European International Journal of Philological Sciences
12
https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps
TYPE
Original Research
PAGE NO.
12-16
DOI
OPEN ACCESS
SUBMITED
09 June 2025
ACCEPTED
05 July 2025
PUBLISHED
07 August 2025
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue 08 2025
COPYRIGHT
© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.
Lexical-Semantic Problems
in Translating Financial
Terminology Between
English, Uzbek, And
Korean
Tojiyeva Kamola Ne’matjon kizi
National University of Uzbekistan named after Mirza Ulugbek, Teacher of
the Department of Foreign language and literature, Uzbekistan
Abstract
: In the era of global information exchange,
translating financial-engineering and economic terms
from English into languages with different linguistic
structures such as Korean and Uzbek presents
significant challenges. These challenges are shaped by
linguistic, cultural, historical, and political factors,
including phonetic systems, morphological structures,
and socio-political language policies. This paper
conducts a comparative lexical-semantic analysis of
financial terminology from Robert Kiyosaki’s Rich Dad
Poor Dad across English, Korean, and Uzbek. The study
evaluates translation strategies such as semantic
calque, loan-blend, transliteration, modulation, and
syntactic transformation. Findings highlight differences
in how historical borrowings, phonological adaptation,
and internal lexical resources shape terminological
adequacy and user accessibility. The paper concludes
with implications for translation theory and financial
discourse localization.
Keywords:
Financial terminology; semantic calque;
loan-blend; modulation; lexical adaptation; translation
strategies; Korean; Uzbek; Kiyosaki; comparative
translation.
Introduction:
The translation of financial terminology
into languages like Korean and Uzbek presents a unique
set of challenges and opportunities. Unlike English,
these target languages rely heavily on distinct
phonological systems, morphological structures, and
historical terminological layers. With globalization
pushing the boundaries of linguistic adaptation,
European International Journal of Philological Sciences
13
https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps
European International Journal of Philological Sciences
understanding how core financial terms such as asset,
liability, and portfolio income are localized is crucial for
ensuring terminological accuracy and conceptual
continuity. This study focuses on a comparative
analysis of terminological translation in Rich Dad Poor
Dad by Robert Kiyosaki, tracing how terms are
rendered across the three languages with emphasis on
lexical-semantics, syntactic adaptation, and cultural
adequacy [Kiyosaki, 1997; p. 13].
MAIN PART
Methodological Approach.
The
study
applies
a
descriptive-comparative
framework informed by Nida’s dynamic equivalence
theory [Nida, 1964, p. 120], Koller’s five
-layer
equivalence model [Koller, 1995, p. 191], and
Newmark’s communicative vs. semantic dichotomy
[Newmark, 1988, p. 45]. It identifies key financial terms
from the original English text and their equivalents in
officially published Korean and Uzbek translations.
Terms are analyzed for:
•
Semantic preservation
•
Syntactic alignment
•
Transliteration or transcription strategies
•
Cultural adaptation
•
Phonological naturalization
Analysis of Key Terminological Units:
Our home is our largest investment and our greatest
asset.”[Rich Dad Poor Dad. New York:
Plata Publishing,
1997- p. 12.]
“
우리
집은
우리가
가진
가장
큰
투자이자
최고의
자산이다
.”[
부자
아빠
가난한
아빠
, 2023- B. 21.]
“
Uyimiz
–
eng katta sarmoyamiz va eng yirik
aktivimiz.”[ Boy ota, Kambag‘al ota, 2016
- B.15.]
Asset (
자산
/ aktiv).
The term asset carries multiple
meanings: from accounting resources expected to
generate future economic value, to generalized
metaphors for advantage or intellectual capacity. In
Korean, asset is translated as
자산
(jasan), a Sino-
Korean term derived from classical Chinese
morphemes, thus forming a precise semantic calque
[Cho, 2010, p. 102]. In Uzbek, asset is rendered as aktiv,
a term borrowed via Russian phonetic transliteration.
Though technically accurate, the term may be obscure
for lay readers due to limited semantic transparency.
Adding explanatory synonyms such as boylik (wealth)
or mulk (property) may enhance communicative
adequacy [Abdullaeva, 2017, p. 47].
“
All of a sudden, they wake up and their liabilities
column is full of mortgage and credit-
card debt.”[Rich
Dad Poor Dad, 1997- p. 70.]
“
그러다
어느
날
일어나
보니
갖바기
부채
부분이
은행융자와
신용카드
빚으로
꽉
차
있다
.”[
부자
아빠
가난한
아빠
, 2023- B. 108.]
