Analysis of B. Zahoder’s Ways of Translating A.Miln’s Book “Winnie-the-Pooh”
§1.Grammatical Aspect of the Translation
It is obvious that every word in the text is used in a particular form and all the words are arranged in sentences in a particular syntactic order. Grammatical forms reveal the semantic relationship between the words, clauses and sentences in the text. According to V. Comissarov1 “they can make prominent some part of the contents that is of particular significance for the communicants.”
Though the bulk of the information in the original text is conveyed by its lexical elements, the semantic role of grammatical forms and structures should not be overlooked by the translator. Grammatical aspect of the Source Text (ST) may be reflected when using parallel forms and structures in Target Language (TL).
However, in many cases equivalence in translation can be best achieved if the translator does not try to mirror the grammatical forms used in the ST. It is natural that there are no permanent grammatical equivalence and the translator can chose between the parallel forms and various grammatical transformations. He may opt for the latter in case there is no absolute identity of grammatical forms in SL and TL.
For instance, the idea of prior action expressed by the Perfect Tense is not present in Russian Language. The similar difference can be observed if one compares the finite forms of the verb in English and Russian. Both the English and Russian verbs have active and passive forms, but in English passive forms are more numerous and often used. It is not characteristic of Russian where the Passive
Voice is used in formal style only. As a result the Passive Voice in the ST is often rendered by the Active one in the translation: He was given a cool reception –Ему оказали холодный прием.
Speaking about grammatical equivalence L. Barhudarov 2 singles out two types of Grammatical Transformations: Transposition and Substitution. T. Levitskaya and A. Fitterman 3, on the contrary, do not admit that there are grammatical and lexical transformations in their pure form. They suggest their definition – Lexico -Grammatical Problems of translation.
As far as translation of Winnie-the-Pooh is concerned we think that Bahudorov‘s classification is more appropriate for our analysis.
1. Transposition
Transposition is a way of translation which supposes the change of language elements order in the Target Text as compared to the Source Text4 . The most common case of Transposition is the change of word order in the sentence structure. It is known that the word order in English and Russian sentences is different. It means that the Theme and Reme pattern is not the same for English and Russian sentences5 .| E.g.: | A suburban train was derailed near London last night. |
| Вчера вечером вблизи Лондона сошёл с рельс пригородный поезд. |
- The change of word order in the structure of Simple Sentence.
E.g.: And then he brightened up suddenly. И вдруг он совсем просиял. - The change of structural elements in the Composite Sentence.
E.g.: Pooh was very excited when he heard this and suggested that they should have an Expotition to discover the East Pole. Услышав это сообщение, Пух очень взволновался и предложил немедленно устроить Искпедицию к Восточному Полюсу. - The change of sentence order in the text.
E.g.: ” So much for washing”, said Eeyore” Roo’s fallen in!” cried Rabbit and he and Christopher Robin came rushing down to the rescue. -Ру упал в воду! - закричал Кролик. - Доумывался! – сказал Иа-Иа. Кристофер и Пух кинулись на помощь.
2. Substitution
Substitution is the most frequent and diverse kind of transformation. It is characteristic of both grammar and lexical aspects of translation. There are two kinds of grammatical substitutions: Morphological Substitution and Syntactical Substitution. Let us take Morphological Substitution. It is subdivided into:- Part of Speech Substitution which means that one part of speech in ST, is substituted for another one in TT. It happens when grammatical pattern in the original text does not coincide with that in the TT.
As far as “mouthful” is translated as “глоток”, ”кусок” the translation aiming at preserving the same part of speech would be impossible. Very often adjectives performing their predicative function are substituted by verbs.E.g.: What about of mouthful of something? А не пора ли нам подкрепиться? E.g.: Eeyore frisked about the forest waving his tail so happily that Winie-the-Pooh came over all funny. Иа - Иа принялся носиться по лесу с таким восторгом, что у Вини - Пух защекотало во всем теле. - The Substitution of Grammatical meaning for Lexical one.
L.Barhudarov does not include this kind of Substitution into his classification, but we think it is extremely important for rendering stylistic peculiarities of the original text.
E.g.: Indeed, he has eaten most of it (honey). К счастью, оказалось, он съел ещё не всё.
There is an inverted substitution – when lexical meaning is rendered by grammatical one. Let us take an example from the passage where Baby Roo was washing (very proud he could do it by himself) and suddenly fell into the river:
| “So much for washing!” said Eeyore. |
| –Доумывался! – сказал Иа. |
Syntactical Substitution
There are four types of the Syntactical Substitution 6:
- The Composite Sentence is substituted by a Simple one.
A subordinate clause in Russian composite sentence would sound superfluous. It would need more semantic elements:E.g.: What was a Heffulump like?Did it come when you whistled? Какой он этот Слонопотам? Идет ли он на свист? А он придет, если ты ему свистнешь? There is an inverted substitution.
