T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
Introduction
Chapter I English predicate and its translation properties
1.1 Constituent analyses of the sentence
2.1 The predicate as a main part of the sentence
3.1 Complication of predicate and types of complications
Chapter II The ways and problems of translating predicate from English into Uzbek
1.2 The link-verbs in English and their translation into Uzbek and Russian
2.2 Transitivity of verbs and the problems of translating them into Uzbek and Russian languages
3.2 Predicate as the center of the sentence
Conclusion
The list of used literature
I N T R O D U C T I O N
Performing their semantic functions, words in an utterance form various syntagmatic connections with one another.
One should distinguish between syntagmatic groupings of notional words alone, syntagmatic groupings of notional words with functional words, and syntagmatic groupings of functional words alone.
Different combinations of notional words (notional phrases) have a clearly pronounced self-dependent nominative destination, they denote complex phenomena and their properties in their inter-connections, including dynamic inte-connections. Combinations of a notional word with a functional word are equivalent to separate words by their nominative function.
The actuality of our qualification paper is determined by the rise of interest of linguistics in the problems of the theory of translation and its interconnection with the theoretical grammar.
The purpose of the qualification paper is to reveal and establish the means of transforming predicate from English and Uzbek, with the comparison of Russian.
The tasks of the work includes:
· To reveal the properites of English predicate and the means of their expression
· To research into the interconnection of the predicate with the other parts of the sentence
· To determine and reveal the ways and problems of translating predicative constructions from English into Uzbek
Theoretical and practical significance of the work is that the material can be used in compiling theoretical lectures on the theory of translation and theoretical grammar, and the practical part can be used as a source in seminars on the above mentioned subjects.
The structure of the sentence. It consists of introduction, two chapters, conclusion and the list of used literature.
In the first chapter we deal with the theoretical base of predicate, its types and the means of forming them.
The second chapter is devoted to the ways and problems of translating the predicate constructions from English into Uzbek language.
C H A P T E R I
English predicate and its translation properties into Uzbek
C H A P T E R II
The ways and problems of translating predicate from English into Uzbek.
1.2 The link-verbs in English and their translation into Uzbek and Russian
In shaping the predicate the differences of language systems become apparent stronger and multilaterally than in shaping the subject. This is stipulated by the capacity and importance of the given part of the sentence.[5] Actually, the predicate bears greater number of grammatical relations than the subject does.
The object itself, about which we are talking can reveal itself i.e. determine itself really only through actions and functions which are expressed by the predicate. The predicate connects the doer with the object and the modifiers of the action. That is why the predicate is factual center, which gravitates and gathers subgroups of all parts of the sentence.
This happens in any language. But it is vividly seen in English, where one cannot omit any main parts of the sentence. Here it is indicative to compare Uzbek and English composite nominal predicate.
Mening akam - muhandis. - My brother is an engineer.
The predicate can be expressed by two types of verbs: verbs denoting action, and the verbs denoting existence and objective reality. The use of the verbs of the first group as a predicate does not differ greatly form the appropriate Uzbek verbs of action, that’s why we shall not stop at the predicate, expressed by the verb of action. We shall consider the verbs of the second group, which includes to be and to have, in the meaning and use of which it is observed essential divergence in comparison with the appropriate Uzbek bo’moq and ega bo’lmoq.
1. Verb to be
English verb to be corresponds to Uzbek verb ‘bo’moq’. In its main meaning ‘bor bo’moq’ as it is well-known, verb ‘ bo’moq’ is used in the past and future tenses, but in present tense it is usually omitted. But in English it is obligatory to use the copula verb in the present tense too. Compare the senetences:
Men honada edim.- I was in the room.
Men honada bo’laman.- I’ll be in the room.
Men honada. – I am in the room.
Except the present tense (omitting copula verb in Uzbek and its obligatory presence in English – generally, it is formal circumstance, connected with the different structure of two languages), here the use and the meaning of ‘to be’ coincide with ‘bo’lmoq’ too. But the similarity exhausts here. Verb ‘to be’ is much richer in its potential semantic possibilities than Uzbek ‘bo’lmoq’. Thus, depending on the context, it can obtain the meaning ‘the state in the space’, for example:
The book is on the table- Kitob stolda yotibdi. -Книга лежит на столе..
The table is in the middle of the room- Stol hona o’rtasida turibdi.- Стол стоит посреди комнаты.
The picture is on the wall- Sur’at devorda osilib turibdi.- Картина висит на стене.