“Bir payt kelib, ular uyg‘onib, passiv ustuni ipoteka va
kredit kartalari qarzlari bilan to‘lib ketganini
ko‘rishadi.”[ Boy ota, Kambag‘al ota, 2016
- B.58.]
Credit Card (
신용카드
/ kredit kartalari).
The term
credit card illustrates hybrid strategies. Korean uses a
loan-blend
신용카드
(shinyong kadeu), combining
신용
(semantic calque of “credit”) and
카드
(phonetic
transcription of “card”) [Jang, 2016, p. 437]. Uzbek
adopts kredit kartalari, a morphologically integrated
form based on Russian transliterations with local
suffixation [Ataeva, 2023, p. 56].
“When my rich dad said, “The rich don’t work for
money. They have their money work for them, he was
talking about passive income and p
ortfolio income.”
[Rich Dad Poor Dad, 1997- p. 175.]
“
부자가
되는
비결은
근로
소득을
최대한
빨리
포트폴리오
소득이나
수동적
소득으로
바꾸는
데
있다
.” [
부자
아빠
가난한
아빠
, 2023- B. 404.]
“Boy otam dedi: ‘Boy bo‘lishning kaliti —
ishlab topilgan
daromadni imkon qadar tez portfel daromadiga yoki
passiv daromadga aylantirishdir.” [ Boy ota, Kambag‘al
ota, 2016- B.163.]
Portfolio Income (
포트폴리오
소득
/ portfel
daromadi).
Korean renders portfolio income as
포트폴리오
소득
, retaining the foreign phonology in
the first element and matching it with a native economic
term (so-deuk). This preserves both recognition and
meaning. Uzbek translates this as portfel daromadi,
where portfel is a historical loan from Russian
портфель, and daromad is native. This example
demonstrates how both loan-blends and naturalized
forms support semantic continuity [House, 2015, p. 73].
“
My capital gains of approximately $40,000 were placed
into a 1031 tax-
deferred exchange…”[Rich Dad Poor
Dad, 1997- p. 114.]
“
약
4
만
달러에
달하는
자본
이익은
1031
세금이연
교환에
넣었다
…” [
부자
아빠
가난한
아빠
, 2023- B.
155.]
“Tax 1031 bo‘yicha kapital daromadlarim (taxminan 40
ming $)ni boshqa aktivga o‘tkazdim…”[ Boy ota,
Kambag‘al ota, 2016
- B.87.]
European International Journal of Philological Sciences
14
https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps
European International Journal of Philological Sciences
Capital Gains (
자본
이익
/ kapital daromadlar).
Korean forms a semantic calque:
자본
이익
(jabon iik),
with Sino-Korean roots. Uzbek uses kapital
daromadlar, blending a borrowed lexical base (kapital)
with native morphology. This “external integration”
contrasts with Korean’s “internal integration” [Kang,
2007, p. 53].
“
The lower part of the diagram is a Balance Sheet
—
it’s supposed to balance assets against liabilities.” [Rich
Dad Poor Dad, 1997- p. 54.]
“
도표의
아래쪽은
대차대조표
(Balance Sheet)
로서
자산과
부채가
균형을
이루어야
한다
.” [
부자
아빠
가난한
아빠
, 2023- B. 69.]
“Chizmada pastgi qism balans jadvali bo‘lib, u aktiv va
majburiyatlar muvozanatini
ko‘rsatadi.” [ Boy ota,
Kambag‘al ota, 2016
- B.34.]
Balance Sheet (
대차대조표
/ balans jadvali).
Korean
employs a native compound
대차대조표
for balance
sheet, avoiding phonetic borrowing while preserving
the conceptual core. Uzbek uses balans jadvali, a
semantic calque containing balans (borrowed) and
jadval (native), illustrating the mixed heritage of
financial lexis in Uzbek [Musaev, 2008, p. 88].
“
The small-
cap stocks are used for fast growth.” [Rich
Dad Poor Dad, 1997- p. 112.]
“
저자는
빠른
성장을
위해
소형주
(
주식
)
를
활용한다
.” [
부자
아빠
가난한
아빠
, 2023- B. 149.]
“Tez o‘sish uchun men kichik kapitalizatsiyali
aksiyalardan foydalanaman.” [ Boy ota, Kambag‘al ota,
2016- B.86.]
Small-Cap Stocks (
소형주
/ kichik kapitalizatsiyali
aksiyalar).
