Addition

When rendering certain English grammatical phenomena like infinitive, participle, gerundial complex, attributive cluster and the like the translator has occasionally to carry out the operation of addition, i.e. to introduce the lexical items into the final text that do not formally exist in the original. Operations of additions may involve lexical, grammatical and lexico-grammatical aspect and are usually connected to lexical replacements.

Riot police – спеціальні загони поліції для придушення вуличних безпорядків; pay claim – вимоги підвищення заробітної платні; welfare cuts – зниження бюджетних коштів на соціальні потреби; oil-thirsty Europe – Європа, якій бракує нафтопродуктів; herring ban – заборона ловити оселедців.

Mr. Ames complained his way out of bed and went to the door (Steinbeck).

Пан Еймс, стогнучи виліз з постелі, і поплівся до дверей.

What is the reason for addition transformations? It depends. The most frequent motive for this is the “formal inexpressiveness” of some semantic components in the SL syntagmata. This phenomenon is repeatedly encountered in English and it could be regarded as a particular case of ellipsis – a construction in which some words are left out but contribute to the contents implicitly.

Here we can establish links with the N.Chomsky’s idea of Generative grammar in which a kernel or primary phrase may serve as a source of a great number of grammatically correct derivatives or surface structures which in turn build up regular, non simplified texts. Still every language has its own rules to produce surface structures. In English newly made surface structures are at times of elliptical type that is far more “compact” comparatively to their Slavonic counterparts.

The new American Secretary of State has proposed a world conference on food supplies.

In the original in the word combination “has proposed a world conference” that virtually is a surface structure the component of the deep semantic structure – to convene -- is formally omitted. It exists implicitly and could be restored in Ukrainian by means of addition, namely by the word “скликати”.

Новий державний секретар США запропонував скликати всесвітню конференцію з питань продовольчих ресурсів.

Consider examples of translating fiction:

“Her English is not very good”, I said. “I’m afraid my French is awful” (G.Green).

-- Вона не дуже добре знає англійську, -- сказав я. -- Боюсь, що я погано говорю французькою.

“Знати”, “говорити” – are additions since the context prompts that the speaker means the foreign languages.

-- Wouldn’t you like a cup of chocolate before you go? (J.Salinger).

-- Не вип’єш філіжанку гарячого шоколаду на дорогу?

The formal inexpressiveness of certain semantic components accompanies English word combinations of the “N + N” type: gun license – посвідчення на право володіння зброєю; oil countries – країни – виробники нафти; electricity cuts – скорочення подачі електроенергії тощо.

The formal inexpressiveness also occurs in the word combinations of the “A + N” type, especially when they are of terminological nature: solid engine – двигун на твердому пальному; logical computer – комп’ютер, що виконує логічні операції; the un-American committee – комісія з розслідування антиамериканської діяльності тощо.

People that represent the best American charities offered their aid.

Представники найкращих американських благодійних організацій запропонували допомогу.

The number of missing people has rose to…

Число людей, що пропали без вісти, сягнуло…

In all cases offered the norms of the Ukrainian language require the formal presence of semantic components that were implicit in the original i.e. – formally unexpressed. Therefore the translator resorts to the translational transformation of addition.