Let’s look at some more important of its numerous meanings:
1. “bo’lmoq, qatnashmoq”
She’ll be here all the day- U bu yerda butun kun davomida bo’ladi.
Kitty was here for the holidays.- Kiti bu yerga ta’til payti kelgan edi.
John was at the meeting, too. – Jon ham majlisda qatnashdi.
2. ‘ sodir bo’lmoq, bor bo’lmoq’
It was only last year.- But faqat o’tgan yili sodir bo’lgan edi.
3. ‘teng bo’lmoq, tashkil etmoq’
Twice two is four.- Ikki kara ikki to’rtga teng.
4. ‘turadi (narxlar haqida)’
How much is the hat? – Bu shlyapa qancha turadi?
5. 'iborat bo’lmoq'
The trouble was we did not know her address.- Muammo shundan iborat ediki biz uning manzilgohini bilmagan edik.- Беда состояла в том, что мы не знали ее адреса.
In prefect forms to be acquires the meaning ‘tashrif buyurmoq, borib turmoq’
I hear you've been to Switzerland this summer. – Mening eshitishimcha sen Shvetsariyaga borib kelibsan. -Я слышал, вы ездили в Швейцарию летом.
Has anyone been?- Kimdir kelgan edimi?- Кто-нибудь заходил?
I've been for a walk. – Men sayr qilib kelgan edim-Я прогулялся.
The verb to be in definite word combinations can acquire other meanings too:
Mr Black and Mr White were at school together when they were boys.- Janob Blek va Janob Uaytlar bolaliklarida bitta maktabda o’qishgan.- В детстве м-р Блэк и м-р Уайт учились в одной школе.
Are the boys in bed? –Bolalar uhlashayaptimi?-Мальчики спят?
In English a number of stable combinations with the verb to be were formed, which are translated into Uzbek and Russian as a rule by the combinations of the verbs of action. For example:
Не was ill at ease. – U uzini noqulay his qilardi.-Он чувствовал себя неловко.
Are you in earnest? –Siz jiddiy gapirayapsizmi?-Вы говорите серьезно?
Yossarian was as bad at shooting skeet as he was at gambling. He could never win money gambling either. Even when he cheated he couldn't win, because the people he cheated against were always better at cheating too. –Iossaryan huddi qartalarda uynaganidek likopchalarni ham yomon nishonga olardi. U hech qachon yuta olmasdi, hattoki qalloblik qilgan taqdirda ham, chunki u aldashga uringan odamlar, qalloblik bo’yicha undan ustun edilar.- Иоссарьян так же плохо стрелял по тарелкам, как и играл в карты. Ему никогда не удавалось выиграть. Он не мог выиграть, даже когда мошенничал, потому что люди, которых он пытался обмануть, превосходили его и в мошенничестве.
In these last combinations to be loses its independent meaning keeping only the function of copula verb. This happens in all composite nominal predicates, expressed by the combination of the verb ‘to be+ noun/ adjective/ postposition’ and so on.
Let’s stop in our statement at some word combinations with the verb to be, omitting word combinations of to be with nouns like he is a turner, the task is easy and so оn, which have been spoken enough about in the grammar of English language and which do not represent any difficulty for mastering, for they have little difference from the appropriate Uzbek and Russian word combinations. We shall pay attention to individual word combinations with to be, particularly characteristic to English language and that’s why they are of special interest for us. It is well-known, what meaning the postpositions possess in English. With the help of postpositions, which join a number of more often used English verbs, which enter the main vocabulary fund (to do, to go, to come, to make, to put, to give, to take and so on), the verbs with new meanings are formed. But when adding the postposition to the verbs of action the meaning of initial verb in the combination is either kept equally with the meaning of the added postposition, or the formed word combination acquires idiomatic meaning, and when adding the postposition to the verb to be the main semantic burden is carried by the postposition. For example:
Is Mr Brown in? – Janob Braun uydalarmi?-М-р Браун дома?
No, he is out.- Yo’q u chiqib ketdilar- Нет, его нет. (Он вышел.)
Mr Brown is away at present. – Hozir Janob Braun safarda.- В настоящее время м-р Браун в отъезде.
I hear Mr Brown is back. – Eshitishimcha janob Braun qaytib kelganmish- Я слышал, м-р Браун вернулся.
I am through with my work. – Men ishimni tugatdim-Я закончил работу.
Many of these postpositions are polysemantic.
The train is off. – Poezd ketdi.-Поезд ушел.
