Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная
лингвистика
и
лингводидактика
–
Foreign
Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Journal home page:
https://inscience.uz/index.php/foreign-linguistics
Linguocultural realia in English and Uzbek folktales: a
comparative translation analysis of Joseph Jacobs’
“English Fairy Tales” and “Zumrad va Qimmat”
Mushtariy AKHMEDOVA
1
Jizzakh State Pedagogical University
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Article history:
Received May 2025
Received in revised form
15 May 2025
Accepted 25 June 2025
Available online
15 July 2025
This article explores the translation of linguacultural realia
in two culturally distinct folktales: English Fairy Tales by Joseph
Jacobs and the Uzbek folktale Zumrad va Qimmat. Through a
comparative analysis, it examines how culturally specific items
such as food, household objects, social titles, and ritual
expressions are rendered in translation. The paper applies
qualitative comparative methods to identify realia types and
analyse translation strategies such as loan translation,
adaptation, descriptive translation, and omission. The findings
highlight the translator’s role as a cultural mediator, showing
that descriptive translation dominates in the case of culturally
unique items, while adaptation and substitution are preferred
for more universal concepts. The article contributes to
understanding the complexities of folklore translation and
offers practical insights into balancing cultural preservation
with reader accessibility.
2181-3701
/©
2025 in Science LLC.
https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-3701-vol3-iss4-pp20-28
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:
linguacultural realia,
folklore translation,
cultural mediation,
descriptive translation,
adaptation strategies,
comparative analysis.
In
gliz va o‘zbek xalq ertaklaridagi lingvomadaniy
realiyalar: Jozef Jeykobsning “English Fairy Tales” hamda
“Zumrad va Qimmat” asarlari tarjimasining taqqosiy
tahlili
ANNOTATSIYA
Kalit so‘zlar
:
lingvomadaniy realiyalar,
xalq ertaklari tarjimasi,
Maqolada Jozef Jeykobsning English Fairy Tales va o‘zbek
xalq ertagi Zumrad va Qimmat asarlaridagi lingvomadaniy
1
PhD student, Jizzakh State Pedagogical University.
E-mail: mushtariy.axmedova@jdpu.uz
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Issue
–3 № 4 (2025)
/ ISSN 2181-3701
21
madaniy vositachilik,
tavsiflovchi tarjima,
moslashtirish strategiyalari,
taqqosiy tahlil.
realiyalar tarjimasi tahlil qilingan. Taqqoslash asosida milliy
taomlar, maishiy buyumlar, ijtimoiy unvonlar va marosimlarga
oid iboralar tarjima jarayonida qanday aks etishi o‘rganilgan.
Tadqiqot davomida realiyalar turlari aniqlanib, tarjima
strategiyalari
—
to‘g‘ridan
-
to‘g‘ri o‘girish, moslashtirish,
tavsiflovchi tarjima va tushirib qoldirish
—
tahlil qilingan.
Natijalar tarjimonning madaniy vositachi sifatidagi rolini
ko‘rsatib, madaniy o‘ziga xoslikni saqlash uchun tavsiflovchi
tar
jima ko‘p qo‘llanilishini, universallashgan tushunchalarda
esa moslashtirish ustuvor bo‘lishini ko‘rsatadi. Ushbu maqola
xalq og‘zaki ijodi tarjimasi murakkabliklarini yoritib,
tarjimonlar uchun amaliy tavsiyalar beradi.
Лингвокультурные реалии в английских и узбекских
народных сказках: сравнительный анализ перевода
«English Fairy Tales» Джозефа Джейкобса и «Зумрад ва
Киммат»
АННОТАЦИЯ
Ключевые слова:
лингвокультурные
реалии,
перевод фольклора,
культурное
посредничество,
описательный перевод,
стратегии адаптации,
сравнительный анализ
.
В статье рассматривается перевод лингвокультурных
реалий в двух культурно различных сказках: английские
народные сказки Джозефа Джейкобса и узбекской народной
сказке Зумрад и Киммат. Путем сравнительного анализа
исследуется, как в переводе передаются
элементы культуры,
такие как блюда, предметы быта, социальные титулы и
ритуальные выражения. Методологическая база включает
выявление типов реалий и анализ применяемых
переводческих
стратегий:
заимствование,
адаптация,
описательный
перевод
и
опущение.
