Ukrainian historical terminology designating social and military status in Old Rus': Examining their counterparts in English

Abstract

The article researches translators' challenges in rendering domain-specific terms which include culture-specific items. The study has been carried out using Old Rus' historical terminology employed to designate social and military status. It was selected en masse from academic texts, using monographs and academic articles in both languages. 82 language units representing culture-specific historical terms related to social, political and military organisation of the society of that period were chosen and described in terms of appropriate translation. Our hypothesis has been tested as to the unacceptability of approximation (analogous translation and generalisation) in rendering culture-related terms that designate highly specific concepts of the defined period in Ukrainian history. The research establishes that approximate translation fails to meet the requirements of strict definition and accuracy demanded by professional terminology. Our study underlines the importance of secondary term formation, descriptive translation, and the method called combined renomination (transcription and description combined). For a translation to be accurate, the shift in translation should follow the shift in concept. The specific term may have wider, more general semantics, and in each particular context it should be specified. The use of the description or combined renomination helps to make the meaning of the concept clearer.  The study demonstrates that the most accurate and effective secondary term formation usually follows the pattern of term formation in the original language.