Structure of the translation analysis model

Descriptive grammar units of any language are arranged in meaningful segments or patterns. One single case of these samples is called a ‘structure’. This is an abstract category that applies to all units in the grammar of the language (except, lowest in rank). It makes up the different ways in which one unit can be realized by the block following it. Sometimes, however, a unit can be understood by a unit higher than it. This phenomenon is known as the displacement of rank.

Languages show a significant number of differences in the implementation of similar structures existing in these languages and in the type of structures existing in each language. It is worth mentioning here that the difference between the deep representation of linguistic relations and their surface realization constitutes an important phase for the analysis of structural changes.

It is important to know that there are two ways to describe each structure. The first concerns the sequence of elements. The second has to do with the class of these elements. These two methods can be adopted for the sake of a more subtle analysis of microstructural changes.

In addition, it is necessary to distinguish between two types of variants implied in each element of the structure. On the one hand, one can freely choose, for example, between a singular nominal group and a multiple nominal group the original language, in order to realize the function “subject”. On the other hand, such freedom is absent in oral groups with past and future forms of time. This distinction can only be made, referring to the category ‘class’ and ‘system’ (see below). This constitutes another potential area for interlanguage microstructural changes.

It is necessary to distinguish between additional and mandatory elements that are part of the implementation of the structure. In English, for example, ‘root’ is an obligatory element in the structure of any word, while affixes are optional. When this is viewed in different directions, this difference leads to another potential area of ​​change. The Russian language, for example, shows more changes than English with respect to additional and mandatory elements in the structure of the unit ‘offer’. Indeed, interlingual micro structural changes are likely to occur in each unit that shows the structure, ie, all units except the lowest in rank.

Class

By ‘class’ is meant the grouping of the elements of a unit according to the way in which they operate in the structure of another subdivision, then higher in rank. In other words, a class refers to any set of items having the same operation capabilities in the structure of a particular unit.

The need to relate to this category in the analysis of interlingual micro changes comes from the fact that languages ​​differ in the limitations that they establish for the emergence of certain units in the structure of some other higher units. The elements of each unit are assigned the class name according to their potential ability to work in the structure of units that follow the one they refer to. Consequently, the more delicate the class, the wider the differences between languages ​​involved in comparison and more, the number of shifts will be.

System

By ‘system’ is meant a closed series of elements, among which a choice must be made. In fact, the terms available in each system in one language may have fundamental differences from the conditions of the same system in another language. This can be considered the main source of mandatory micro changes at this level of language description. It is worth noting that the translator is forced to link with the choice of the author of the text in the original language. Otherwise, his opinion will be erroneous. In cases where compatible conditions with the source system occur in the target system, an experienced interpreter of the translation bureau must bridge the gap with some other means.

The appearance of changes here can be made up by conditions existing in the system of individual languages. All the descriptive units required to describe a language are systemic in nature, this increases the possibility of such occurrence. They are understood through a certain choice of specific systems of that language. In fact, these options depend on the language, and their applicability is determined by three criteria. The first is given “in terms of the rank of the unit to which the system is applicable, and the second is defined in terms of the part the unit plays in the structure of the higher unit.” The third is indicated “in terms of other options that must be selected before the options of this system become available.”

It is necessary to emphasize the mutual integration of certain categories. In this connection, two types of structural surface relations can be formulated, namely, paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations.