CHAPTER II

CONTENTINTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. .3Chapter 1 Transformation translation and their classification.................................. 51.1 Development of translation notion in linguistics .......................................... 5 1.2 Equivalence of translation ............................................................................ 61.3 Translation transformations and their classification ................................ 11

1.4 Grammatical transformations ..................................................................... 14

Chapter 2 Analysis of grammatical transformations in translation on the basis of "the dventures of Huckleberry Finn by M. Twen........................................... 17

2.1 Conversion ................................................................................................... 17

2.2 Transposition ............................................................................................... 182.3 Sentence fragmentation ............................................................................... 182.4 Sentence integration .................................................................................... 192.5 Addition ....................................................................................................... 202.6 Omission ...................................................................................................... 21CONCLUSION .................................................................................................... 22BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................. 24

INTRODUCTION

Translation is dominated by objective, scientific, and linguistic description and explanation. At the same time it is a subjective choice of means preserving stylistic equivalence of the source text.

Translation reflects the source text but it does not copy it. To translate adequately, a translator must do his or her best to find a proper means of expression. A translator bears in mind that the receptor has a cultural background other than that of a receptor of the original text; therefore, s/he has to be very resourceful in producing the same impact upon the receptor as that of the source text. Special problems arise in translating dialects, foreign speech, puns, poetry, etc. And a translator is in constant search for new tools to solve translation problems.

Achievement of the translation adequacy, despite the discrepancy in semantic systems of source and target languages, demands from translator abilities to make numerous translation transformations in order to target text transfers the information from source text with maximum accuracy and observance SL norms. Actuality of the given paper consists in problem of choice maximum correct translation transformation in transferring different grammatical forms to the Russian language.

The aim of this term paper is to investigate the problem of transformations in translation and to reveal peculiarities of the grammatical transformations usage in translation of the literary texts.

The following tasks were set up to identify translation peculiarities:

1. To give the notion and the general characteristics of the transformations in translation;2. To reveal types of translation transformations;3. To observe main types of the grammatical transformations;4. To analyze peculiarities of grammatical transformations usage on the basis of the literary text.

The object of this research is the peculiarities of grammatical transformations usage in translating of the literary text. The subject of this research is the problem of transformations in translation.

Scientific novelty consists in reviling dominant grammatical transformation in translation of the English fiction.

Main method of our course paper is comparative on the basis of M. Twens novel "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" and its translation into Russian by N. Daruzes.

Theoretical value of the given work consists in attempt to develop uniform criteria of grammatical transformations classification and different methods and approaches while translating different grammatical forms from the English language to Russian.Practical value. The results of the given research can supply further investigations in the problem of translation transformations; also all the materials of the work can be used on lections and studies on theory and practice of translation.

The paper consists of introduction, two chapters and conclusion. It is also provided with bibliography list. In introduction we define actuality of the paper, set up aim and tasks, define scientific novelty, theoretical and practical value of the work. First chapter is devoted to translation notion in linguistics, to the definition of the translation transformations and their classification. In the second chapter we analyse types of grammatical transformations through the translation of the story "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" by TwenM. The results of the research are submitted in the conclusion of the work.Chapter 1 Transformation translation and their classification1.1Development of translation notion in linguistics

