are depending on the interpreter to make sure they understand what is being said. If the interpreter cannot understand the accent of a speaker or is not fully knowledgeable on the topic, vocabulary required, or the culture, it can interfere with the accuracy of the interpretation and the flow of the conversation. According to Friedrich Schleiermacher, there is a considerable difference between interpretation and translation. Schleiermacher was a German philosopher, theologian, and biblical scholar during the Romantic era who is known for his work in the philosophy of religion and his theory of translation. According to Schleiermacher, the difference between a translator and interpreter is that the translator is considered an artist. The more the author adds in his own “particular way of seeing and drawing conclusions” (Schleiermacher 44) and organizes it according to principles that he has either chosen or designed to affect the reader in a certain way, the more his own character is in the work. (Schleiermacher 44) Schleiermacher also says that the translator must “be familiar with his writer and the writer’s tongue in a different sense than the interpreter” (Schleiermacher 44). For example, the translator must be aware of the author’s background and what he wanted to get across in the text as well as how that particular language manipulated the words to get that meaning across. In all, according to Schleiermacher, the translator is above the interpreter because the translator is incorporating his own influences into the work he is translating, which includes the spirit of his own language and his own views and feelings about the topic. (Schleiermacher 44-45) He is considering a translator an artist because of the individual influence that is being added to the text making it more of his own work. The translator is considering the multiple characteristics of the text that the original author added and is having to manipulate those characteristics and the words into a text that would make sense to the new audience. While doing this, the way the translator personally expresses meaning will influence the text of the translation. In contrast to translation, interpretation is more for getting across the main point of what was said, so the interpreter is not putting much of his own personal influence into what is translated. When translating a written text of high artistic quality, however, it is not an easy task to transfer information from one way of speaking into another while preserving all that the original piece had to offer. Therefore, Friedrich Schleiermacher explained what can alter the original text and what translators have to be aware of when translating a text. The first consideration is whether a word in one language can correspond directly to a word in the other and can express the same idea with the same range of meaning. If that were true, he said, then the translation of these areas would be just as mechanical as interpretation, where you are only communicating the information in the piece (Schleiermacher 45). Schleiermacher writes, “the further removed (the languages) are from one another in etymology and years, the more it will be seen that not a single word in one language will correspond perfectly to a word in another” (Schleiermacher 46). Even people who know both languages very well are not going to be able to find the exact word in the other language, and so it becomes the task of finding the most fitting word to get across 518 AMERICAN Journal of Public Diplomacy and International Studies www. grnjournal.us the same point. An example of a word that does not have a direct translation to English is the Spanish word “sobremesa”, which is used to express the moment after eating a meal at the table where the food is gone but the conversation is still going. There is not a single word in English to describe this so the translator would have to express this meaning differently in the translation. The second point Schleiermacher noted was that when someone is translating, his own self- expression can take over. The way one author manipulates words to paint a picture within a story is going to be different than how another author would. Since some words are not going to translate directly, this opens the opportunity for the translator’s influence to enter the text as they find a different way to convey the original thought. From here Schleiermacher outlined two points that define the relationship between the language and the writer. One is the language’s effect on the writer and the other is the writer’s effect on the language. He described the language's effect on the writer by stating “every human being is...in the power of the language he speaks” (Schleiermacher 46). This quote is saying that the language a person speaks influences that person. This influence could be in the way that an individual interprets something or in the way he or she words things and expresses thoughts. The way someone combines words and forms ideas is shaped by the language and culture he or she grew up in. He described the writer's effect on the language by stating “every free-thinking, intellectually independent individual shapes the language in his turn” (Schleiermacher 46). Here Schleiermacher is saying that the individual also has the ability to manipulate language. How a person puts words together and shapes the language to express meaning is the power he or she has over the language. The individual causes new forms of the text to emerge because he or she is using his or her own way of combining the words in that language. [4]. There are two main models in translation theory that relate to this question. The first is the instrumental model, which is the model that was dominant in translation studies up until the Romantic period. This theory of translation focuses on the reproduction of the source text in form, meaning, or effect. The goal is to have the translated text be a copy of the original. This type of translation is also called word for word or sense for sense translation. The word for word concept refers to the translator being more focused on translating exactly what the original author said by translating each word to the other language. To sum up, this way of translating can affect how the sense of the text is conveyed since the way words are organized in one language might not make sense in another, and it does not take into consideration the cultural differences between the different audiences. The sense for sense concept means that the translator is more focused on conveying the same meaning that the text had for the original readers. It translates the whole meaning of a statement rather than just each word one at a time. This allows for the meaning of the text and flow of sentences to be preserved in a way so that the audience of the translation will be able to understand it. The second model is called the hermeneutic model. This theory views translation as an interpretation of the original since the text is a product of many factors. It considers the cultural and social context of the texts and translates accordingly. It is considered a more holistic approach, since it considers all aspects (writers’ style, cultural context, etc.) of the text to be important. According to the renowned translation scholar, Lawrence Venuti, the hermeneutic model is better because it gives a more sophisticated, comprehensive, and ethical translation. This model recognizes that translation cannot reproduce an unaltered version of the source text. (Venuti 5-6) [5] REFERENCES: 1. Freeman, R. “What is 'Translation'?”. Evidence and Policy, vol. 5, no. 4, 2009. pp. 429-447. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426409X478770 2. Narimanova J.Y. The Role of Teachers’ Cultural Awareness in Preparing to work with Multicultural Students. The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations (ISSN – 2689-100x) Published: September 18, 2020. P: 172-181. 519 AMERICAN Journal of Public Diplomacy and International Studies www. grnjournal.us 3. Narimanova J.Y. The Significance of Comprehending Cultural Diversity Through Movies in English Lessons. International Journal of Engineering and Information Systems (IJEAIS) ISSN: 2643-640X Vol. 4, Issue 7, July – 2020, Pages: 53-58 4. Schleiermacher, Friedrich. “On the Different Methods of Translating.” Translated by Susan Bernofsky. In The Translation Studies Reader, edited by Lawrence Venuti. London and New York: Routledge, 3rd ed., 2012. pp. 43-53. 5. Venuti, Lawrence, ed. The Translation Studies Reader. 3rd ed., London and New York: Routledge, 2012. ISBN: 978-0-415-61348-4