Результаты
подчеркивают
роль
переводчика
как
культурного
посредника и показывают преобладание описательного
перевода в случае уникальных реалий, в то время как
адаптация чаще используется для универсальных понятий.
Исследование вносит вклад в понимание особенностей
перевода
фольклора
и
предлагает
практические
рекомендации для переводчиков.
INTRODUCTION
In translation studies, the challenge of transferring culturally bound elements
across linguistic borders has long been recognized as a critical issue [1], [2]. This
challenge becomes particularly complex in the translation of folklore, where language
functions not merely as a communicative medium but as a vessel for preserving collective
memory, social values, and cultural identity [3], [4]. As folklore texts reflect the
worldview, social structures, and material realities of their source culture, they inevitably
embed culturally specific elements that resist straightforward translation [5]. Within this
context, linguacultural realia
—
terms denoting culturally unique objects, phenomena, and
practices
—
pose one of the most significant obstacles for translators aiming to preserve
both meaning and cultural distinctiveness [6], [7].
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Issue
–3 № 4 (2025)
/ ISSN 2181-3701
22
The concept of
realia
itself was introduced into translation theory by Vlakhov and
Florin [8], who defined these items as “lexical units denoting objects and concepts
characteristic of the life, history, or culture of one nation, which are unknown in other
nations.” These units not only carry referential meaning but also evoke symbolic
associations tied to national identity and collective experience. The translation of realia,
therefore, cannot be addressed through linguistic substitution alone; as Leppihalme [9]
argues, it requires a deliberate cultural negotiation wherein the translator acts as both a
linguistic processor and a cultural mediator. This is especially relevant in literary
translation, where the aesthetic and narrative functions of realia further complicate
translation decisions [10], [11].
In the context of folklore translation, the translator faces dual pressures: on the
one hand, the need to preserve the cultural uniqueness of the source text, and on the
other, the obligation to ensure comprehensibility for the target audience [12], [13].
Domestication and foreignization strategies
—
popularized by Venuti [13]
—
thus play a
critical role in shaping the translator’s approach t
o realia. Whereas foreignization aims to
preserve the foreignness of the source culture, domestication adapts culturally
unfamiliar elements into familiar terms for the target audience [13], ]14]. However,
scholars such as Katan [2] and Aixelá [6] caution
that neither strategy should be applied
rigidly, advocating instead for a flexible, context-sensitive approach.
This article addresses these theoretical considerations through a comparative
analysis of realia translation in two culturally distinct folktales:
English Fairy Tales
by
Joseph Jacobs and the Uzbek folktale
Zumrad va Qimmat
. Both texts function as cultural
artifacts, preserving and transmitting the material and social realities of their respective
cultures. They contain diverse examples of realia, including household objects, traditional
foods, social hierarchies, and ritual practices, each of which demands careful translation
choices to balance cultural preservation with narrative coherence [5].
The primary aim of this paper is to explore how realia are identified, categorized,
and translated in these two folktales. It analyses the application of strategies such as loan
translation, adaptation, descriptive translation, and omission [15], [6], evaluating their
effectiveness in preserving cultural meaning and facilitating reader comprehension. In
doing so, this article contributes to the broader discourse on cultural representation and
translator agency in folklore translation [11], [4].
The
guiding
research
question
of
this
article
is:
How are linguacultural realia identified and translated in English and Uzbek folktales,
and what translation strategies are predominantly employed to balance cultural
representation with readability?
In addressing this question, this study highlights the translator’s du
al role as both
linguistic expert and cultural mediator, reinforcing the idea that literary translation,
particularly of folklore, is as much a cultural negotiation as it is a linguistic operation.
