The Problem of Alternative Words in Poetic Translation

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

348

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

VOLUME

Vol.05 Issue05 2025

PAGE NO.

348-355

DOI

10.37547/ajps/Volume05Issue05-95

The Problem of Alternative Words in Poetic Translation

Sapaeva Feruza Davlatovna

Professor at the Uzbekistan State World Languages University, Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Philology, Uzbekistan

Received:

31 March 2025;

Accepted:

29 April 2025;

Published:

31 May 2025

Abstract:

In this article the tanslators skills in using words in the process of translating the verses of Makhtumkulu

are analyzed, the value of a word is discusussed in belles-letters translation.

Keywords:

Poet, verse, range, of thematic diversity, world of images, skill, method.

Introduction:

Literature is the art of words, while

translation is the art of word-by-word reproduction.
That is why the role of the word in translation is unique:
finding and substituting a single word reveals the
beauty of the translation, on the contrary, a single word
used improperly can become a stain on this beautiful
beauty.

“In fact, while personal creativity emerges through the

search for ideas, translated works are created through
the search for appropriate words. Because the novel to
be translated has a ready idea, a ready concept. The
translator must choose a word that is deep in logic,
expressing to its form and beauty. The choice of this
word is a creative process that depends on the

vocabulary, sharp taste and delicate taste of the writer”
[1, 44]. As G. Salomov and N. Kamilov rightly noted: “It’s

very important to be able to find the word in the
translation and put it in its place. If a word or phrase,
let alone a grammatical addition, does not fit in or is a
little out of place, it will ruin the beauty of the whole

work” [2, 130].

Of course, this is not about literal translation, about
sticking to the word, rather, it is about a suitable and
appropriate word found with skill that reveals the

content of the poem, conveying the poet’s thoughts to
the reader of the translation as well. “It takes skill and

taste for a translator to find an alternative word in a

translation that is original and to use it in its place” [3,

184]. This is also one of the main criteria that

determines the skill of any translator. “Talking about

the skill of a translator means, first of all, evaluating his

vocabulary” [4, 13]. Therefore, in this chapter, the skill

of the translators is precisely their attitude to the word,

we will look at the example of how he found this or that
word and use it in its place, and we will talk about the
place, function, status of the word in poetic translation.

Along with the words of artistic discovery used in the

translation of Makhtumkuli’s poems, we will come with

encountered words that were irrelevant, misused,
misplaced, distorted, and changed the poet's mind due
to negligence and irresponsibility, not understanding
the meaning of the word or not feeling the edges of
meaning.

The translator must be free and courageous enough to

argue with the author. “If the translator does not have

the courage, he will not be able to approach the original

creatively” [5, 89]

J.Sharipov approached the translation of the following
verse freely and creatively, which made it sound in

Uzbek. The “arziydi” radif found by the translator

revealed the beauty of the band:

Гөзел бардыр гүнде

-

гүнде гөрмели,

Шол гөзелиң сыя зүлпүн өрмели,

Дөкүп, хазынаңы зерин бермели,

Аның сөвдасында боласың гелер (МШ, 1, 202).

Go'zal bordir kunda ko'rsang arziydi,

Qora zulfin kunda o'rsang arziydi,

Xazinangni to'kib bersang arziydi,

Uning savdosida bo'lging keladi (TA, 69).

Here the translator takes the rhyming words, such as

“ko’rsayding, ursayding, bersayding” into the inner
rhyme, confirms them with the radifi of “arziydi” and

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

349

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN

–

2771-2273)

this is not contrary to the originality.

In the first verse of the original,

the word “kunda” is

repeated twice in the form “kunda

-

kunda”. In

translation, it was used once, but the radif “arziydi” has
replaced it. Although the phrase “shul go`zalning” was

dropped in the second verse, it did not affect the
meaning because the text speaks of that beauty, and

the abbreviated word “kunda” in the first verse was

added to the second verse.

Such cases are common in the practice of literary
translation. This is called compensation in translation.
That is, adding words, phrases, or images that are lost
in one place or that cannot be reflected in another. In

the same verse, one of the two words “kunda” in the

first verse is reflected, and the second is reduced to the
second verse, thus increasing its influence. Of course,
in the third verse, t

he word “zar” is omitted, but there

is no difference between “hazinangning zarini to’kib
berging keladi” and “hazinangni to’kib bersang arziydi”.

Treasure means both the dice inside it and all the other
riches.

