Antonymic translation

Antonymic translation usually implies a comprehensive lexical and grammatical transformation: an affirmative construction is translated by a negative one or a negative construction – by an affirmative one. But such grammatical transformation is usually accompanied by lexical transformation – the key word of the SL utterance is translated by its antonym in the TL utterance, e.g. … the undead past – ще живе минуле.

Let a sleeping dog lie. – Не буди спящую собаку.

Nobody was ever sorry to see him. – Усі завжди були раді його бачити.

Antonymic translation is more frequently used when rendering negative constructions by affirmative ones. This may be accounted for by the stylistic use of negative constructions in English for purposes of expressiveness. The English language uses grammatically only one negative in a sentence – either with a verb or with a noun but it maces a stylistic use of two negatives of which one is formed by grammatical means and the other – by means of affixation (negative prefixes or suffixes) or by lexical means, i.e. by words with a negative meanings.

A sentence containing two negatives is negative only on the face of it, actually it is affirmative as the two negatives neutralize each other. The grammatical form in this case is not used in its direct meaning and consequently attracts attention, as does, for example, the rhetorical question which is no question at all but an emphatic statement. The clash between the denotative meaning of the grammatical form and its use in speech makes it highly emotive and increases its expressiveness. Thus a double negation has a special connotative meaning. It is not identical, however, with an affirmative statement. It contains a certain modification. It may be an overstatement or an understatement.

British imperialists never failed to recognize the value of tea and fought many a bloody battle to grab the plantations of India.

Британські імперіалісти завжди чудово розуміли цінність чаю і не раз вели криваві битви, щоб захопити індійські чайні плантації.

The double negation is expressed grammatically by the negative adverb “never” and lexically by the semantics of the verb “to fail” is desemantized to such an extent that in some cases it is equivalent to a simple negative and is translated accordingly, e..g. he failed to appear – he did not appear.

The combination of a grammatical negative with the comparative or superlative degrees of the adverb “little” is always emphatic and is rendered antonymically.

Dickens is hampered by his age, which demands sentiment and reticence, but in the space that is allowed to him he scampers as if he knew no restraint…Never was he less embarrassed by restrictions than in the exuberance of “Pickwick Papers”.

Діккенс був зв’язаним своєю епохою, яка вимагала чуйності і стриманості, але у дозволених йому межах він веселиться, не знаючи спину ... Ніколи він не почував себе вільнішим від обмежень, чим у „Записках Піквікського Клубу”, де веселості били ключем.

The double negative construction “not … until” may be regarded as a cliché which is practically always rendered antonymously as лишь тогда, только (тогда), когда possessing the same degree of emphasis.

It was not until I reached the farmyard that I made the discovery. (Susan Howatch)

І тільки коли я дістався ферми, я зробив це відкриття.

He spoke in no uncertain terms. (Susan Howatch)

Він говорив вельми рішуче.