METHODOLOGY
This article employs a qualitative comparative analysis, a method widely
recognized in translation studies for its capacity to explore cultural and linguistic
complexities in literary texts [1], [3]. The focus of this analysis is on identifying,
categorizing, and comparing linguacultural realia present in two folktales:
English Fairy
Tales
by Joseph Jacobs and the Uzbek folktale
Zumrad va Qimmat
. These works were
chosen due to their status as culturally emblematic narratives in their respective
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Issue
–3 № 4 (2025)
/ ISSN 2181-3701
23
traditions, as well as their accessibility for comparative analysis of realia types and
translation strategies.
Following Aixelá’s approach to culture
-specific items, realia were identified in the
selected texts through close reading [6]. Realia were recognized as lexical units denoting
culturally unique objects, social practices, or phenomena, often embedded in everyday
life or folklore-specific rituals. Particular attention was paid to narrative passages and
dialogues where culturally marked references were concentrated, in accordance with
Leppihalme’s recommen
dation that allusions and culture-bound terms should be
examined within their narrative context to fully understand their functional load [9].
The corpus consisted of selected tales from Jacobs’ collection, including “Jack and
the Beanstalk” and “Tom Thumb,” as well as key narrative episodes from
Zumrad va
Qimmat
. In total, approximately fifty realia units were identified in each folktale, covering
diverse cultural categories such as material culture, food, social roles, and ritual
practices. For instance,
in Jacobs’ tales, references like
“a peck of peas”
and
“a barley loaf”
illustrate material culture realia tied to traditional English rural life, while in
Zumrad va
Qimmat
, terms like
“chillak suvi”
(water stored in a clay jar) and
“duv
-
duv gap bo‘ldi”
(an
idiom meaning “word spread everywhere”) represent culturally specific Uzbek objects
and expressions.
Once identified, realia were categorized into four types, as suggested by Vlakhov
and Florin [8]:
•
Material culture realia (e.g., foods, household items)
•
Social realia (e.g., titles, family roles)
•
Ethnographic and ritual realia (e.g., holidays, ceremonies)
•
Toponymic realia (e.g., geographical names)
For each instance, the following elements were recorded: the realia itself, its
narrative function (symbolic, functional, decorative), its cultural significance, and its
potential translation challenges.
In terms of translation analysis, the study examined how each identified realia was
treated in the available translations of the folktales or, in the absence of official
translations, hypothetical translations were constructed based on Newmark’s established
framework of translation procedures. Four main strategies were applied in this
comparative evaluation [15]:
•
Loan translation (transliteration), preserving the source term in the target
language.
•
Cultural adaptation, replacing the source term with a culturally equivalent
target item.
•
Descriptive translation, explaining the term in the target language.
•
Omission or generalization, where cultural specificity is reduced or omitted.
For example,
“barley loaf”
was translated using descriptive translation in Uzbek as
“arpa unidan tayyorlangan non”
, since no direct equivalent exists. Conversely,
“chil
lak
suvi”
required descriptive explanation in English, such as
“water kept in a traditional clay
jar”
, to convey the cultural reference without confusing the target audience.
The analytical process followed a systematic sequence:
1.
Close reading and realia identification.
2.
Classification according to type and cultural function.
3.
Documentation of narrative context and cultural load.
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Issue
–3 № 4 (2025)
/ ISSN 2181-3701
24
4.
Analysis of translation strategies applied.
5.
Evaluation of cultural representation outcomes.
While primarily qualitative, the analysis also involved comparative tabulation to
observe general tendencies and contrasts between the two texts. In line with Katan’s
insights [2] on cultural framing, particular focus was placed on assessing whether the
translation strategies tended toward domestication or foreignization [13], reflecting the
translator’s position as either a cultural bridge or a cultural filter.
Finally, it should be noted that this study deliberately limited its scope to lexical-
level realia, excluding syntactic transformations and broader narrative-level adaptation.
This methodological constraint allowed for an in-depth examination of how culturally
specific terms and concepts are negotiated during the translation process.
Results.
The comparative analysis of English Fairy Tales and Zumrad va Qimmat
revealed significant differences in the distribution and treatment of linguocultural realia.
Across both texts, realia were categorized into four main types: household items, food
and drink, social roles and titles, and culturally embedded customs or practices. The two
source cultures demonstrate different emphases in the representation of cultural
elements, with material culture dominating the English tales, while social and ritual
realia are more prominent in the Uzbek narrative.