In the articles on the analysis of M. Ismaili

’s translation

about M.Sholokhov’s famous story “Human Destiny”,
H.Doniyorov and R. Doniyorov called such an event “an
adequate method of compensatory replacement”.
Analyzing Oybek’s translations of Roman literature,
N.Vladimirova writes that Oybek “consid

ers the ability

to compensate to be important”. It is not always

possible to convey the strong and expressive parts of
the original perfectly in translation. Such cases are
compensated in less powerful places ...

It often determines which of the lexical or phonetic
aspects is important, sacrificing and compensating for
one in return for the other. Oybek replaces phonetic
means with lexical means when necessary, that is, adds
additional words, adjectives, metaphors. Undoubtedly,
such places require high arti

stic intuition”.

As they say, the truth is revealed in comparison, in
comparison with the translation of A.Jumaev and
J.Zulpiev, the translation of J.Sharipov is superior in all
respects:

Go'zal bordir kundan-kunga chiroylik,

Ul sanamning siyo zulfin o'raylik,

To'kib xazinaning barin beraylik,

Aning savdosinda yuroyin dersan (MFS, 166).

Here, first of all, conditional verbs have become a plural
personal pronoun.

Second, in the first verse, the phrase “kunda

-kunda

ko’rsayding” is changed to “kundan

-kunga ch

iroylik”.

Thirdly, in the second verse, the Persian-Tajik word

“siyo” is not translated, but taken on its own –

it is not

clear to the modern reader. In the fourth verse, the

word “barin” is redundant –

the meaning of “bari,

hammasi, to’la” in the giving o

f the treasure. Fifth,

there was no need to give a classic tone to words like

“aning” and “yuroyin”.

The poem “Bo`ylaringga” has a strong place in the

repertoire of hafiz translated by J.Sharipov. It really is
one of the best translations of the translator. As an
example, consider a single paragraph:

Гөрсем роюң, ёк арманым,

Сенсиз хазан урсун җаным,

Ыкбалым, диним

-

иманым

Кылсам хормат бойлариңа (МСЭ, 1, 96).

Ko'rsam husning, yo'q armonim,

Sensiz xazon bo'lsin jonim,

Iqbolim, dinim-imonim,

Qilsam hurmat bo'ylaringga (TA, 101).

Here almost all the words have also been moved to the
translated text without any change. The skill of the
translator was shown in the translation of the second

verse: If he translates it as “Sensiz hazon ursin jonim”,

first of all, it will be a bit strange from the point of view
of the Uzbek language, secondly, if he expresses the
idea fluently, both the rhythm and the rhyme will be

distorted: “Sensiz hazon ursin jonimni”. Therefore, the

replacem

ent of the word “ursun” with “bo’lsin” was

very successful: “Sensiz hazon bo’lsin jonim”.

“It is not a question of whether every word is reflected

in the literary translation, rather, it takes into account
the extent to which the meaning has been recreated in
accordance with the original and it is natural for some

words to change, substitute, and even fall apart.”. The

example given is a clear proof of this. Or:

Замана бейледир –

гөзе илмезлер,

Хер йигидиң голда бары болмаса.

Йүз туменлик сөзүн шая алмазлар

,

Хер кишиниң ыгтыбары болмаса (МШ, 1, 152).

Here are three words that are incomprehensible to the

Uzbek reader:1) The word “bo’yla” is also found in the
texts of Uzbek classical poetry, meaning “shunday,
shunaqa, shu kabi, shunga o`xshah” and the transla

tor

translated it as “shunday” very accurately.

2) “tuman” is also an ancient Turkic word meaning “o’n
ming” (ten thousand);

“shay” –

1) thing; 2) small money; the smallest thing,

the least thing (TKES, 454). The meaning of the verse is

“Yuz tumanlik so’z

ingni eng arzimas narsaga ham

olmaydilar”, and the translator will translate it freely

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

350

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN

–

2771-2273)

and creatively: “yuz tuman” as –

“gold”, “shay” as –

“one money” and creates a resonant and wise verse in

Uzbek:

Zamona shundaydir, ko'zga ilmaslar,

Har yigitning qo'lda bori bo'lmasa.

Tilladek so'zing bir pulga olmaslar,

Har kishining e'tibori bo'lmasa (TA, 133).

The word “tuman” cannot be omitted

- it is unfamiliar

to the modern reader.

When he takes the word “shay” as “something”, it

becomes obese, and the rhythm is l

ost again: “Yuz

tumanlik so’zning narsaga olmaslar” –

the third verse of

the poem, written in the an eleven-syllable tonic, turns
into a twelve-syllable tonic, causing a rhythm disorder.