The meeting was off. Majlis o’tkazilmadi.-Собрание не состоялось.
The lights were on. –Chiroqlar yoqildi.-Свет был включен.
What is on at our cinema?- Kinoteatrda hozir nima ketyapti?- Что идет в нашем кинотеатре?
The children are not up yet. – Bolalar hali turishmadi.-Дети еще не встали.
The prices for foodstuffs were up. – Iste’mol mollari narhi ko’tarildi. -Цены на продовольственные товары повысились.
Your time is up. –Sizga ajratilgan vaqt tugadi.-Ваше время истекло.
Dictionary records a large number of stable word combinations with postpositions: to be about to do smth.- -moqchi (rejalashtirilgan ish harakat)- собираться, намереваться сделать что-л.;
to be up to smth.- boshlab qo’ymoq-замышлять, затевать что-л.;
to be up to smb. – bog’liq bo’lmoq-зависеть от кого-л.,.
to be for (some place) – yo’lga chiqmoq-отправляться, ехать куда-л and so on.
One can notice how wider English to be is used than Uzbek ‘bo’lmoq’ and Russian ‘быть’. This is very evident in a number of cases where Englishmen prefer composite nominal predicate, which consists of copula verb ‘to be’ and an adjective or participle I or II which have the meaning of appropriate verb, to simple verbal predicate. For example:
Still she was hesitant. (instead was hesitating) –U hali ham ikkilanayotgan edi. -Она все еще колебалась.
Не felt that everyone disapproved of Scarlett and was contemptuous of him. (instead contempted him) – U atrofdagilar Skarletni hush ko’rmasliklarini undan esa hazar qilishlarini his qilardi. -Он чувствовал, что все вокруг не одобряют Скарлетт и презирают его.
These visits were disappointing. – Bu tashriflar uni hafsalasini pir qildi.-Эти визиты разочаровывали (ее).
She was shocked and unbelieving. –U dovdirab qoldi va bunga ishonmasdi.-Она была поражена и не верила этому.
Are you insulting, young man? – Siz, yigitcha, meni haqorat qilmoqchimiz?- Вы что, хотите оскорбить меня, молодой человек?
As it is clearly seen from the examples, the combination of the link- verb to be with the adjective or participle I or II is equal to the appropriate verb (ikkilanmoq, hazar qilmoq and etc.), using which we translate the given word combination into Uzbek and Russian.
The usability of this form led to the origin in the speech of such stable word combinations with to be. For example:
I am serious. – Men jiddiy gapiryapman.-Я говорю серьезно.
She was giddy. – Uning boshi aylandi.У нее закружилась голова.
Don't be so literal. – Hamma narsani aytilganday tushinmang.-He понимайте все буквально.
Не was homesick. – U uyini qumsardi.-Он тосковал по дому.
The second, i.e. nominal element of the given type of predicate can be Participle II as well, for example:
She was amazingly well read. – U haddan tashqari ko’p o’qigan edi.- Она была исключительно начитана.
Moreover, fuzzy differentiation of transitive and intransitive verbs broadened the frameworks of using participles II as a part of the second element of the composite nominal predicate, so it has become possible to use in analogous function the participle II of intransitive verbs too, which is found in Uzbek and Russian:
Now, of course, all you gentlemen are well-travelled. – Albatta, janoblar hammalaringiz ko’p syohat qilgansizlar.-Конечно, все вы, джентльмены, много путешествовали.
She is well-connected. – Uning yahshi tanishlari bor. - У нее прекрасные связи.
Не was well-mounted. – Uning yahshi oti bor edi. -У него была прекрасная лошадь.
In spite of the fact that these are passive constructions according to their form, the subject does not designate the object of the action. On should make a slip in speaking that combinations «to be + participle II» from intransitive verbs in the functions of composite nominal predicate are not frequent. Link- verb to be in the combination with the adjective or the participle as a part of composite nominal predicate force out other link- verbs, which are more appropriate by meaning in this or that context: to get, to turn, to grow and so on, which transform dynamics of the action, transmission from one state into another, for example:
She was hot with sudden rage. - Un to’satdan jahli chiqib ketdi. - Ее внезапно охватила ярость.
Rhett's eyes were sharp with interest.- Ret ko’zlarida qiziqish uchqunlari chaqnab ketdi. - В глазах Рета вспыхнул интерес.
He's lived here only since the year we were married. – U bu yerda faqat biz turmush qurganimizdan beri yashamoqda.Он живет здесь лишь с того года, когда мы поженились.