Table 1 summarizes the identified realia types across the two folktales.
Table 1. Types of Linguacultural Realia in the Source Texts
Type of Realia
Example from English Tales
Example from Zumrad va
Qimmat
Household items
Iron pot
Xum (clay jar)
Food and drink
Barley loaf, peck of peas
Chillak suvi, non
Social roles/titles
Lord, lady
Onaxon, ota, bek
Customs / Ritual practices
Sunday feast
Duv-duv gap, Ramazon
hayiti
Place names
Land of Giants
Buxoro, Qo‘qon
In the English folktales, household items and food-related realia are commonly
found, reflecting the rural, agrarian lifestyle characteristic of the source culture.
Phrases such as “a peck of peas” and “a barley loaf” serve not only a narrative function
but also introduce culturally marked concepts specific to traditional English diet and
measurement systems. In contrast, Zumrad va Qimmat foregrounds family structure,
daily rituals, and social interactions, as seen in terms like “chillak suvi”, a reference to
a traditional Uzbek wat
er vessel, or idiomatic expressions like “duv
-
duv gap bo‘ldi”,
denoting the rapid spread of gossip within a community.
To analyse how these culturally embedded elements are rendered in translation,
the identified realia were examined based on the strategies used to convey their
meaning. Table 2 presents representative examples of realia along with the observed
or modelled translation strategies.
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Issue
–3 № 4 (2025)
/ ISSN 2181-3701
25
Table 2. Translation Strategies Applied to Realia
Realia Item
Source Text
Translation Strategy
Example Translation
Barley loaf
English Tale
Descriptive
translation
Arpa unidan tayyorlangan non
Peck of peas
English Tale
Descriptive /
adaptation
Ko‘p no‘xat (approximation)
Iron pot
English Tale Cultural substitution
Qozon
Chillak suvi
Zumrad va
Qimmat
Descriptive
translation
Water kept in a clay jar
Duv-duv gap
Zumrad va
Qimmat
Adaptation /
descriptive
Word spread quickly through the
village
Onaxon
Zumrad va
Qimmat
Loan + explanation
Respected elderly mother
Ramazon
hayiti
Zumrad va
Qimmat
Descriptive
translation
The feast marking the end of
Ramadan
Land of
Giants
English Tale
Loan translation
Gigantlar mamlakati
Buxoro
Zumrad va
Qimmat
Loan translation
Bukhara
The analysis shows clear patterns in how cultural items are rendered for target
audiences. In the case of food-
related realia in English tales, such as “barley loaf” or
“peck of peas”, descriptive translation is predominantly used in Uzbek, as direct
equivalents do not exist. Occasionally, translators employ adaptation, choosing
general terms like “ko‘p no‘xat” to replace the culturally specific “peck of peas.”
Household items tend to lend themselves to cultural substitution, as seen in the
replacement of “iron pot” with “qozon”, which, while not identical, serves the same
functional role in Uzbek culture.
In contrast, social and ritual realia from Zumrad va Qimmat present greater
challenges for English translation. Terms like “chillak suvi” are typically re
ndered
using descriptive translation to explain the cultural object without losing its identity.
Idiomatic expressions such as “duv
-
duv gap bo‘ldi” necessitate adaptation or
descriptive paraphrasing, as literal translation would result in semantic opacity.
Ritual references like “Ramazon hayiti” are similarly explained for clarity in English
translations.
A noteworthy observation is the treatment of personal titles and social roles.
Terms like “lord” and “lady” from the English source texts are adapted in U
zbek
translations using culturally proximate equivalents such as “bek” or “xonim”.
Conversely, in Uzbek-to-
English translation, social terms such as “onaxon” are often
retained as loan words accompanied by explanation or rendered using descriptive
expressions that combine respect and relational role.
