Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная
лингвистика
и
лингводидактика
–
Foreign
Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Journal home page:
https://inscience.uz/index.php/foreign-linguistics
Problems of translating phraseological units: from English
to Uzbek
Sabinabonu MUYINJONOVA
1
Samarkand State Institute of Foreign Languages
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Article history:
Received April 2025
Received in revised form
10 April 2025
Accepted 2 May 2025
Available online
25 June 2025
Translating phraseological units (PUs), such as idioms,
proverbs, and fixed expressions, from English to Uzbek poses
significant challenges due to linguistic, cultural, and semantic
differences between the two languages. This article examines
key problems, including the lack of direct equivalents, cultural
specificity, and structural mismatches. Drawing on comparative
analysis and examples, it discusses translation strategies like
substitution, paraphrasing, and descriptive explanation. The
study highlights the need for cultural competence in translation
to preserve meaning and idiomatic essence. Findings suggest
that while some PUs have partial equivalents, many require
adaptive approaches to avoid loss of connotation.
2181-3701
/©
2025 in Science LLC.
https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-3701-vol3-iss6
This is an open-access article under the Attribution 4.0 International
(CC BY 4.0) license (
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.ru
Keywords:
Phraseological units,
idioms,
translation strategies,
cultural equivalence,
semantic opacity,
English-Uzbek translation,
linguistic differences,
cross-cultural
communication,
figurative language,
translation challenges.
Frazeologik birlikmalarni ingliz tilidan o‘zbek
tiliga
tarjima qilishdagi muammolar
ANNOTATSIYA
Kalit so‘zlar
:
Frazeologik birliklar,
idiomalar,
tarjima strategiyalari,
madaniy ekvivalentlik,
semantik noaniqlik,
ingliz-
o‘zbek tarjimasi,
lisoniy farqlar,
madaniyatlararo muloqot,
majoziy til,
tarjima muammolari.
Ingliz tilidan o‘zbek tiliga frazeologik birliklarni (FB),
xususan, idiomalar, maqollar va turg‘un iboralarni tarjima qilish
ikki til o‘rtasidagi lisoniy, madaniy va ma’noviy tafovutlar
tufayli jiddiy qiyinchiliklarni keltirib chiqaradi. Ushbu maqolada
to‘g‘ridan
-
to‘g‘ri muqobillarning yo‘qligi, madaniy o‘ziga xoslik
va tuzilmaviy nomuvofiqliklar kabi asosiy muammolar ko‘rib
chiqiladi. Qiyosiy tahlil va misollardan foydalanib, o‘rin
almashtirish, qayta ifodalash va tavsifiy tushuntirish kabi
tarjima usullar
i muhokama qilinadi. Tadqiqot ma’no va
idiomatik mohiyatni saqlab qolish uchun tarjimada madaniy
1
Student, Samarkand State Institute of Foreign Languages. E-mail: muyinjonovasabina04@gmail.com
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
6 (2025) / ISSN 2181-3701
264
bilimdonlik zarurligi ta’kidlanadi. Natijalar shuni ko‘rsatadiki,
ba’zi FBlar qisman muqobillarga ega bo‘lsa
-
da, ko‘pchiligi
ma’no nozikliklarini yo‘qotmaslik
uchun moslashuvchan
yondashuvlarni talab etadi.
Проблемы перевода фразеологических единиц: с
английского на узбекский язык
АННОТАЦИЯ
Ключевые слова:
фразеологические
единицы,
идиомы,
стратегии перевода,
культурная
эквивалентность,
семантическая
непрозрачность,
англо
-
узбекский перевод,
языковые различия,
межкультурная
коммуникация,
образный язык,
трудности перевода
.
Перевод фразеологических единиц (ФЕ), таких как идиомы,
пословицы и устойчивые выражения, с английского на
узбекский язык представляет собой значительную сложность
из
-
за лингвистических, культурных и семантических
различий между двумя языками. В данной статье
рассматриваются ключевые проблемы, включая отсутствие
прямых эквивалентов, культурную специфику и структурные
несоответствия. Опираясь на сравнительный анализ и
примеры, рассматриваются такие стратегии перевода, как
субституция, парафразирование и описательное объяснение.
В исследовании подчеркивается необходимость культурной
компетентности при переводе для сохранения смысла и
идиоматической сущности. Результаты показывают, что, хотя
некоторые ФЕ имеют частичные эквиваленты, многие
требуют адаптивных подходов, чтобы избежать потери
коннотации.