In some cases to be in theses combinations comes with the meaning of the verbs like to keep, to feel and so on:
Suddenly she was sorry for him. – U unga nisbatan achinishni his qildi.- Вдруг она почувствовалажалость к нему.
She was silent a moment.-U bir oz fursat jimlik saqladi.- Она помолчала с минуту.
For a moment she was indignant that he should say other women were prettier, more clever and kind than she. –Bir fursatga u uning boshqa ayollar unga qaraganda go’zalroq, aqilliroq va mehribonroq degan so’zlaridan uzini noqulay sezdi.-На какое-то мгновение она почувствовала негодование оттого, что он сказал, что другие женщины красивее, умнее и добрее ее.
At last we have to stop at the combinations «to be + noun- doer» (player, reader and etc.), formed from the appropriate verb. It transforms constant quality, intrinsic to this man. For example:
Не is a good swimmer. – U yahshi suzadi.-Он хорошо плавает.
What a small eater you are!- Munch ham kam eysan!- Как мало ты ешь!
Stable idiomatic expressions of this type were formed as well:
to be a poor sailor – dengizda uzini yomon his qilmoq- плохо переносить качку на море,
to be a poor correspondent – yozishni yomon ko’rmoq-не любить писать письма,
to be a stranger- biror joyga kamroq borib turmoq- редко бывать где-л.
2. The verb to have
The verb to have like to be is wider according to its meanings then Uzbek verb “ega bo’lmoq” and Russian “иметь”. Potential possibility of action is put in it like the verb to be.
Магу has a pencil in her hand. (together with : Mary is holding a pencil in her hand.) Meri qo’lida qalam ushalb turibdi.-Мэри держит в руке карандаш.
The city has 100,000 inhabitants. -Shahar aholisi 100000 kishini tashkil qiladi.- Население города составляет 100 000 человек.
In such kind of sentences when the subject– acting person is available, the construction ‘there is’ is also possible.
There is a pencil in her hand.
We haven't any coffee in the house. = There isn't any coffee in the house.
However the verb to have can be used not only with the subject, expressed by the noun, denoting person (the meaning of the verb itself – possession- presupposes it), but it can be used in relation to the objects too. In such cases its meaning is identical to the meaning of the construction of ‘there is’, and they are interchangeable. For example:
Some houses had quite wide grass round them. = There was quite wide grass round some houses.
Jack's eager conspirator voice seemed very close to his ear, and it had a kind of caress, a sort of embrace. = ...there was a kind of caress, a sort of embrace in Jack's voice.
To have, analogous with the verb to be, though more seldom, is used as a link-verb in composite predicate. This can be seen in such word combinations with nouns as как to have dinner- tushlik qilmoq- обедать, to have a talk –gaplashmoq-поговорить, to have a quarrel- urishib qolmoq- поссориться, to have a rest- dam olmoq- отдыхать, to have a walk –sayr qilmoq-прогуляться, to have a smoke – chekmoq-покурить, to have a good time- vaqtni yahshi o’tkazmoq хорошо провести время and etc. The verb to have loses its main meaning and serves as only indication for using something only once, committing any limited action.
If one looks carefully at these cases of using the verbs to be and to have and takes into account their active presence in English, then he cannot leave it unnoticed the manifestation of systematic peculiarities of English language. Actually, Englishman can say to rest, but he nevertheless prefers complicated form — to have a rest. The main point is that, in any verb, expressing concrete action and reflecting definite qualitative side of the action or state the quantitative side, the very fact of this action is included. Analytical tendency of English generate the aspiration to separate formal expression of general and concrete, qualitative and quantitative side of these actions. And then, naturally the composite predicate with the verb to have and nominal expression of quality (adjective, participle, noun) replaces the concrete verb.
A number of stable word combinations with the verb to have were formed which are translated into Uzbek and Russian with the help of action verbs in English. For example:
She has a perfect command of English. U Ingliz tilini mukammal egalagan.-Она прекрасно владеет английским языком.
I wish you to have a good time. Sizga vaqtingizni yahshi o’tkazishingizni tilayman. -Желаю вам хорошо провести время (повеселиться).
In conclusion we should state that as the verb to be with adjectives, participles, or nouns acquires the meaning of the appropriate verb, so the verb to have in the combination with the noun is often used instead of simple verbal predicate, expressed by the action verb. For example:
But if they were under the impression that they would get any information out of him he had a notion that they were mistaken.- Но если им казалось, что им удастся выудить из него какие-то сведения, то он считал, что они ошибаются.