Among multiple problems that modern linguistics studies an important role is played by studying of linguistic aspects of cross-language speaking activity that is called translation or translating activity. Translation is an ancient human's activity. Due to groups of people appeared in the history of mankind had different languages the bilinguals became urgent as they helped communication between groups with different languages. Then writing appeared and along with oral interpreters written translators became urgent as well. They translated different texts of official, religious and business issues. From its very beginning translation played a significant social function allowing people of different languages communicate. Spreading of written translations gave people access to cultural achievements of other people and it made interacting and intersaturation of literatures and cultures feasible. Knowledge of foreign languages allows reading books originally written in those languages [1,562]. The first theories of translation were the translators themselves who tried to generalize their own experience. Translators of ancient world discussed the issue of proximity degree to the source text. In early Bible translations or translations of other materials that were considered to be sacral and exemplary we can find word for word approach of the source text interpretation that sometimes lead to partly or even full misunderstanding of translations. That is why later translators tried theoretically approve the right of translator for reasonable variety in subject to the source text that meant the interpretation of meaning and the impression of the source text instead of word for word coping [2,124]. The foundations of scientific theory of translation started to be developed in the middle of XXth century when the problematic of translating appeared to be urgent amongst linguists. Before that period it was thought that translation is not the issue of linguistic range. Translators themselves considered linguistic aspects to be non-significant but totally technical role. The translator was supposed to be fluent both in source and target languages but knowledge of the language was just a preliminary condition and did not cover its meaning. By the middle of XXth century the attitude to translation activity had changed and its systematic studying commenced. During this period the translation of political, commercial, scientific- technical and other texts was of great priority. In those types of translation the features of individual writer's style were not important. Due to this fact more and more attention was paid to the main difficulties of translation related to different structures and functioning of languages in this process. The meaning of language units was emphasized by more precise requirements for the translation. During the translation of such materials it was not enough to get general translation as the translation was supposed to provide information transmission in all details up to the meaning of single words. It was required to identify linguistic meaning of this process and what factors identified it and what range they have for information transmitting [3,44].1.2 Equivalence of translation

So, there are always two texts during translation, and one of them is initial and is created independently on the second one, and the second text is created on the basis of the first one with the help of some certain operations - the inter language transformations. The first text is called the text of original''; the second text is called the text of translation". The language of the text of original is called the source language (SL). The language of the text of translation is called the target language (TL) [4,97]. We need to define the most important thing: why do we consider that the text of translation is equivalent to the text of original? For example, why do we speak that the Russian sentence " is the translation of the English sentence "My brother lives in London", while the Russian sentence is not the translation of the English sentence given above - to say in other words - is not equivalent to it?

Obviously, the replacement of the text in one language by the text in the other language is not always the translation. The same idea can be expressed in the other way: the process of translation or the inter language transformation is realised not arbitrary, but with the help of some certain rules, in some strict frameworks. And if we do not observe these rules we have already no rights to speak about translation. To have the rights to be called the translation, the text on TL should contain in it something that the text on SL contains. Or else, while replacing the text on SL by the text on TL it is necessary to keep some certain invariant; the measure of keeping of this invariant defines by itself the measure of the equivalence of the text of translation to the text of original. So, first of all, it is necessary to define what is the invariant in the process of translation, that is in the process of transformation of the text on SL in the text on TL [5,176].

At the decision of this problem it is necessary to take in account the following. The process of translation directly depends on bilateral character of a mark, as it is called in a mark systems science - semiotics - It means that any mark can be characterised from two sides, or plans the plan of expression or form and the plan of contents or meaning. It is known that the language is a specific mark system, that is why the units of language are also characterised by the presence of two plans, both form and meaning. Thus the main role for translation is played by that fact that different languages contain different units and these units differ from each other in the way of expression, but they are similar in the way of the contents, that is by the meaning. For example, the English word "brother" differs from Russian word " in the way of the expression, but coincides with it in the way of the contents, that is has the same meaning [5,312]. The English word "brother" has not only the meaning " but also some meanings expressed in Russian language by the words ", ", , " etc. And the Russian word " in the combination corresponds not to the English word "brother", but to the word "cousin", which means not only but also ". This phenomenon, namely, the incomplete concurrence of systems of meanings of units in different languages, complicates the process translation. Taking in account this fact we can say, that if we replace the English word "brother" by the Russian word ", the process of translation takes place here, as these words, differing in the way of expression, that is by the form, coincide or are equivalent in the way of the contents, that is by the meaning. Actually, however, as the minimal text is the sentence, the process of translation is always realised in the limits of minimum one sentence. And in the sentence, as a rule, the discrepancy between the units of different languages in the way of the contents is eliminated. Proceeding from this, we can give now the following definition of the translation:Thetranslation is theprocess of transformation of the speech product in the language into the speech product in the other language by keeping the constant plan of the contents that is the meanings. About the keeping of the constant plan of the contents it is possible to speak only in the relative, but not in the absolute sense. During the inter language transformation some losses are inevitable, that is the incomplete transference of meanings, expressed by the text of the original, is taking place [6, 29]. So, the text of translation can never be complete and absolute equivalent of the text of original; the task of the interpreter is to make this equivalence as complete as it is possible, that is to achieve the minimum of losses. It means that one of the tasks of the theory of translation is the establishment of the order of transference of meanings. Taking into account that there are various types of meanings, it is necessary to establish which of them have the advantages during the transference in the process of translation, and which of them it is possible to endow" so that the semantic losses would be minimal while translating. To finish the consideration of the question about the essence of translation, it is necessary to answer one question yet. This question arises from the definition of translation equivalence based on the keeping of the constant plan of the contents, that is the meaning, given above. It was already marked that the opportunity of keeping of plan of the contents, that is the invariance of meanings while translating, assumes that in the different languages there are some units that are similar in the way of meaning. The divergence in the semantic systems of different languages is a certainty fact and it is the source of numerous difficulties arising before the interpreter in the process of translation. That is why, many researchers consider that the equivalence of the original and the translation is not based on the identity of expressed meanings.