INTRODUCTION
Phraseological units are integral to language, encapsulating cultural nuances,
historical contexts, and metaphorical meanings that extend beyond literal
interpretations. In translation studies, PUs from English to Uzbek present unique
difficulties because English belongs to the Germanic language family, while Uzbek is
Turkic, leading to divergent syntactic structures and semantic frameworks. These units
often derive from specific cultural experiences, making direct translation ineffective or
misleading. For instance, English idioms like "kick the bucket" (meaning to die) may not
have a straightforward Uzbek counterpart, requiring translators to navigate between
fidelity to the source and naturalness in the target language.
This article explores the primary problems in translating English PUs into Uzbek,
supported by examples and theoretical insights. It aims to contribute to translation
pedagogy and practice in multilingual contexts like Uzbekistan, where English-Uzbek
translation is increasingly vital for literature, media, and diplomacy.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Scholarly work on translating PUs emphasizes cultural and linguistic barriers.
Baker (2018) discusses equivalence in translation, noting that non-literal meanings in
idioms complicate cross-linguistic transfer. Newmark (1988) classifies translation
strategies for idioms, including literal translation, substitution, and omission when no
equivalent exists.
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
6 (2025) / ISSN 2181-3701
265
In the context of English-Uzbek translation, studies highlight specific challenges.
For example, research on somatic PUs (those involving div parts) reveals mismatches
in metaphorical usage between the languages. Comparative analyses of idioms show that
while some share universal themes (e.g., animal-related expressions), others are culture-
bound, leading to semantic loss. Uzbek scholars like Nabieva (2017) examine equivalents,
stressing the role of national coloring in PUs. Recent works also address globalization's
impact, where borrowed English idioms enter Uzbek but often retain foreign
connotations.
PROBLEMS IN TRANSLATION
Cultural Specificity.
One major issue is the cultural embeddedness of PUs. English
idioms often draw from Western history, religion, or folklore, which may not resonate in
Uzbek culture, influenced by Central Asian traditions and Islam. For example, "when pigs fly"
(indicating impossibility) references pigs' unclean status in some cultures, but in Uzbek, a
direct translation (“cho‘chqalar uchganda”) might confuse due to different animal
symbolism. Instead, equivalents like "osmondan yulduz uzib tushsa" (when a star falls from
the sky) are used, but this requires cultural adaptation to avoid alienating readers.
Semantic Ambiguity and Non-Literal Meaning. PUs are semantically opaque; their
meanings cannot be deduced from individual components. Literal translation often
results in nonsense or altered connotations. Take "spill the beans" (reveal a secret):
A verbatim Uzbek rendering (
“
loviyalarni to
‘
kib yubormoq
”
) loses the idiomatic sense,
necessitating paraphrasing as
“
sirni oshkor qilmoq
”
. This ambiguity is exacerbated in
proverbs, where English "every cloud has a silver lining" (optimism in adversity)
translates to
“
har bir bulutning kumush cheti bor
”
, but Uzbek prefers "yomonlikdan
yaxshilik chiqadi," altering the imagery.
Structural and Linguistic Differences. English and Uzbek differ in grammar and
word order, affecting PU translation. English idioms are often verb-initial (e.g., "bite the
bullet"
–
endure hardship), while Uzbek equivalents may be noun-focused. For instance,
"break a leg" (good luck) becomes
“
ishing o
‘
ngidan kelsin
”
in Uzbek, shifting from
imperative to wishful structure.
Collocations like “black market” translate directly as
“qora bozor”
,
but others, such as “red tape” (bureaucracy), require explanation as
“qizil
lenta" fails to convey meaning, leading to “ortiqcha byurokratiya.”
Problem Type
Description
Example
(English PU)
Uzbek Translation Issue
Cultural
Specificity
Rooted in source culture
without target equivalent
"When pigs
fly"
No pig-related impossibility idiom;
substitute with star-falling metaphor
Semantic
Ambiguity
Meaning not literal; risk of
misinterpretation
"Spill the
beans"
Literal translation nonsensical;
paraphrase needed
Structural
Differences
Grammar/word order
mismatch
"Bite the
bullet"
Verb-initial vs. noun-focused; adapt
to natural Uzbek flow
Strategies to Overcome Challenges. Translators employ various methods to
address these issues. Substitution uses Uzbek equivalents where possible, e.g., “once in a
blue moon” (rarely) as “qizil oyda bir marta.” Paraphrasing explains the meaning
descriptively, useful for culture-specific units. Descriptive translation combines
explanation with adaptation, as in translating "kick the bucket" as "oyog'ini cho'zmoq"
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
6 (2025) / ISSN 2181-3701
266
(stretch one's legs, meaning die). In literature, hybrid approaches preserve stylistic
effects.