Не had a longing to smoke. – Uni juda ham chekkisi kelyapti.-Ему страшно хотелось курить.
But this kind of word combinations is less frequent than with the verb to be.
C O N C L U S I O N
Our qualification paper deals with the problems of the theory of translation and the theoretical grammar, and it was carried out at the interfaces between these two subjects, which shows their close connection.
The object of investigation was English predicate, its properties and the way of transforming it into Uzbek language, but we have also touched Russian.
In general while translating the predicate there are not any difficulties, if the predicate is expressed by the action verbs, therefore we have taken the most interesting and significant, and at the same time causing problems for the translator parts of the predicate, that is the link- verbs, to be and to have. Besides being a link verb they fulfill a greater number of functions, sometimes forming idiomatic expressions. Generally to be is not translated into Uzbek in present tense, but in the future and in the past tenses it appears. We have revealed the cases when one should use action verbs in translation. The same is with the verb to have, which besides its main meaning “ega bo’lmoq” have a number of different meanings, and most of them are idiomatic.
In the first chapter we have looked through the theoretical base of the predicate, the structure of the sentence, the interrelations of the predicate with other parts of the sentence and one problem that is typical to the predicate, its complication features. We have also discussed the types of complications.
As the main part of the sentence the predicate is in the center of attention, and there are many tasks and problems concerning it, and the research into it will be continued. And in our qualification paper we just tried to combine these all and approach to it from not only theoretical, but also from practical point of view.
Literature in Uzbek
1. Буранов Ж. Инглиз тили грамматикаси. Тошкент, 1974 (351бет)
2. Турсунов У. Ҳозирги Ўзбек адабий тили. Тошкент, 1992 (399 бет)
3. Абдурахмонов Г. Ўзбек тили ва адабиёти. Тошкент, 2002 (350 бет)
Literature in Russian
1. Ахманова О.С. и др. Современные синтаксические теории. М., 1963 (256ст.)
2. Аполлова М.А. Специфический английский язык (грамматические трудности перевода) М., 1977 (246ст.)
3. Бархударов Л.С. Структура простого предложения современного английского языка. М., 1966 (340ст.)
4. Бархударов Л.С. и др. Грамматика английского языка. М.,1973 (590ст.)
5. Блох М.Я. Вопросы изучения грамматического строя языка. М., 1976 (378ст.)
6. Бурлакова В.В. Основы структуры словосочетания в современном английском языке. Л., 1975 (235ст.)
7. Воронцова Г.Н. Очерки по грамматике английского языка. М., 1960 (345ст.)
8. Денисенко Ю. О некоторых проблемах выбора слова в русско-английском переводе. «Тетради переводчика» №8, М., 1971
9. Иванова И.П. Вид и время в современном английском языке. Л., 1961 (345ст.)
10. Иванова И.П. и др. Теоретическая грамматика современного английского языка. М., 1981 (567ст.)
11. Кошевая И.Г. Грамматический строй современного английского языка. М., 1978 (356ст.)
12. Кутузов Л. Практическая грамматика английского языка. М.,1998 (600 ст.)
13. Каушанская В.Л. и др. Грамматика английского языка. Л. 1963 (567ст.)
14. Левицкая Т.Р., Фитерман А.М. Проблемы перевода. М., 1976. (67ст.)
15. Левицкая Т.Р., Фитерман А.М. Глаголы адвербиального значения и их перевод на русский язык. «Тетради переводчика», №2 М., 1964
16. Левицкая Т.Р., Фитерман А.М. Теория и практика перевода с английского языка на русский. М.,1963 (158ст.)
17. Прозоров В.Г. Основы теории и практики перевода с английского языка на русский. М., 1999 (221ст.)
