Надеяться

1. to wish but necessarily with expectation (возлагать надежду);

2. to wish (полагаться, хотеть);

3. to wish or require with strong expectation (рассчитывать, быть уверенным).

Hope

1. надеяться (to hope);

2. хотеть (to want);

3. ожидать (to expect);

4. ожидать с нетерпением (to look forward to).

The correct English translation will depend on the context and the force of the Russian. In the example, expect is clearly far too emphatic for the intention of the message. Another, even clearer, example of non-correspondence of semantic field is рука, for what in English is covered by the concepts of arm and hand. Translation from English to Russian requires disambiguation using co-text and context (the situation).

These examples are relatively straightforward, but Nida and Larson use such visual representations of semantic structure to describe much more complex words such as spirit which we mentioned above.

HIERARCHICAL STRUCTURING AND COMPONENTIAL ANALYSIS

At other times the problem is more one of locating an equivalent on the same level in the TL. This occurs where one language has a wider range of specific terms for a given semantic field operating at various levels. E. Nida gives the example of a series of motion verbs under the generic verb wove, which they ordered hierarchically:

Generic term move

Lower level walk, run, skip, hop, crawl

(more specific forms of move)

Lower level march, stroll

(more specific forms of walk)

The generic term is known as the superordinate and the lower level terms as hyponyms – their more specific meaning is included within the meaning of the superordinate. Here analysis contrasts elements in the same semantic area, particularly on the same semantic level. Walk involves motion, on foot, moving legs alternately while always keeping at least one foot in contact with the ground; run involves motion on foot, moving legs in 1-2,1-2 (left-right) fashion but not always keeping one foot on the ground, and so on. Both include the sense of motion, which can be described as a central or core component of meaning, and so can the use of the legs (or leg). But if we turn to the analysis of crawl we find that there is move­ment of legs and hands but not an upright posture, so this may cause us to modify what we consider to be central and what are supplementary features. Distinguishing run from skip would conversely require the addition of more clearly differentiated supplementary components.

Componential analysis

A technique of semantic analysis that examines the basic meaning components of a word and allows contrast with other terms in the same semantic field.

One of the prime elements of componential analysis is the notion of binary opposites: one sense of bachelor (a famous example in Katz and Fodor), would be: + (плюс) human, + (плюс) male, – (минус) married. This ‘principle of contrast in identifying mean­ing’ is crucial. It was initially used, and continues to have great currency, in anthropology for the mapping of kinship terms in different cultures.

CONNOTATIVE MEANING

The other area explored by E. Nida is connotative meaning (the emotional response evoked in the hearer). For instance, on various occasions in St John’s gospel, the Greek word gunai is translated as woman in the old King James Version but as mother in the New English Bible. The justification for this change is the positive connotation of the Greek, which, the translators felt, merited a similarly positive translation equivalent. This is a much more difficult area to investigate objectively. Nevertheless, Ch. Osgood did carry out an important study on what he terms ‘semantic space’, asking respondents to assess words according to dines of evaluation (good to bad), potency (strong to weak) and activity (active to passive).

E. Nida discusses aspects other than single words or idioms that carry connotative associations, including pronunciation (some accents are more prestigious than others), style and subject matter when translated into a radically different cultural context.

The nature of meaning and how to analyze and evaluate it is crucial for a translator working on a text and for a theorist who is assessing the transference of meaning. This unit has examined forms of ‘scientific’ analysis adapted from English linguistics for the purposes of assessing translation. These include disambiguation of refer­ential meaning through semantic structure analysis and componential analysis, and the gauging of connotative meaning using clines.