From the numerous statements on this theme we shall quote only one, belonging to the English theorist of translation J. Ketford: ... The opinion that the text on SL and the text on TL have the same meaning" or that there is a carry of meaning" while translating, have no bases. From our point of view, the meaning is the property of the certain language. The text on SL have the meaning peculiar to TL; for example, the Russian text has Russian meaning, and the English text, that is the equivalent of it, has the English meaning [7, 120]. For the benefit of translation it is possible to state the following arguments: In the system of meanings of any language the results of human experience are embodied, that is the knowledge that the man receives about the objectively existing reality.In any language, the system of language meanings reflects the whole external world of the man, and his own internal world too, that is the whole practical experience of the collective, speaking the given language, is fixed. As the reality, environmental different language collectives, has much more than common features, than distinguishes, so the meanings of different languages coincide in a much more degree, than they miss. The other thing is that these meanings (the units of sense or semes') are differently combined, grouped and expressed in different languages: but it concerns already not to the plan of the contents but to the plan of the language expression. The greatest difficulties during translation arise when the situation described in the text on SL is absent in the experience of language collective - the carrier of TL, otherwise, when in the initial text the so-called realities are described, that is different subjects and phenomena specific to the given people or the given country. The ability to describe new unfamiliar situations is the integral property of any language; and this property makes what we speak about to be possible. The translation was determined above as the process of transformation of speech product in one language into the speech product in the other language. Thus, the interpreter deals not with the languages as the systems, but with the speech products, that is with the texts. Those semantic divergences, that is in the meanings, which we are talking about, concern, first of all, to systems of different languages; in the speech these divergences very often are neutralised, erased, brought to nothing. The concrete distribution of elementary units of sense (semes" or semantic units) on separate words, word combinations or sentences of the given text is defined by the numerous and complex factors. And, as a rule, it does not coincide in the text on SL and text on TL. But it concerns not to the plan of the contents, but to the plan of expression and is not the infringement of a principle of semantic equivalence of the texts of original and the text of translation [8, 65]. Last give an example to prove the fact given above. In the story of the known English writer S. Moem A Casual Affair " we can see the following sentence: " He'd always been so spruce and smart; he was shabby and unwashed and wild-eyed ". This is the Russian variant of this sentence: " , , , , , (translation of Litvinova ) On the first sight the Russian text do not seems to be the equivalent to the English one: there are such words as ", , " in it, which have not the direct conformities in the text of original. But really, the semantic equivalence is available here, though here are no verbal equivalence, of course. The thing is that the Russian words " and transfer the meanings, which are expressed not by the words, but by the grammatical forms in the English text: the opposition of the forms of the verb "to be" -had been and was expresses that the first event is taking place before the second one, which has the logical expression through adverbs of time in Russian language. [9, 90] Words " transfer the semantic information, which the initial English text contains too, but in one of the previous sentences, not in the given sentence (He didn't been the job in Sumatra long and he was back again in Singapore). So, the semantic equivalence is provided not between the separate words and even not between the separate sentences here, but between the whole text on SL and the whole text on TL as a whole [10, 37]. So, the semantic divergences between the languages cannot serve as the insuperable obstacle for the translation, by virtue of that circumstance, that the translation deals with the languages not as the abstract systems, but with the concrete speech products (texts). And in their limits there is the complex interlacing and interaction of qualitatively diverse language means being the expressions of meanings - of words, grammatical forms, and "super signments" means, transmitting this or that semantic information together. That semantic equivalence of the texts of the original and the text of translation, which we regard as the necessary condition of the process of translation, exists not between the separate elements of these texts, but between the texts as a whole. And inside the given text the numerous regroupings, rearrangement and redistribution of separate elements are not only allowed, but frequently they are simply inevitable, (" translation transformations "). So, while translating, there is a strict rule - the principle of submission of elements to the whole, of the lowest units to the highest [11, 176].