Literature in English
1. Akhmanova O. et.al. Syntax: Theory and Method. Moscow, 1972 (256p)
2. Allen W.S. Living English Structure. Longmans, 1960 (270p)
3. Alksnis I. The Hazards of Translation. Geneva, 1980 (300p)
4. Blokh M.Y. A Course in Theoretical English Grammar. Moscow ‘Visshaya shkola’1983 (383p)
5. Close R.O. A Reference Grammar for Students of English. Ldn., 1967 (450p)
6. Chukovsky K. A High Art: the art of translation. USA,1984 (243p)
7. Deyeva I.M. Lexico-Grammatical Difficulties of English. Leningrad, 1976 (278p)
8. Ganshina M.A. English Grammar.Higher School Publishing House, 1964 (548p)
9. Gordon E.M. A Grammar of Present-day English M., 1974 (437p)
10. Graham J. Difference in Translation, Ithaca, 1985 (340p)
11. Francis W.N. The Structure of American English. New York, 1978 (283p)
12. Hill A.A. Introduction to Linguistic Structures. N.Y., 1958 (435p)
13. Holman M. Translation or Transliteration? Sofia, 1985 (235p)
14. Ilyish B. The Structure of Modern English. Leningrad, 1972
15. Koshevaya I.G. The Theory of English Grammar. Moscow “Prosvesheniye”, 1982 ()
16. Khaimovich B.S. A Course in English Grammar. Moscow,1967 (298p)
17. Morokhovskaya M. Fundamentals of Theoretical Grammar. Moscow, 1985 (367p)
18. Newmark, Peter. A Textbook of Translation. Phoenix, London, 1995 (291p)
19. Quirk R. The Use of English. London, 1984 (289p)
20. Quirk R. A Grammar of Contemporary English. London, 1972 (358p)
21. Rayevska N.M Modern English Grammar. Kiev, 1976 (304p)
22. Strang B. Modern English Structure. London, 1974 (299p)
23. Schibsbye Knud. A Modern English Grammar. Oxford,1970 (346p)
24. Toury G. In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv,1980 (289p)
25. Wilss W. The Science of Translation. Tubingen, 1982 (178p)
26. Zandvoort R.W. A Handbook of English Grammar. Longman,1958 (345p)
27. http://www.indiana.edu/~easc/resources/working_paper/noframe_2b_recen.htm
28. http://www.google.com/search?q=Theory+of+Predicate&hl=en&lr=
29. http://www.pupress.princeton.edu/predicate and their use/chap4.pdf
30. http://www.poetrymagic.co.uk/literary-theory/a-summing-up.html
[1] Blokh M.Y. A Course in Theoretical English Grammar. Moscow, 1983, p 236
[2] see Иванова И.П., Бурлакова В.В. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка. М, 1981, ст.181
[3] Иванова И.П., Бурлакова В.В. Теоретическая грамматика современного английского языка. М, 1981, ст.187
[4] Example is taken from «Теоретическая грамматика современного английского языка» Иванова Л.П., Бурлакова В.В. ст 192
[5] Apollova M.A. Specific English (grammatical problems of translation) M, 1977, p29
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
Introduction
Chapter I English predicate and its translation properties
1.1 Constituent analyses of the sentence
2.1 The predicate as a main part of the sentence
3.1 Complication of predicate and types of complications
Chapter II The ways and problems of translating predicate from English into Uzbek
1.2 The link-verbs in English and their translation into Uzbek and Russian
2.2 Transitivity of verbs and the problems of translating them into Uzbek and Russian languages
3.2 Predicate as the center of the sentence
Conclusion
The list of used literature
I N T R O D U C T I O N
Performing their semantic functions, words in an utterance form various syntagmatic connections with one another.
One should distinguish between syntagmatic groupings of notional words alone, syntagmatic groupings of notional words with functional words, and syntagmatic groupings of functional words alone.
Different combinations of notional words (notional phrases) have a clearly pronounced self-dependent nominative destination, they denote complex phenomena and their properties in their inter-connections, including dynamic inte-connections. Combinations of a notional word with a functional word are equivalent to separate words by their nominative function.
The actuality of our qualification paper is determined by the rise of interest of linguistics in the problems of the theory of translation and its interconnection with the theoretical grammar.
The purpose of the qualification paper is to reveal and establish the means of transforming predicate from English and Uzbek, with the comparison of Russian.
The tasks of the work includes:
· To reveal the properites of English predicate and the means of their expression
· To research into the interconnection of the predicate with the other parts of the sentence
· To determine and reveal the ways and problems of translating predicative constructions from English into Uzbek
Theoretical and practical significance of the work is that the material can be used in compiling theoretical lectures on the theory of translation and theoretical grammar, and the practical part can be used as a source in seminars on the above mentioned subjects.
The structure of the sentence. It consists of introduction, two chapters, conclusion and the list of used literature.
In the first chapter we deal with the theoretical base of predicate, its types and the means of forming them.
The second chapter is devoted to the ways and problems of translating the predicate constructions from English into Uzbek language.
C H A P T E R I
English predicate and its translation properties into Uzbek
Дата: 2019-05-29, просмотров: 270.