Apparently, such a translation is not without four
shortcomings:

1)

T

he

word

“tuman”

is

incomprehensible; 2) “The word “narsa” is confusing;

3) the rhythm is broken; 4) the translation remains like
a sentence. Of course, the word "hech" can be used

instead of “narsa”: “Yuz tumanlik suning hechga
olmaslar”. But there is ambi

guity in this line. You can

add a word to the word “narsa” to define it (for
example, “bir narsa”), but even that does not solve the

problem: both ambiguity persists and the rhythm is
broken (now the line increases to two syllables -
thirteen syllables ton

ic): “Yuz tumanlik so’zing bir pulga

olmaslar”. Here is the art of tazod: one against a

hundred and ten thousand. J.Sharipov found an Uzbek
alternative to these words and translated the meaning

of the verse: “bir pulga” is opposed to “tilla”; because

gold is the most valuable thing, money is the most
insignificant. So the most valuable thing is set against
the most insignificant thing, and that is not contrary to

reality. Here, the use of “yuz tuman” as –

“tilla”, “narsa”

–

“bir pul” is fully justified and

creates a successful

translation from the Uzbek point of view. The
important thing is to correctly understand and reflect
the idea that the author embodies through images and
figuratively. Therefore, the issue is not in the words,
but in the meaning and co

ntent of the words”.

A.Jumaev and J.Zulpiev left out the words “bo’yla” and
“tuman” even translation of this verse is not clear the

to the modern reader, this makes it difficult for the
reader to fully understand the content of the text with
all aspects of meaning. But they, too, have shown a

certain skill in taking the phrase “hech narsaga
olmaslar” as “pisand qilmas”:

Zamona bo'yladir

–

ko'zga ilmaslar,

Har kishining qo'lda bori bo'lmasa.

Yuz tumanlik so'zin pisand qilmaslar,

Har kishining e'tibori bo'lmasa (MFS, 71).

The translators generalized the word “yigit” (young
man) in the second verse to “kishi” (man). From this

point of view, this is not a serious mistake. But since this
word is also in the fourth verse, this repetition has
caused confusion.

Restoring the most delicate aspects of thought, image,
and emotion expressed in the original in another
language is a mirror that reflects the complexity of the

translator’s work. It must be borne in mind that even

substituting one word for another in the original will
und

ermine the meaning.”

Consequently, the skill of the translator is also
manifested when he ingeniously replaces words and
phrases.

For example:

Ышк эсер этмесе, янмаз чыраглар,

Ышка дүшсе, гушлар эңрəр, гурт аглар,

Эгилер хайбатлы, кувватлы даглар,

Дашлар эрип, чеке билмез бу дерди (МШ, 1, 16).

Translated by J.Sharipov:

Ishq asar etmasa, yonmas chirog'lar,

Ishqqa tushsa, bo'ri ingrar, qush yig'lar,

Egilar haybatli, quvvatli tog'lar,

Toshlar erir, cheka bilmas bu dardni (TA, 65).

Apparently, the verse was almost literally translated
into Uzbek. However, if he translated the second verse
on his own, the rhythm would be lost, because the

word “gurt” –

“bo’ri”, which was one syllable in the

Turkmen language, has two syllables in the Uzbek

language. That’s why th

e interpreter, first renounces

the plural suffix “lar” in the word “qushlar”. It didn't

influence to the meaning, because it is continuing the
idea about the birds moan and the wolf cries when falls
in love

–

it doesn't have to put the plural suffix in the

words “bo’ri” and “qush”. Second, the groan is more

specific to the animal than to the bird. Therefore, the
interpreter attributes the groaning to the wolf and
crying to the birds. Thirdly, not only the change of
words did not affect the meaning, but the addition of

the word “yig’lar” to the end of the verse was in line
with the rhyme, but the words “chirog’lar” and
“tog’lar” are more appropriate rhymes “yig’lar” than
“ingrar”.

E.Ochilov also leaves them:

Ishq asar etmasa, yonmas chiroqlar,

Ishq kelganda qushlar ingrar, qurt yig'lar,

Egilar haybatli, quvvatli tog'lar,

Toshlar erib, cheka bilmas bu dardni (DO'B, 187).

E. Ochilov leaves the word “qurt”. In the Turkmen

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

351

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN

–

2771-2273)

language, the word means both wolf and worm (TRS,

213). Maybe it’s true, too, because the l

ogic of thought

seems to require a bird to moan and a worm to cry in
front of love. On top of that, a pair of bird and worms
seems closer to logic than a bird and a wolf.