Finally, place names are consistently treated using loan translation in both
directions to preserve cultural integrity. Whether referring to “Buxoro” or the “Land
of Giants”, phonetic consistency and cultural s
pecificity are prioritized. In general, the
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Issue
–3 № 4 (2025)
/ ISSN 2181-3701
26
translation strategies observed in this analysis reflect an underlying tendency
towards foreignization when dealing with unique cultural practices and rituals, but a
preference for domestication when adapting material culture and functional objects.
The choice between these approaches is influenced by the cultural distance between
the source and target audiences and the nature of the realia itself.
These findings highlight the central role of translators as cultural mediators,
required to balance fidelity to the source culture with accessibility for the target
audience. Whether explaining, adapting, or borrowing, the strategy chosen
significantly shapes how cultural identity is preserved or transformed in the process
of folktale translation.
DISCUSSION
The analysis of
English Fairy Tales
and
Zumrad va Qimmat
demonstrated that
the translation of linguacultural realia involves complex decision-making processes
influenced by cultural distance, narrative function, and the translator's aim to balance
readability with cultural preservation. This section discusses the key patterns
identified in the results and situates them within the broader context of translation
theory and cultural mediation.
One of the most evident findings is the predominance of descriptive translation
in cases where culturally specific items lacked functional or conceptual equivalents in
the target culture. In translating from English to Uzbek, items like
“barley loaf”
or
“peck of peas”
could not be directly transferred due to the absence of corresponding
food items in traditional Uzbek cuisine. Therefore, the translator resorted to
explanatory phrases or approximations, ensuring that the target audience could
understand the general meaning without distorting the original cultural reference. A
similar pattern emerged when translating from Uzbek to English. Terms such as
“chillak suvi”
and
“duv
-
duv gap bo‘ldi”
required descriptive elaboration or paraphrase,
as these culturally marked concepts were not familiar to English readers.
In contrast, cultural substitution was observed primarily in the translation of
functional material culture items where the cultural gap could be bridged without
significant loss of meaning. For example, the translation of
“iron pot”
as
“qozon”
in
Uzbek is a practical solution, as both cultures recognize the object’s purpose, even if
the form differs. Similarly, in the case of social titles, adaptation strategies were
frequently applied:
“lord”
and
“lady”
were rendered as
“bek”
or
“xonim”
in Uzbek to
evoke a similar sense of status and social hierarchy.
These findings confirm the observations of Vlakhov and Florin [8] regarding the
importance of cultural context in determining translation solutions for realia.
According to their theory, translators must choose between preserving foreignness
and adapting content to the target culture’s frame of reference. In the analysed
folktales, th
e translators’ tendency toward
foreignization when dealing with unique
cultural items (especially rituals and idiomatic expressions) suggests a deliberate
effort to preserve cultural identity and authenticity. This strategy aligns with
Leppihalme’s argumen
t [9] that retaining culturally significant terms can enhance the
educational and intercultural value of a text, even at the cost of reader comfort.
However, the analysis also indicates that translators act as cultural mediators,
required to make compromises depending on the narrative function and cultural load
of each realia instance. When cultural specificity risks obscuring meaning, as in the
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Issue
–3 № 4 (2025)
/ ISSN 2181-3701
27
case of food items or household tools, translators tend to domesticate or explain
rather than borrow directly. Th
is pragmatic approach reflects Newmark’s
functionalist perspective [15], which emphasizes communicative effectiveness in
translation over strict adherence to formal equivalence.
An important implication of this analysis is the translator’s responsibility t
o
recognize which cultural elements are central to the narrative’s authenticity and
which can be adapted without significant distortion. Folktales, as repositories of
national culture and tradition, demand heightened sensitivity to the preservation of
culturally embedded concepts. Excessive domestication risks erasing these unique
cultural markers, while overreliance on foreign terms or literal translation can
alienate readers.
Finally, the limitations of this study must be acknowledged. The analysis
focused solely on word-level and phrase-level realia, excluding broader stylistic,
narrative, or structural adaptations. Moreover, the reliance on constructed
translations (where official translations were unavailable) introduces subjectivity into
the analysis, though these reconstructions were based on established translation
practices.
In sum, the findings of this article confirm that translating realia in folktales is
not merely a linguistic task but a cultural negotiation. The translator’s role extends
beyond language conversion to cultural representation, requiring both linguistic
competence and cultural awareness to bridge the gap between source and target
audiences effectively.