1.3Translation transformations and their classification

Main purpose of the transfer is the achievement of adequacy. Adequate, or as it also called equivalent translationis atranslation, which is performed at the level necessary and sufficient for transfer invariable plane of content, subject to appropriate plan expression, i.e. rules of thetranslationlanguage. By definition by A.V. Fedorov, adequacy a "comprehensive transfer semantic content of the original and is fully functional and stylistic correspondence to him" [12, 179].

Main task of an interpreter in achieving adequacy - ably produce varioustranslationtransformation in order to texttranslationas close as possible to transmit all information contained in the original text, while respecting the rules of thetranslationlanguage."Transformation is the basis of most methods oftranslation. It consists in change of formal (lexical or grammaticaltransformations) or semantic components of the source text while transferring".

Y.I. Retsker defines transformation as "the techniques of logical thinking, with we disclose the value of foreign words in context and find him n match, does not coincide with the dictionary" [13, 38].Currently, there are many classifications oftranslationtransformations proposed by various authors.

Let's consider some of them.Latyshev gives a classification of the nature deviations from the interlanguage of correspondences in which all are divided at:1) Morphological replacement of a categorical form of one or more;2) Syntax changed the syntactic functions of words and phrases;3) The style stylistic change in color of the segment of text;4) Semantic a change not only the content of expressions, but the content itself, namely, those signs by which describe the situation;5) Mixed lexical-semantic and syntactic and morphological.

The classification by Barkhudarov differs transformations on formal grounds: transpositions, additions, functional replacements, omissions. Barkhudarov emphasizes that such a division is in largely approximate and relative. Transpositions are changes in location (order of) the language elements in the texttranslationcompared with the text of the original. Under the functional replacements are regarded as changes in thetranslationof words, parts of speech, parts of the sentence, types syntactic context, and lexical substitution (concretization, generalization, antonymic translation, compensation). Additions imply the use of additional words in thetranslation, without correspondences in the original. Omission means the omission of one or other words in thetranslation.

Retsker writes that "although not always possible classify each example the transfer because of interlocking categories, generally can be identified 7 types of lexicaltransformations:

- differentiation of values;

- specification of values;

- generalization of values;

- meaning development;

- antonymictranslation;

- holistic transformation;

- compensation for losses in thetranslationprocess.[14,48]

Barkhudarov (1973), Latyshev (1988), Levitskaya, Fiterman (1973), Komissarov (1994), Retsker (1974) divided all transformations on the lexical, grammatical, stylistic. Transformations can be combined with each other, taking the nature of complextransformations. For example, Lviv (1985) finds that among the different types oftransformationsare no blank wall, the same transformation can sometimes be a contentious case, they can be attributed to different types.

Lexical transformations

Lexical transformations change the semantic core of a translated word. According to Retsker they can be classified into the following groups:

1. Lexical substitution, or putting one word in place of another. It often results from the different semantic structures of the source language and target language words.

Deliberate substitution as a translation technique can be of several subtypes:

a) Specification,

b) Generalization

c) Differentiation

d) Modulation

2. Compensation is a deliberate introduction of some additional element in the target text to make up for the loss of a similar element in the source text.

3. Metaphoric transformations are based on transferring the meaning due to the similarity of notions [15, 44]. Stylistic transformations

Stylistical transformations at the translation from English into Russian have to consider a contextual background of the original texts (micro and macrocontext), individuality of author's style and also to consider specifics of SL, its stylistic norms and syntactic organization of the text.