In translation from close languages, the translator is
faced with two problems: the first is the interlingual
homonyms, and the second is the influence of the
national color of the translated language, said the well-
known translator M.F. Rilsky.

Sometimes the omission of certain words may not even
affect the meaning according to the rhythm
requirement:

Ёксуллыкда ничелерин, дөвраны,

Ятып, ягшы гөрен дүйшүне дегмез.

Ничелер хасратда тапып хөшк наны,

Бир леззетли тагам дишине дегмез (МШ, 1, 151).

Translated by J.Sharipov:

Yo'qchilikda nechalarning davroni,

Yotib, yaxshi ko'rgan tushiga yetmas.

Nechalar hasratdan topadir nonni,

Bir lazzatli taom tishiga yetmas (TA, 137).

The word “hushq” –

“quruq” in the third stanza of the

verse is the quality of bread, but it is difficult to reflect
it in translation: first of all, it breaks down the rhythm:

“Nechalar hasratda topib quruq nonni”. The poem is

written in eleven-syllable tonic. When translated as

“Nechalar g’amda topar quruq nonni” the place of

translation change, and this also changes the tone of
the poem. So the translator did the right thing by

dropping the word, because it didn’t affect the

meaning that much and the rhythm was retained. This
means that not only finding and using the right word,
but sometimes dropping unnecessary word correctly is
a skill in itself.

However, in J.Sharipov’s translations, along with the

words found and used in the right place, there are a lot
of words that do not fit - this shows that the translator's
achievements, as well as his shortcomings, are not
insignificant.

For example:

Оввал

-

а, мал ягшы, малдан баш ягшы,

Баш дөвлетин тапан мала серетмез.

Догмадык огулдан доган даш ягшы,

Надан огул

атасына серетмез (МШ, 1, 116).

Translated by J.Sharipov:

Avvalo mol yaxshi, moldan bosh yaxshi,

Bosh davlatin topgan molga qaramasa.

O'gay bir o'g'ildan bir yot er yaxshi,

Nodon o'g'il otasiga qaramas (TA, 117).

Most of the words in the verse are exactly the same as
the translation. Here it is clear that the skill of the
translator is determined by the successful translation of
the third verse, as it cannot be translated into Uzbek

exactly. “Asrandi o'g'ildan uzoq bo'lsa ham tuqqan
yaxshi”. The word “dogmadik” means

“asrandi” (adopted) and the translator found and used
the word “o’gay” (step) instead of it, but, the verse
“dogan dash yagshy” was mistaken for “bir yot er
yahshi”: “dogan” –

born, “dash” –

far, far away. So,

here ther is no the word “yot”.

Moreover, in the verse, the born and the unborn are
contrasted: far from relative is good, than the step-son
in the house (next to you). In the translation there was
not given this meaning. A legitimate question arises

“Nega endi yetti yot begona o'gay o'g'i

ldan yaxshi bo'lar

ekan?”

- there is no answer to it in translation.

Бир дилег дилесең, мөхүмиң битмез,

Достуң ыхлас билен мерхемет этмез,

Мəрекеде айдан сөзүң җай тутмаз,

Диңлемезлер, гуры, сөзүң бад болар (МШ, 1, 150).

Translated by J.Sharipov:

Bir tilak tilasang, keraging bitmas,

Do'sting ixlos bilan marhamat etmas,

Ma'rakada aytgan so'zing joy tutmas,

Tinglamaslar aytgan so'zing mot bo'lar (TA, 139).

If the word “keraging” was used instead of the word
“hojating” in the first verse, its meaning would be

revealed (hojating bitmas). The translator did not find
the word, and as a result, the verse became a bit

confusing. It is not clear how the word “bod” (wind) in
the fourth verse became “mot”.

M. Kenjabek showed skill in this regard:

Bir tilak tilasang, hojating bitmas,

Do'sting ixlos bilan marhamat etmas,

Ma'rakada aytgan so'zing joy tutmas,

Tinglamaslar, quruq so'zing bod bo'lar (MS, 2004, 63).

A.Jumaev and J.Zulpiev again caused confusion by

preserving the original word “muhim”:

Har ne so'rab borsang, muhiming bitmas,

Do'sting ixlos bilan marhamat etmas,

Ma'rakada aytgan so'zing joy tutmas,

Tinglamaslar, so'zing go'yo bod bo'lar (MFS, 70).