DISCUSSION
The analysis of phraseological unit (PU) translation from English to Uzbek reveals
that linguistic differences alone do not account for the complexity of the task; cultural
and cognitive factors are equally influential. The comparative examples in this study
demonstrate that many PUs are culture-bound, drawing on imagery, historical events, or
social practices that are unfamiliar to Uzbek audiences. This reinforces the view,
supported by Baker (2018) and Newmark (1988), that translation of idioms is as much
an act of cultural negotiation as it is a linguistic operation.
The problem of semantic opacity
–
where the meaning of an idiom cannot be
deduced from its components
–
further complicates direct translation. Even in cases
where partial equivalents exist, subtle connotative differences may lead to shifts in tone,
register, or imagery. For instance, while “spill the beans” and “sirni oshkor qilmoq” both
denote revealing a secret, the metaphorical background differs, with the English version
carrying a more informal, even playful, nuance.
Structural disparities between the two languages also play a critical role. English
idioms often follow syntactic patterns that do not exist in Uzbek, requiring grammatical
restructuring in translation to maintain fluency. Such adjustments can cause loss of
idiomatic rhythm or imagery, which may be particularly problematic in literary texts
where stylistic integrity is paramount.
The strategies identified
–
substitution, paraphrasing, and descriptive translation
–
emphasize adaptability. The choice of strategy is contingent on factors such as target
audience, text type, and translation purpose. In literary contexts, preserving imagery may
take precedence, while in technical or journalistic contexts, clarity and accuracy may
override stylistic considerations. The discussion also highlights the translator’s role as a
cultural mediator, making interpretive decisions that balance fidelity to the source with
naturalness in the target language.
CONCLUSION
Translating English phraseological units into Uzbek is a multidimensional
challenge shaped by cultural specificity, semantic opacity, and structural differences
between the two languages. Direct equivalents are often unavailable, and literal
translations frequently result in semantic distortion or loss of idiomatic force. This
necessitates the use of flexible translation strategies
–
such as culturally appropriate
substitution, paraphrasing, and descriptive rendering
–
to preserve both meaning and
communicative effect. The study underscores that effective PU translation requires more
than linguistic competence; it demands deep cultural knowledge, sensitivity to context,
and creative problem-solving skills. Translators must navigate between preserving the
idiomatic essence of the source text and ensuring accessibility and resonance for the
target audience.
In the broader scope of translation studies, these findings reaffirm the importance
of integrating phraseological awareness into translator training, especially in multilingual
contexts like Uzbekistan. Future research could investigate how technological tools,
including AI-based translation systems, handle PUs and whether hybrid human
–
machine
approaches can enhance accuracy and cultural nuance. Ultimately, mastering PU
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Special Issue
–
6 (2025) / ISSN 2181-3701
267
translation strengthens cross-cultural communication, enriches literary exchange, and
contributes to the preservation of idiomatic richness across languages.
REFERENCES:
1. Baker, M. (2018). In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation (3rd ed.).
Routledge.
2. Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. Prentice Hall.
3. Vinay, J. P., & Darbelnet, J. (1995). Comparative Stylistics of French and English:
A Methodology for Translation (J. C. Sager & M. J. Hamel, Trans.). John Benjamins.
4. Nabieva, N. (2017). Uzbek Phraseological Units and Their English Equivalents.
Tashkent State University Press.
5. Moon, R. (1998). Fixed Expressions and Idioms in English: A Corpus-Based
Approach. Oxford University Press.
6. Fernando, C. (1996). Idioms and Idiomaticity. Oxford University Press.
7.
Халимова, Ф. Р. (2019). Прагматические свойства лингвофонетических
средств в поэтическом тексте и их сравнительный анализ при переводе.
Вестник
Челябинского государственного университета, (1 (423)), 138
-144.
8.
Халимова, Ф. Р. (2021). КОГНИТИВ
ПОЭТИКА
. Academic research in
educational sciences, 2(12), 133-142.
9. Kholikov, B. A. 1-
sho‘ba the language of fantasy: linguistic features in
mythological and fantasy lite
rature. Ilmiy va professional ta’lim jarayonida muloqot, fan
va madaniyatlar integratsiyasi, 17.
10.
Насруллаева, Н. З. (2019). Классификация английских и узбекских
гендерно маркированных фразеологизмов по этимологическому признаку. In
Язык
и культура
(pp. 17-21).