Stylistic techniques of different languages are basically the same, however, their functioning in the speech is variously. During translation of original text the translator's task consists in defining function of used stylistic technique and to make the necessary decision concerning possibility of preservation this technique in target text or about its replacement with other stylistic technique.

Kazakova defines three main stylistic techniques:

metaphor translation;

metonymy translation;

irony translation.

1.4 Grammatical transformations

The term "grammatical transformation" as transformation of the English sentence in translation process, certainly, should be understood relatively. The English sentence, of course, isn't changed, but in mind of the translator there is a certain transformational operation of that "picture" of an English sentence construction in which English words are already replaced by Russians. Essentially, there is a transferring of a literal translation which is an inevitable stage in work of the beginning translator. Only experience can fast prompt on Russian sentence construction typical for English language, like the following: A bus and tram crash killed four. [16,22]. According to Retsker all types of grammatical transformations can be set to the following main categories:

Conversion (grammar substitution) is used at partial discrepancy of structural-semantic properties of this or that syntactic unit in initial and translating languages [18; 41]. Transposition (word order change). Usually the reason for this transformation is that English and Russian sentences have different information structures, or functional sentence perspective. Sentence partitioning. Sentence fragmentation is the replacement of a simple sentence in the source text with a complex sentence (with some clauses), or a complex sentence with several independent sentences in the target text for structural, semantic or stylistic reasons . Sentence integration is a contrary transformation. It takes place when we make one sentence out of two or more, or convert a complex sentence into a simple one . Omission. In the translation process the words being semantic superfluous, i.e. express semantic excess values that can be understood from the text without their help, are most often exposed to omission. Both system of any language as a whole, and concrete speech works possess, as we know, very big degree of redundancy that gives the chance to make these or those omissions in translation process [17,145]. Addition. The reasons causing the necessity of lexical additions in a target text can be various. One of them perhaps, the most usual is that it is possible to call "formal not expressiveness" semantic components of the phrase in SL. These phenomenon are quite usual for English words combinations, grammatically they can be regarded as "ellipse". Words which the known American linguist Z. Harris calls "appropriate words" often are exposed to such "ellipse".

Two last transformations omission and addition Retsker regards as more lexical than grammatical one.

Shweizer classified grammatical transformations following way:

1. Sentence integration;

2. Sentence fragmentation;

3. Addition of grammatical units (prepositions, conjunctions, pronouns, etc);

4. Omission of grammatical units.

Pivueva and Dwoinina having compared grammatical categories and forms of both languages, have come to conclusion, that folllowing situations can be in any both languages:

1. lack of this or that grammatical category;

2. partial coincidence;

3. absolute coincidence.

Necessity in grammatical transformations appears only in first and second cases. The Russian language in comparison with English doesn't have such grammatical categories as article and gerund, and also such compound complexes as gerund, participle and infinitive constructions. Discrepancy or partial coincidence in meaning of corresponding forms and constructions require grammatical transformations. There can be partial discrepancy of number category, passive constructions, participle, infinitive, some differences in modality. Pivueva and Dwoinina classified four types of grammatical transformations:

1. Transposition

2. Replacement

3. Additions

4. Omissions.

In our paper we adhere Retsker's classification, as it is more complete and common. We performed an analysis of grammaticaltransformationson the example of translationof selected chapters from the book by M. Twen"The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn", translation byN. Daruzes.Chapter 2Analysis of grammatical transformations in translation on the basis of "the adventures of Huckleberry Finn" by M. Twen 2.1 ConversionConversion is applied when a grammar category of the translated unit is changed. Thus a passive construction can be translated by an active voice verb form: That book was made by Mr. Mark Twain, and he told the truth, mainly [20; 5]. , , [19; 6]. The reason for this transformation is stylistic: in English the passive voice is used much more often in neutral speech, whereas in Russian this category is more typical of the formal style.