But e

ven though the word “quruq” is omitted in the last

verse, “quruq so’zing bod bo’lar” seems more fluent

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

352

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN

–

2771-2273)

and resonant than the phrase “so'zing go'yo bod
bo'lar”. “In general, ensuring the beauty of language in

any translation, including poetry, is a priority. The
sound of the poem in Uzbek also depends on the

language”.

The skill of translators in the use of words is

especially evident in finding and translating
alternatives to words and phrases that have become

radif. “Before choosing a radif, poets pay att

ention to

how well the word fits their purpose. The beautiful
sound of the word radif is also taken into account, as it
is rhythm-

bearing”. Therefore, the role of radif in

enhancing the impact and resonance of the poem, in
enhancing the meaning, is invaluable. Often the main
burden of thought in a byte falls on this poetic element,
poets take the word into radif for what they focus in

their mind”. But it is not always possible to reflect it in

translation. As a result, its content is often absorbed
into the layer of verses. When saved, it is not always
successful: either words that are incomprehensible to
the reader or inappropriate to the original are used.
This can obscure the content of the poem, lowering its

resonance and destroying its impact. “Using a

radif is a

serious challenge for an interpreter, and sometimes an
insurmountable mess. This is why some translators do
not reflect it. However, radif in poetry is not only a
formal ornament, but it carries a great meaning, serves
to increase the impact of the work, the resonance of
the poem.

In translation from close languages, a radif is

often not a problem, because the word or phrase that
becomes a radif is also present in the translated
language. However, sometimes words specific to a
particular language are radiated so that translating
them exactly into the target language makes the text

incomprehensible. For example, in Makhtumkuli’s

work there are a number of poems in which the words

“dondi” (turned), “belli” (marked, known) are radif, and

in their translation it is not justified to leave these
Turkmen words in radif. In particular, J.Sharipov left the

word “do`ndi” with radif in the translation of two

poems. The work of this translator was also criticized
by G.Salomov: The commentary begins with the title of

the poem “Do`ndi”: it means aylandi, otdi, boldi (133).

So, it is necessary to translate into Uzbek Probably, the

words “aylandi, o`tdi, bo`ldi” (turned, passed, finished)

do not correspond to this poem. In this case, it is
necessary to continue the search again, not to leave
until you find an alternative and appropriate word. The
whole space will find a word in Uzbek that covers the

meaning of one Turkmen word “do`nmoq”...

Tilla taxtida qopilar,

Davr aylanib yopilar,

Eshon, mulla, pir, so'filar

Elatga ozora do'ndi (133).

The word “qopilar” is said to be “door”, and the

fourth verse is interpreted as unbroken

–

“Elga ozor

beruvchiga aylandi” (It has become a tormentor to the
people). In the sixth verse of the poem “Nodon
falakdan” the word “do`ndi” –

“do’ndi” is a radif:

Бизиң гөрен достлар авара дөнди,

Баш апаран əрлер бичəрə дөнди,

Йөргүр арап атлар, гөр, хара дөнди,

Гымматы айрылып, яман пелекден! (МСЭ, 2, 97)

J.Sharipov calls it “bo’ldi”. This radif, which

justified itself in the first two verses, is inconsistent in
the third verse:

Ko'zim ko'rgan do'stlar ovora bo'ldi,

Bosh ko'targan erlar bechora bo'ldi,

Сhopqir arab otlar, ko'r, xora bo'ldi,

Qimmatdan ayrilib, yomon falakdan (TA, 342).

In the third verse, it should be “hor bo’ldi” (was

humiliated). To do this, you need to replace the rhyme
in the previous two lines. In addition, the phrase

“qimmatdan ayrilib” (lost value) did not work –

it would

be appropriate to translate into Uzbek as “bahosi
tushub”, “qadri qolmay” (falling in price) and

(worthless).

The radif chosen by M.Kenjabek was even more
unsuccessful:

Bizning ko'rgan do'stlar ovvora qaytdi,

Bosh ko'targan erlar bechora qaytdi,

Yo'rg'a arab otlar, boq, xora qaytdi,

Qimmati ayrilib yomon falakdan (MS, 2004, 122).

“In translation, the idea is often clarified by

finding and replacing one word. The search will
continue until that word is found. Sometimes, even
several generations of translators change, and the

“kerakli”

(necessary) word is not found. The word

“kutaveradi” (waits) for its inventor. The same can be
said about the word “donmoq”.

In the Turkmen language, the word “belli” (TRS, 87) is

used in the meanings of known, popular, well-known,
definite, obvious, familiar. In the translation of poems

of M.Ahmad leaves exactly this radif “Ovda bellidir”,
“Qovog’idan bellidir” (It is known in the hunt, It is

known from the eyebrows),

–

but this is not familiar to

the Uzbek reader.