Korean creates a semantic calque
소형주
,
using internal lexical resources. Uzbek applies a more
descriptive phrase: kichik kapitalizatsiyali aksiyalar,
which reflects a loan-blend plus derivational
adaptation (-li suffix) to naturalize the structure
[Crystal, 2003, p. 114].
“Often I ask people, “What is your business?” —
and
they say, “I’m a banker,” but they don’t own the bank.”
[Rich Dad Poor Dad, 1997- p. 79.]
“
당신
비즈니스가
무엇이냐
?”
고
물으면
,
사람들은
“
은행원입니다
”
라
답하지만
은행을
소유한
건
아니다
.” [
부자
아빠
가난한
아빠
, 2023- B. 103.]
“Men odamlardan “Sizning biznesingiz nima?” deb
so‘rasam, ular “men bankirman” deydi, lekin bank
ularnikimas.” [ Boy ota, Kambag‘al ota, 2016
- B.62.]
Business / Banker.
The word business is transliterated
in both languages (
비즈니스
/ biznes). However, banker
is translated semantically in Korean as
은행원
(“bank
worker”), while Uzbek uses bankirman, a blend of the
borrowed bankir and the native suffix -man, showing
syntactic and morphological integration [Bell, 1991, p.
122].
“The top part of the diagram is an income statement.”
[Rich Dad Poor Dad, 1997- p. 62.]
“
앞의
그림
중
위쪽은
손익
계산서다
.” [
부자
아빠
가난한
아빠
, 2023- B. 112.]
“Chizmada yuqoridagi qism foyda
-zarar hisobotini
ko‘rsatadi.” [ Boy ota, Kambag‘al ota, 2016
- B.83.]
Income Statement (
손익
계산서
/ foyda-zarar
hisoboti).
Both Korean (
손익
계산서
) and Uzbek (foyda-
zarar hisoboti) apply semantic calques. The Korean form
draws on Sino-Korean roots, while Uzbek uses native
Turkic words and a Russian loan (hisobot) to create a
functional equivalent [Turi, 1995, p. 71].
“
The poor and middle class acquire liabilities that they
think are assets.”
”
A liability is something that takes money out of my
pocket.” [Rich Dad Poor Dad, 1997
- p. 48.]
“
한
분은
이렇게
생각했다
. ‘
우리
집이
나에게는
가장
큰
투자이고
가장
큰
자산이다
.’
다른
한
분은
이렇게
생각했다
. ‘
우리
집은
부채이며
,
자기
집이
가장
큰
투자라고
생각하는
사람은
문제
있는
사람이다
.”
“
부채는
당신의
주머니에서
돈을
빼가는
것이다
.” [
부자
아빠
가난한
아빠
, 2023- B. 119.]
“Bir kuni mening kambag‘al otam: ‘Bizning uy eng ko‘p
pul sarflangan aktiv’ deb tushuntira boshladi. Men uning
fikriga qo‘shilmadim va ‘katta uy katta xarajatlar talab
qiladi, shu uchun passiv’ dedim.
Bir ota uyini aktiv desa,
ikkinchisi ‘passiv’ derdi.”
“
Passiv
—
bu sening cho‘ntagingdan pulni olib
chiqadigan narsa.” [ Boy ota, Kambag‘al ota, 2016
-
B.43.]
Liability / Passive (
부채
/ passiv).
Korean uses
부채
(buchae), a semantic equivalent, while Uzbek uses
passiv, a term from Russian economic discourse. Both
maintain conceptual equivalence, but differ in
transparency and linguistic familiarity [Vinay &
Darbelnet, 1995, p. 92].
“…
a piece of real estate that is sold for a capital gain
European International Journal of Philological Sciences
15
https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps
European International Journal of Philological Sciences
through an exchange for
a more expensive property.”
[Rich Dad Poor Dad, 1997- p. 142.]
“
부동산은
가치
상승
(
양도차익
)
시
1031
교환을
통해
세금을
미룬다
.” [
부자
아빠
가난한
아빠
, 2023-
B. 218.]
O‘zbek nashrida termin odatda “kapital oshishi”
sifatida izohlanadi, lekin toʻgʻridan
-
toʻgʻri birikma
ko‘rinishida uc
hramaydi; tarjima izohida keltirish
tavsiya etiladi: “…qo‘shma ko‘chmas mulk (real estate),
bu kapital qiymatining oshishi (capital gain) evaziga
yanada qimmat mulk bilan almashtiriladi.” [ Boy ota,
Kambag‘al ota, 2016
- B.150.]