Or there may be substitution of the noun number category, the singular by the plural or vice versa: She put me in them new clothes again, and I couldnt do nothing but sweat and sweat, and feel all cramped up [20, 6]. , , , [19, 7]. This transformation is due to the structural difference between the English and Russian languages: in English the analyzed noun is Singularia Tantum, in Russian it is used in the plural [18; 40].

Parts of speech, along with the parts of the sentence, can be changed: Pretty soon I wanted to smoke, and asked the widow to let me [20, 6]. , [19,7], where the verb is substituted by the noun. The reason for this transformation can be accounted for by language usage preferences: English tends to the nominal expression of the state, Russian can denote the general state by means of the verb [18, 40]. Conversion is often used for English grammatical forms like infinitive that don't coincide with Russian one, for example: If you are with the quality, or at a funeral, or trying to go to sleep when you aint sleepy if you are anywheres where it wont do for you to scratch, why you will itch all over in up-wards of a thousand places [20; 10]. : - , , , , [19; 11]. In this sentence subordinate clause with infinitive is submitted by the impersonal sentence. This miserableness went on as much as six or seven minutes; but it seemed a sight longer than that [20; 11]. , , [19; 12]. In the given sentence grammatical construction "it seemed" transfered with the help of personal sentence. I didnt want him to try [20; 11]. [19; 12]. Here, in order to transfer the meaning of the sentence infinitive construction is submitted by the personal sentence. 2.2 TranspositionThe stars were shining, and the leaves rustled in the woods ever so mournful; and I heard an owl, away off, who - whooing about somebody that was dead, and a whipp of will and a dog crying about somebody that was going to die [20; 8]; is naturally equivalent to , ; - , - ; , , , - [19; 9], where the subject, predicate and adverbial modifier are positioned in a mirrorlike fashion. He got up and stretched his neck out about a minute, listening [20; 10]. , [19; 11].

2.3 Sentence fragmentation

Then I slipped down to the ground and crawled in among the trees, and, sure enough, there was Tom Sawyer waiting for me [20; 9]. . : [19; 10]. There was a place on my ankle that got to itching, but I dasnt scratch it; and then my ear begun to itch; and next my back, right between my shoulders [20; 10]. , . , , [19; 11]. The Widow Douglas she took me for her son, and allowed she would sivilize me; but it was rough living in the house all the time, considering how dismal regular and decent the widow was in all her ways; and so when I couldnt stand it no longer I lit out. I got into my old rags and my sugar-hogshead again, and was free and satisfied [20; 5]. , ; : , . , , - , [19; 6]. In the given examples we have both transformations sentence fragmentation and integration. But Tom Sawyer he hunted me up and said he was going to start a band of robbers, and I might join if I would go back to the widow and be respectable [20; 6]. , . , [19; 7].

2.4 Sentence integration

She got mad then, but I didnt mean no harm. All I wanted was to go somewheres; all I wanted was a change, I warnt particular [20; 7]. , , -, , [19; 8]. Here two sentences are integrated by conjunction a. I went up to my room with a piece of candle, and put it on the table. Then I set down in a chair by the window and tried to think of something cheerful, but it warnt no use. I felt so lonesome I most wished I was dead [20; 8]. , - , : , [19; 9]. three simple sentences are integrated into one composed by punctuation marks. I got up and turned around in my tracks three times and crossed my breast every time; and then I tied up a little lock of my hair with a thread to keep witches away. But I hadnt no confidence. You do that when youve lost a horseshoe that youve found, instead of nailing it up over the door, but I hadnt ever heard anybody say it was any way to keep off bad luck when youd killed a spider [20; 8]. , , , , , - : , , , ; , , [19; 10]. this integrated sentence transfers the meaning of the original one more accurately. 2.5 AdditionShe worked me middling hard for about an hour, and then the widow made her ease up [20; 7]. , [19; 8]. ease up is translated into Russian like "" so to make adequate translation there is need to add some information. Well, likely it was minutes and minutes that there warnt a sound, and we all there so close together [20; 10]. , , , , [19; 11]. Tom he made a sign to me kind of a little noise with his mouth and we went creeping away on our hands and knees [20; 11]. , . [19; 12]. 2.6 OmissionShe said all a body would have to do there was to go around all day long with a harp and sing, forever and ever [20; 7]. , [19; 8]. I didnt need anybody to tell me that that was an awful bad sign and would fetch me some bad luck, so I was scared and most shook the clothes off of me [20; 8]. , , , , [19; 10].