However, J.Sharipov found a solution to the problem in

the translation of the poems “Toshda bellidir” (It is
known in the stone) (TA, 192), “Ot yonida bellidir” (It is

known near the horse) (TA, 257) by translating this

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

353

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN

–

2771-2273)

word into Uzbek as “bilinar” (known).

Therefore, Jabborov calls it “bilinar”

:

Яман хатын маңлай сачы топ болар,

Геплегенде, яман сөзи көп болар,

Ишигниң алдында дыздан чөп болар,

Атмаз күлүн, оҗагындан беллидир (МСЭ, 1, 190).

Translated by М.Аhmad:

Yomon xotin manglay sochi to'p bo'lar,

Gapirganda yomon so'zi ko'p bo'lar,

Eshigi oldida tizdan cho'p bo'lar,

Artmas kulin

–

o'chog'idan bellidir (MS, 1995, 87).

Translated by J.Jabborov:

Yomon xotin manglay sochi to'p bo'lar,

Gapirganda yomon so'zi ko'p bo'lar,

Eshigin oldida xasu cho'p bo'lar,

Kulga to'lgan o'chog'idan bilinar (DO'B, 121).

However, in the translation of the poem

“Ussada belli” M.Ahmad thickens and intensifies the
stylistic paint, calling the word “belli” “shaksiz” which

does not contradict the original, but rather strengthens
the emphasis on meaning:

Эй агалар, бир гүн

болар, пай алар,

Гуллук эдип гезен уссада, белли.

Худа өзи кими догры гөзлесе,

Етишер мырада, максада, белли (МСЭ, 2, 11).

Ey og'alar, bir kun shuhrat topar ul,

Kimki qulluq qilsa ustodga shaksiz.

Xudo o'zi kimga bersa to'g'ri yo'l,

Etishar maqsadu murodga shaksiz (MS, 1995, 37).

M.Ahmad approached the original freely and

translated creatively, which brought him success. In

particular, the sentences “hizmatiga yarasha topadi”
(earns according to merit) and “shuhrat topadi” (earns

fame) are close in meaning and do not contradict the
original. But to worship, in addition to bowing, also
means to serve, where it comes more in that sense.

In accordance with the rules of the Uzbek

language, J.Sharipov calls the phrase “bizim sari”, which
is a radius in the poem “Yar bizim sary”, as “bizning
sari”:

Гулзумы гыр санып кырк ёл гечер мен,

Эгер ки мейл этсе яр бизим сары.

Гадам ерне ганат баглап учар мен,

Дийсе дилбер: “Ашык, йөр бизим сары!” (МШ, 1,

19).

Qulzumni qir bilib qirq yil kecharman,

Agarki mayl etsa yor biz tomonga;

Qadamimga qanot bog'lab ucharman,

Desa dilbar: “Oshiq, yur biz tomonga” (TA, 63).

Of course, the translation is not without some

mistakes.

The meaning of the phrase “гыр санып” in the

first verse is “ўлчаб, қулочлаб”, an

d its omission has

caused ambiguity for the reader. The translator also

mistakenly called the word “ёл” “йўл” here. A.Jumaev

and J.Zulpiev corrected the next mistake, and in the
previous one repeated the mistake of their
predecessors. In addition, they leave the radif exactly,
in which the features of the dialect look like a column:

Qulzumni qir bilib, qirq yo'l kecharman,

Agarki mayl etsa yor bizim sari.

Qadam yerga qanot bog'lab ucharman,

Desa dilbar: “Oshiq, yuz bizim sari” (MFS, 168).

However, the mean

ing of the poem is: “Qulzum

–

Qizil dengizni qirq marta qulochlab kechaman (suzib

o'taman)” (Kulzum

- I will cross the Red Sea forty times),

and such a poetically beautiful poem has appeared in
Uzbek translations with errors and incomprehensibility.

In t

he Turkmen language, “эгленмек” means

to be caught (TRS, 775). Therefore, it would be

expedient to translate the word “эгленмез”, which is a
radif in the translation of the poem “Пыган эгленмез”,
into Uzbek as “qolmagay” according to the weight

requirement

. Sharipov translates as “to`xtamas” and

says he has not justified himself in all areas. Because
the word chosen for the radif must match from
beginning to end for all the byte verses of the poem - if
it does not fit in one place and fall into another, the
radif will be selected unsuccessfully. The word

“to`xtamas” (does not stop) –

it means it will pass, but

it also means that it will continue uninterrupted, which
shows that the radif was misused from the very
beginning of the poem:

Билбил хүжүм эйлəн ховали баглар,

Билбил сенден гидер, пыган эгленмез! (МШ, 1, 245).

