`
122
THE PROBLEM OF LEXICAL-SEMANTIC EQUIVALENCE: BASED ON ENGLISH-
UZBEK TRANSLATION EXPERIENCES
Mirzaakhmedova Gulzira Oybek kizi
Master's student at Webster University
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16875626
Abstract.
This article examines the issue of lexical-semantic equivalence in the context of
English-Uzbek translation. Drawing on examples from literary, journalistic, and technical texts,
the paper explores the challenges translators face when selecting equivalent units in the target
language. Special attention is given to cultural, stylistic, and contextual factors that affect the
adequacy of translation. The findings suggest that full equivalence is often unattainable due to
conceptual differences between the two languages, and that creative strategies, such as
adaptation and paraphrase, are frequently required.
Keywords
: lexical-semantic equivalence, English-Uzbek translation, adaptation,
paraphrase, cultural specificity.
Lexical-semantic equivalence is one of the central concerns in translation studies. It refers
to the degree of semantic correspondence between a source language (SL) unit and its target
language (TL) counterpart. In English-Uzbek translation, achieving such equivalence is often
challenging due to differences in cultural concepts, syntactic structures, and semantic fields.
The notion of equivalence has been widely discussed by scholars such as Eugene Nida,
Peter Newmark, and Mona Baker, each offering frameworks to evaluate and achieve it.
However, the unique cultural and linguistic relationship between English and Uzbek adds a
specific layer of complexity.
Equivalence is commonly divided into different types:
Formal equivalence – a close adherence to the source text's wording and structure.
Dynamic (or functional) equivalence – prioritizing the effect on the target audience over
literal accuracy.
Semantic equivalence – focusing on meaning over form.
In the case of English-Uzbek translation, the divergence in lexical systems often leads to a
preference for dynamic and semantic equivalence, as literal rendering may cause distortion or
incomprehensibility.
There are the following factors that influence lexical-semantic equivalence:
Cultural specificity: Many English words and expressions refer to concepts absent in
Uzbek culture. For example, pub has no direct equivalent in Uzbek, requiring adaptation
(
pivoxona
or bar depending on context).
Polysemy and ambiguity: English words like light or spring have multiple meanings. In
Uzbek, different words are needed depending on context (
yorug‘lik
vs.
yengil
for light;
bulog‘
vs.
bahor
for spring).
Idiomatic expressions: Idioms often resist direct translation. For instance, spill the beans
can be rendered as «
sirni oshkor qilmoq»
, which is semantically equivalent but structurally
different.
The strategy for achieving equivalence depends on the following factors:
`
123
Paraphrase: When no direct equivalent exists, rephrasing ensures that meaning is
preserved.
Example:
To have a sweet tooth
→
shirinlikka o‘ch bo‘lish
.
Cultural adaptation: Replacing culturally bound terms with local equivalents.
Example:
Thanksgiving
→ explained as
minnatdorchilik kuni
with cultural clarification.
Borrowing and transliteration: When a concept is new or universal, borrowing maintains
authenticity.
Example:
internet
→
internet
.
Translation case studies include various strategies and methods used to accurately
convey the meaning of a text from one language to another. These examples range from simple
phrases to complex texts that require a deep understanding of the cultural and linguistic
context, such as:
Literary translation: In literary works, metaphor and connotation require careful
handling. For example, Shakespeare’s "
The green-eyed monster
" (jealousy) may be translated as
hasad iloni
to preserve imagery.
Technical translation: Precision is essential, and equivalence often depends on
standardized terminology.
Hard drive
→
qattiq
disk is now widely accepted.
The diagram illustrates the frequency of different strategies used to achieve lexical-
semantic equivalence in English–Uzbek translation:
- According to the data, paraphrase is the most frequently applied strategy, accounting for
40% of all cases.
`
124
- This is followed by cultural adaptation at 30%, where translators adjust expressions to
fit Uzbek cultural context.
- Borrowing, which involves directly adopting words from English, makes up 20% of
cases.
- Finally, literal translation is the least common approach, representing only 10%, as it
often fails to convey idiomatic or culturally specific meanings accurately.
This distribution suggests that translators prioritize meaning and cultural relevance over
rigid word-for-word translation.
Lexical-semantic equivalence in English-Uzbek translation is a complex, multi-
dimensional issue influenced by linguistic, cultural, and contextual factors. While full
equivalence is rarely possible, functional adequacy can be achieved through strategies like
paraphrase, cultural adaptation, and borrowing. Translators must navigate between fidelity to
the source and clarity for the target audience, making equivalence a matter of informed choice
rather than mechanical substitution.
References:
1.
Baker, M. (2023). In other words: A coursebook on translation (3rd ed.). Routledge.
2.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (2025). A comprehensive grammar of the
English language. Longman.
3.
Sultannazarova M.Q., & Azatova N.A. Origin of phrasal verbs in Uzbek and English
languages. (2025). Journal of Multidisciplinary Sciences and Innovations, 4(4), 386-
388. https://doi.org/10.55640/