CONCLUSION

Interlingual transformations exist in our language consciousness as some deviations from interlingual compliances perceived by us.

We came to conclusion that necessity in grammatical transformations appears only in first and second cases. The Russian language in comparison with English doesn't have such grammatical categories as article and gerund, and also such compound complexes as gerund, participle and infinitive constructions. Discrepancy or partial coincidence in meaning of corresponding forms and constructions require grammatical transformations. There can be partial discrepancy of number category, passive constructions, participle, infinitive, some differences in modality.

The first task of our paper was to give the notion and the general characteristics of the transformations in translation. Transformation is the techniques of logical thinking, when we disclose the value of foreign words in context and find their equivalents if the meaning does not coincide with the dictionary.

The second task was to reveal types of translation transformations. There is a big number of different classifications of translation transformations generally and grammatical transformations in particular. The most common classification belongs to Latishev:

1) Morphological replacement of a categorical form of a word;2) Syntax changed the syntactic functions of words and phrases;3) The style stylistic change of expressive means of text;4) Semantic a change not only the content of expressions, but the content itself, namely, those units that describe the situation;5) Mixed lexical-semantic and syntactic and morphological.

The third task was to observe main types of the grammatical transformations. In our paper we investigated different classification and came to conclusion that the most universal is Retsker's one. He divided grammatical transformations into word order change, sentence integration and fragmentation, conversion, transposition, addition and omission.

The fourth task was to analyze peculiarities of grammatical transformations usage on the basis of the literary text.

It is necessary to emphasize that subdivision of translation transformations is considerably approximate and relative. First, in a number of cases this or that transformation can be treated with identical success both as one, and as other type of elementary transformation. For example, in case of the translation from English into Russian typical replacement of conjunctional connection of clauses by the clauses without conjunctions can be characterized as conversion (one type of a syntactic link is replaced with another), and as omission (as thus there is an omission of the union which is available in the SL text). We came to conclusion that there is no dominant grammatical transformation. The most important that these types of translation transformations "in pure form" meet seldom in practice, usually they are combined with each other, accepting form of difficult, "complex" transformations.

Thereby the aim of our investigation, to investigate the problem of transformations in translation and to reveal peculiarities of the grammatical transformations usage in translation of the literary texts, was achieved.

BIBLIOGRAPHY1. . . ( ). ., . , 2005. 240 .2. . . . ., . , 2001. 250 c.3. . . . ., , 2007. 203 c.4. . . . English Russian. ., , 2001. 293 c.5. . . . ., 2005. 280 c.6. . . . . . ., 2003. 130 .

7. . . ., 2001. 84 c.8. . . , ., " ". 2009. 414 c.9. A course book on Military Translation. Moscow, 2002. 93 p.

10. Baker Mona. In other words. A course book on translation. L, 2002. 236 p.11. Barhudarov L.S. & Schteling D.A. English Grammar., M, 2005. 145 p.12. Biguenet John & Schulte Rainer. The Craft of Translation. NY., The University of Chicago Press., 2005. 596 p.

13. Comparative Politics. Washington State University Press, 1996. 68 p.

14. Fathy A. Osman. Senior interpreter/translator. Washington DC., IMF University Press. 2003. 98 p.

15. LaFeber Walter. America and Russian and the Cold War. 6th Edition. NY., Cornell University Press, 1991. 153 p.16. Malchevskaya L. Exercise book on translation of humanitarian texts. Saint P., 1980. 110 p.17. McGuire Basnett. Translation features. New York Publishing house 2000. 120 p.

18. Proshina Z. Theory of translation (English and Russian). Vladivostok., Far eastern university press., 2008. 275 p.

Practical resources19. . " " . ., 1958. 434 .

20. TwenM. "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" Electronic versionInternet resources

21. www.worldtranslationservice.com 22. www.translateweb.org 23. www.monabaker.trans.com 24. www.chicagopress.com

2