134
TRANSLATIONAL TERMINOLOGICAL CHALLENGES IN POLITICAL TEXTS
Holjuraeva Maftunabonu
PhD researcher at Tashkent State University
of Uzbek Language and Literature named after Alisher Navoi
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15737989
Abstract.
Political texts are characterized by their formal style, ideological weight, and a
dense network of specialized terms. Translating these texts requires more than lexical
substitution; it demands a deep understanding of political systems, cultural frameworks, and
discourse strategies. This article explores key terminological challenges encountered in the
translation of political texts, particularly from Uzbek into English, and proposes strategies to
maintain terminological accuracy and pragmatic relevance.
1. Introduction.
The translation of political texts poses unique challenges due to the
presence of specialized terminology rooted in a specific socio-political context. Terms such as
Oliy Majlis (the national parliament in Uzbekistan) or Yangi O‘zbekiston (New Uzbekistan)
reflect not only institutional realities but also ideological and cultural nuances. A literal or
semantically narrow translation often leads to loss of meaning, distortion of political intent, or
pragmatic ambiguity. Thus, achieving accurate terminological equivalence is crucial for
preserving the integrity of political communication.
2. Nature of Terminological Problems in Political Translation
2.1. Cultural and Conceptual Gaps.
Many political terms do not have direct equivalents
in the target language due to differing political systems and cultural experiences. For example:
“Mahalla” is a traditional Uzbek community structure with administrative functions.
Translating it as neighborhood loses the institutional and cultural significance it carries.
2.2. Institutional Mismatch
Terms tied to specific political bodies or governance models pose equivalence issues. For
instance: Oliy Majlis should not be translated as Supreme Assembly (which has vague or
different connotations in English), but rather as the Parliament of the Republic of Uzbekistan,
with appropriate contextual explanation if necessary.
2.3. Newly Coined and Ideologically Loaded Terms.
Modern political narratives often
introduce new terms that lack established equivalents in English:
- Yangi O‘zbekiston – While translatable as New Uzbekistan, the term carries ideological
significance related to ongoing reforms, national branding, and political aspirations.
3. Common Translation Mistakes
3.1. Literal Translation.
Over-literal translations tend to ignore the term’s pragmatic
and discursive context:
- Davlat mustaqilligi → incorrect: state freedom; correct: state independence
- Tashqi siyosiy faoliyat → incorrect: outside politics; correct: foreign policy activity
3.2. Stylistic Inconsistency.
Political texts are highly formal. Informal or colloquial
translations diminish their rhetorical authority:
- Tinchliksevar siyosat → rather than peace-loving policy, a more stylistically consistent
rendering is peace-oriented policy.
4. Strategies for Addressing Terminological Challenges
135
- Use of glossing and explanatory translation: When no equivalent exists, a brief
explanation helps convey the concept. Example: Mahalla → a self-governing local community
institution in Uzbekistan.
- Contextual equivalence approach: Identify the function and meaning of the term in the
source context and seek a target equivalent that performs a similar function.
- Reference to institutional terminologies: Use official terminology from international
bodies (UN, OSCE, EU) when applicable to ensure consistency and recognition.
- Terminological consistency: Maintain uniformity in term usage across the entire text to
prevent confusion or ambiguity.
Conclusion. Terminological precision is essential in political translation to ensure not only
linguistic accuracy but also ideological and communicative effectiveness. A translator must be
linguistically competent and politically literate, able to navigate institutional equivalence,
cultural references, and rhetorical subtleties. The use of explanatory translation, terminological
databases, and cross-referencing with official institutional sources are key strategies to
overcome terminological challenges.
References:
Используемая литература:
Foydalanilgan adabiyotlar:
1.
Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1997). The Translator as Communicator. London: Routledge.
2.
Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. Prentice Hall.
3.
Baker, M. (1992). In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. London: Routledge.
4.
Schäffner, C. (2004). Political Discourse Analysis from the Point of View of Translation
Studies. Journal of Language and Politics, 3(1), 117–150.
5.
Chesterman, A. (1997). Memes of Translation: The spread of ideas in translation theory.
Amsterdam: Benjamins.
6.
Shuttleworth, M. & Cowie, M. (1997). Dictionary of Translation Studies. Manchester: St.
Jerome Publishing.