Bulbul sayrab turgan havoli bog'lar,

Bulbul sendan ketar, fig'on to'xtamas (TA, 296).

The poet says: “Ey bulbullar yoprilgan bahavo

bog'lar, bir kuni bulbul sendan ketadi-yu, ularning
fig'oni

ham qolmaydi”. The translation means, “Even if

the nightingale leaves you, the fig will never stop”.

M. Kenjabek called this radif “aylanmas”:

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

354

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN

–

2771-2273)

Bulbul navo qilgan havoli bog'lar,

Bulbul sendan ketar, fig'on aylanmas (MS, 2004, 86).

Of course, the radif of “aylanmas” justified

itself a bit, but in verses such as “A guest who does not
turn for more than five days” he caused ambiguity and

ambiguity. It will be understandable and suitable for

Uzbek language if it can be said like “No mo

re than five

days of guests”.

A.Jumaev and J.Zulpiev called it “kelgaydir” and again

failed:

Bulbul makon etgan havoli bog'lar,

Bulbul sendan ketar, fig'on kelgaydir! (MFS, 126).

If the radif chosen by J.Sharipov and

M.Kenjabek coincide in some places, if it does not fit in
some places, the radif used by A.Jumaev and J.Zulpiev
did not correspond to the poem from beginning to end,
because it is completely contrary to reality: how can the

word “qolmagay” correspond to the word “kelgaydir”

?! For example, in

the poem, the verse “A guest who

comes to this world does not stay for more than five

days” means “In five days a new guest will come!”

surprisingly translated into Uzbek. Or the verse

“Агыздан тил кетар, зыбан эгленмез!” was translated
without logic “Og’izdan til ketar, zabon kelgaydir!”
(МFS, 127) . However, the poet says that one day his

tongue will be pulled out and he will not be able to turn.
Only this idea was repeated through synonyms.

Apparently, a single poem has been translated

with three different radifs, but none of them
correspond to the original. Hence, the need for a fourth
translation of this poem to be translated with an
appropriate radif remains.

The biggest flaw in the translation of

Makhtumkuli's poems, the worst flaw, is that these
translators could not get out of the influence of the
original, could not treat it freely. It is well known that in
order to get rid of the effects of text, it is necessary to
work hard. Translators, on the other hand, cling to the
text without wanting to work too hard: they often
retain only Turkmen, Arabic, and Persian words,
despite the fact that the poem is constructed, busy, and
has an Uzbek alternative that can be easily replaced.
However, the translation only hurts from clinging to the
original. In such a translation, the influence of the
Turkmen language is usually strong, and often the
expression does not come out in Uzbek. For example:

“Гуноҳим гузашт айла”. After all, it can be translated
into pure Uzbek as “Gunohimni afv ayla”, “Gunohimni

bag'is

hla”, “Gunohimni kechirgil”. In the words of the

famous French writer Bualo, if you work hard, every
word will serve. Or:

Диллер диер гөрүп

-

гөрүп,

Акыл кесер соруп

-

соруп (МСЭ, 1, 240).

Translated by J.Sharipov:

Tillar aytar ko'rib-ko'rib,

Oqil kesar o'ylab turib (TA, 393).

In the Turkmen language, the word “кесмек” (cut) has
a wide range of meanings, one of which is “to evaluate”

(TRS, 395). Here it comes in the same sense. The word

“Акыл” is also used here to mean not as “oqil”, but
“ақл”: “Tillar ko'rib

-ko'rib aytsa, aql so'rab-so'rab

baholaydi”. The fact that the first verse is about

language requires the word mind in the second verse.
In addition, this is the logic of thought expressed in the
verses. As J.Sharipov interprets, in order for the wise
man to deliberately interrupt, the previous verse
should have been based on this idea.

In Turkmen, the word “kesilmoq” also means

“to’xtatilmoq” (TRS, 395). Therefore, the verse
“Азанлар кесилип, месҗит япылып” (MSE, 1, 95)
cannot be translated as “Azonlar kesilib, masjid yopilib”

(TA, 103). Because the Uzbek language does not use the

word “kesilmoq” in relation to the azon, it is called
“to'xtatilib”.