CONCLUSION
This article examined the translation of linguacultural realia in two culturally
distinct folktales:
English Fairy Tales
by Joseph Jacobs and the Uzbek folktale
Zumrad va Qimmat
. By identifying culturally significant items and analysing the
strategies used to render them into the target language, this work highlighted the
complex interplay between cultural preservation and communicative clarity in
folktale translation.
The analysis revealed that descriptive translation is the most frequently applied
strategy when dealing with culturally specific items that lack direct equivalents,
particularly in the translation of food-related and ethnographic realia. Cultural
substitution was also observed, especially when functional equivalence could be
established between source and target cultures. These patterns reflect the translator’
s
need to balance respect for cultural authenticity with the target audience’s cultural
knowledge and reading comfort.
One of the key findings of this article is the central role of the translator as a
cultural mediator. Translators must constantly navigate between maintaining the
foreignness of the source culture and adapting content for target readers. Their
strategic decisions directly influence how much of the source culture is preserved or
transformed in translation.
From a practical standpoint, the findings suggest that translators of folklore
should adopt a flexible approach. Where realia represent core cultural values or
identity, foreignization or descriptive translation is advisable to preserve authenticity.
In contrast, everyday objects or functional terms can often be rendered through
Xorijiy lingvistika va lingvodidaktika
–
Зарубежная лингвистика
и лингводидактика
–
Foreign Linguistics and Linguodidactics
Issue
–3 № 4 (2025)
/ ISSN 2181-3701
28
adaptation or cultural substitution, minimizing potential confusion without
compromising cultural representation.
This study is limited in scope to lexical realia at the word and phrase level.
Future research could extend this analysis to narrative structures, stylistic devices,
and paratextual elements in folklore translation. Additionally, comparative studies
involving other language pairs would contribute to a broader understanding of how
cultural realia are managed across diverse linguistic and cultural contexts.
Ultimately, this article underscores the significance of realia in folktale
translation as both a linguistic and cultural challenge, requiring sensitivity, creativity,
and intercultural awareness from translators working in this field.
REFERENCES:
1.
Baker, M. (1992). In other words: A coursebook on translation. Routledge.
(p. 25)
2.
Katan, D. (2004). Translating cultures: An introduction for translators,
interpreters and mediators. Routledge. (p. 33)
3.
House, J. (2015). Translation quality assessment: Past and present.
Routledge. (p. 102)
4.
Pym, A. (2010). Exploring translation theories (2nd ed.). Routledge. (p. 76)
5.
Ben-Ari, N. (2018). Translation and cultural identity: Selected essays on
translation and cross-cultural communication. Routledge. (p. 51)
6.
Aixelá, J. F. (1996). Culture
-
specific items in translation. In R. Álvarez & M. C.
Vidal (Eds.), Translation, power, subversion (p. 65). Multilingual Matters.
7.
Florin, S. (1993). Realia in translation. International Journal of Translation,
1(2), p. 124.
8.
Vlakhov, S., & Florin, S. (1980). Neperevodimoe v perevode
[Untranslatability in translation]. Moscow: Vyssaja Shkola. (p. 89)
9.
Leppihalme, R. (1997). Culture bumps: An empirical approach to the
translation of allusions. Multilingual Matters. (p. 61)
10.
Berman, A. (2000). Translation and the trials of the foreign. In L. Venuti
(Ed.), The translation studies reader (p. 287). Routledge.
11.
Tymoczko, M. (1999). Translation in a postcolonial context: Early Irish
literature in English translation. Routledge. (p. 118)
12.
Nida, E. A. (1964). Toward a science of translating: With special reference to
principles and procedures involved in Bible translating. Brill. (p. 165)
13.
Venuti, L. (1995). The translator’s invisibility: A history of translation.
Routledge. (p. 32)
14.
Chesterman, A. (2005). Ethics of translation. St. Jerome Publishing. (p. 39)
15.
Newmark, P. (1988). A textbook of translation. Prentice Hall. (p. 85)