Real Estate (
부동산
/ ko‘
chmas mulk).
Both languages
apply semantic calques:
부동산
in Korean (literally
“immovable property”), and ko‘chmas mulk in Uzbek.
This indicates the shared tendency to prioritize local
cognitive models when no phonetic borrowing is
necessary [Reiss & Vermeer, 1984, p. 63].
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The comparative findings indicate:
•
Korean translations heavily rely on Sino-
Korean lexicon to construct semantically precise and
syntactically compact financial terms.
•
Uzbek
translations
often
employ
a
combination of Russian borrowings and Turkic lexical
items, resulting in mixed-origin compounds.
•
Semantic calques are the dominant strategy in
both languages for core financial concepts such as
income statement, liability, and real estate.
•
Phonetic borrowings are preferred for
globalized lexical items (portfolio, business, credit
card) where recognition outweighs localization.
•
Loan-blends allow for flexible yet conceptually
anchored translations.
•
Modulation and descriptive paraphrasing are
used when literal equivalents risk ambiguity.
•
Syntactic transformation is applied in
accordance with typological norms (SVO in English,
SOV in Korean and Uzbek) [Baker, 1992, p. 57].
These strategies reflect a balance between preserving
conceptual
integrity
and
ensuring
local
comprehensibility, validating Newmark’s argument
that “translation is always a compromise between
foreignness and fluency” [Newmark, 1988, p. 10].
CONCLUSION
The lexical-semantic analysis of financial terminology
in English, Korean, and Uzbek reveals that while
universal equivalence is unattainable, context-
sensitive strategies enable translators to preserve both
accuracy and usability. Korean's access to a deep Sino-
lexical foundation facilitates the construction of precise
semantic calques. Uzbek, influenced by Russian and
international financial discourse, prefers hybrid models
blending phonetic loans and native morphemes. In both
cases, translation strategies such as calque, loan-blend,
modulation, and adaptation fulfill the dual goal of
terminological stability and reader accessibility. This
research contributes to a deeper understanding of
cross-linguistic financial communication and informs
best practices in translation pedagogy and terminology
standardization.
REFERENCES
Kiyosaki, R. (1997). Rich Dad Poor Dad. Warner Books.
Nida, E. A. (1964). Toward a Science of Translating. Brill.
Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. Prentice
Hall.
Koller, W. (1995). “The Concept of Equivalence and the
Object of Translation Studies.” Target, 7(2), 191–
222.
Crystal, D. (2003). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the
English Language. Cambridge University Press.
House, J. (2015). Translation Quality Assessment: Past
and Present. Routledge.
Bell, R. T. (1991). Translation and Translating: Theory
and Practice. Longman.
Vinay, J.-P., & Darbelnet, J. (1995). Comparative
Stylistics of French and English. John Benjamins.
Reiss, K., & Vermeer, H. J. (1984). Grundlegung einer
allgemeinen Translationstheorie. Niemeyer.
Turi, G. (1995). Descriptive Translation Studies and
Beyond. Benjamins.
Baker, M. (1992). In Other Words: A Coursebook on
Translation. Routledge.
Cho, H. S. (2010). “Translation Strategies in Korean
Financial Texts.” Asian Journal of Translation, 5(1), 98–
112.
Musaev, Q. M. (2008). Tilshunoslikka kirish. Toshkent:
O‘qituvchi.
Abdullaeva, Sh. N. (2017). “O‘zbek tilida iqtisodiy
terminlar tarjimasi muammolari.” Filologiya Masalalari,
3(21), 44
–
51.
Ataeva, N. S. (2023). O‘zbek tilida iqtisodiy
-moliyaviy
terminlarning tarjima strategiyalari. Samarqand:
Ma’rifat.
Kang, J. Y. (2007). Korean Terminology Formation and
Translation in Economic Discourse. Seoul: KERIS.
Jang, M. J. (2016). “Semantic Strategies in Loanword
Adaptation in Korean.” Linguistic Research, 33(3), 431–
456.
European International Journal of Philological Sciences
16
https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps
European International Journal of Philological Sciences
Shirinova, Ye. T. (2021). Tarjimashunoslik nazariyalari.
Toshkent: TDYU.
Kim, Y. S. (2005). “Morphological Adaptation in Korean
Loanwords.” Korean Linguistics, 14, 155–
178.
Lee, K. M., & Ramsey, S. R. (2000). A History of the
Korean Language. Cambridge University Press.