J.Sharipov translates the verse “Габахатдыр

йүзлерим” (MSE, 1, 221) as “Qabohatdir yuzlarim” (TA,

467), tha

t in Uzbek the word “qabohat” is not used for

face. In the Turkmen language, the word has not only
bad, naughty, but also shameful, honorable, (TKES, 76;

TRS, 664), where the meaning is as follows: “Uyatlidir
yuzlarim”.

In Turkmen, the word “атмак” also means “to

achieve” (TRS, 57). Therefore, the verse “Кимлер бу
дүнйəде ыкбал атмышдыр” (MSE, 2, 83) can be
understood

as

“Kimlar

bu

dunyoda

bahtga

erishgandir”. There is a methodological ambiguity in
the verse “Kimlar bu dunyoda iqbol otmishdir” (TA,

469), b

ecause there is no phrase “iqbol otmoq” in

Uzbek.

Translators often use words that are mistaken, and
ambiguous in terms of the Uzbek language. For
example:

Гара гарганың перзенди

Гөзүне сурат гөрүнер (МШ, 1, 247).

Translated by J. Sharipov:

Qora qarg'aning farzandi

Ko'ziga surat ko'rinar (TA, 292).

Here the poet expresses the idea that “Qora qarg’aning
bolasi ham ko’ziga oppoq ko’rinadi” (the child of the

black crow also looks white (beautiful) to the eyes) In
Uzbek, the meaning is not clear, because the phrase

“surat ko’rinar” (picture is visible) does not mean that.

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

355

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN

–

2771-2273)

The goal would have been achieved if the translator
had taken a creative approach to the text and

translated the second verse as “Ko’zga hushsurat
ko’rinar”.

In the translation of the poem “G

ulzor bilan

o'ynashar” (Playing with flowers) M.Ahmad leaves the
exact meaning of “шамар” in the Turkmen
pronunciation of the king of snakes, ie “шахмор”

meaning dragon, it is not clear to the Uzbek reader

(TRS, 751). In this poem, the word “satashmoq” (TR

S,

568), which means to meet again, encounters again

(MS, 1995, 79). In the poem “Nozli dildor” (MKS, 1995,
80) he uses the word “talvos” (dream, passion) (TRS,
616). In the poem “Лошдан айрилса” (MS, 1995, 83),
he uses the word “qirnoq” (slave) (TRS, 235)

. In the

poem “Berma falakka” (MS, 1995, 84) is appeared the
word “elek” (TRS, 303).

Checking the translation of Makhtumkuli’s poems in

terms of the skill of the translator, along with the words
that were skillfully found and used in these translations
as a result of talent and research, misplaced,
mistranslated, rhyming, or misunderstood in Turkmen,
there are a lot of words that do not comply with the
rules of the Uzbek language, distort the content of the
poem, change the author's opinion. In other words, the
mistakes of translators due to their ignorance and lack
of language far outweigh their skills and achievements.
Moreover, almost all translators have abused archaic

–

ancient Turkic, Arabic, Persian, Turkmen words in their
translations. They also used dialectal words and
grammatical additions. At the same time, a number of
good translations, which are the product of hard work
and skill, are rightly considered an achievement of
Uzbek translation literature.

REFERENCES

Шарипов Ж., Матёқубов А. 30

-

йиллар ўзбек

таржимачилиги // Ўзбекистонда бадиий таржима
тарихи (таржима тарихидан лавҳалар). –

Т.: Фан,

1985. -

Б. 44.

Саломов Ғ., Комилов Н. Жаҳонгашта рубоийлар //
Таржима санъати (Мақолалар тўплами). 3

-

к. –

Т.:

Ғ.Ғулом номидаги Адабиёт ва санъат, 1976.

-

Б.130.

Пошали Усмон ўғли. Журъати маҳоратига эш //
Таржима санъати (Мақолалар тўплами). 3

-

к. –

Т.:

Ғ.Ғулом номидаги Адабиёт ва санъат, 1976.

-

Б.184.

Яркинова Б. Б. Туркий тиллардан таржимада
тарихий колоритнинг акс эттирилиши. Филол.
фанлари. номз... дисс. –

Т., 2002.

-

Б. 13.

Матёқубов А., Жўраев Н. Ғафур Ғулом (портрет

-

очерк) // Ўзбекистонда бадиий таржима тарихи
(таржима тарихидан лавҳалар). –

Т.: Фан, 1985.

-

Б.

89.

Magtimguli. Saylanan eserler. Iki tomluk. 1-tom.

Ashgabat: Tүrkmenistan, 1983.