The Simple Sentence would be less appropriate in this case. Piglet’s words would sound formal: Не мог же я падая, (при падении) наделать столько шумаE.g.: I couldn’t have made such a noise just felling down. Не мог же я сам наделать столько шуму, когда упал. - Principal Clause is substituted by a Subordinate one or vice versa. Unfortunately, we did not find instances of such substitution. So, let us move on to the next one.
- Subordination – Coordination substitution There are numerous examples to prove it, because in the Russian language Subordination is characteristic of mostly formal style, whereas Coordination dominates in colloquial one.
E.g.: …he jumped up and down to keep warm and a hum came suddenly into his head which seemed to him a Good Hum. …он прыгал, чтобы согреться и вдруг в его голове внезапно зазвучал шум, и он показался Вини хорошим шумом. E.g.: The wind had dropped and the snow, tired of rushing round in circles trying to catch itself up, now fluttered gently down until it found a place on which to rest… Ветер утих и снежок, которому надоело вертеться, пытаясь поймать самого себя за хвост, тихонько спускался вниз, и каждая снежинка сама отыскивала себе место для отдыха. - Clauses bound syndetically are substituted by Asyndetic Construction.
Having analyzed a lot of examples we come to the conclusion that grammar plays an important role in rendering the style of the original text. More over, handling peculiarities of Russian word formation the translator manages to convey even small stylistic nuances of emotional colouring in the Source Text.E.g.: Now don’t talk while I think. А теперь помолчите – я буду думать. §2. Lexical Aspect of the Translation
As a rule the object of translation is not a list of separate lexical units but a coherent text in which the SL words make up an integral whole. Though each word in the language has its own meaning, the information it conveys in a text depends to a great extend on its contextual environment. The context may modify the meaning of a word to such a degree that its regular equivalents will not fit the TT. V. Comissarov 7 writes the following about contextual modification, “The contextual modification may extend the connotative meaning of the word. The translator is greatly concerned about the adequate reproduction of this part of the word semantics, since it has an impact upon the whole text.”
A propos of adequacy, we shall mention the method elaborated by Y. Retzcker 8 that consists in overcoming difficulties concerning lexical aspect of translation. He tried to single out types of correspondence between two lexical units in ST and TT.
His classification runs as follows:
Equivalent Equivalent is a word or phrase which completely coincides with that from the original text. For example: rose – роза.
Analogue Analogue is a word or phrase which is quite close to the SL word meaning, but without complete coincidence. One may figure out the meaning analyzing the synonymic string of this word and find the most appropriate variant. For instance, reliable – достоверный, надёжный, magnificent – изумительный, чудесный.
But the real difficulty seems to arise when translator does not see any appropriate word given in the dictionary to fit the context. Therefore Retzcker suggests one more important way of translation – Adequate Substitution which has 3 types:
- Logical development of the idea of the word (interpreting)
- Antonymous translation
- Compensation (the usage of completely different means of TL to convey the meaning of the word from SL. It happens when translator deals with proverbs or idioms).
Barhudarov, in his turn, added some points to Retzcher’s classification, developing his own ideas of the Lexical Aspect of Translation. He suggests the following types of Adequate Substitutions (he calls them Lexical Transformations) 9:
Lexical Substitutions Antonymous Translation Compensation Addition Omission 1. Lexical Substitution
There are 3 kinds of Lexical Substitution:- Differentiation of the word meaning
- Generaliriation of the word meaning
- Substitution based on cause-effect relations
There are numerous examples concerning Differentiation in the translation made by B. Zahoder. He often uses this device to avoid unnecessary repetition. With repetition, we shall say, that A. Miln and B. Zahoder have their own approaches. It is natural because English and Russian provide their speakers with different means for doing that.E.g.: “Oh!” said Pooh. -Ой-ой-ой! – воскликнул Пух. E.g.: Pooh’s friend stopped shaking his head to get the prickles out and explained that Tiggers didn’t like thistles.“Then why bend a perfectly good one?” asked Eeyore. Друг Пуха на секунду перестал трясти головой (он пытался вытрясти колючки) и объяснил, что Тигры не любят чертополоха. -Тогда зачем было портить такой отличный экземпляр? The translator specifying the pronoun “one” makes the narration more expressive suggesting the word “экземпляр”.
The next Differentiation is prompted by the inner logic of the narration.
To think logically, it is more comfortable to investigate the tracks “squatting down”. Thus, B. Zahoder translates it “он присел на корточки” instead of just “присел”.E.g.: He sat down … then he fitted his paw into one of the Tracks. And the third example shows that using this type of Lexical Substitution the translator does not merely avoids repeating words, but even renders the emotional state of Christopher Robin, who tries to understand the mystery of Eeyore’s house disappearance.
Sometimes context dictates the translator to use Differentiating.E.g.: “It’s Pooh”, said Christopher Robin excitedly. “Possibly” said Eeyore. “And Piglet “said Christopher Robin excitedly. -Это Пух,– радостно сказал Кристофер Робин. -Вероятно,– сказал Иа-Иа. -И еще Пятачок,- взволнованно сказал Кристофер Робин.
Russian variant will be impossible without the noun.E.g.: “Roo’s fallen in!” cried Rabbit Ру упал в воду! Generalization of the word means that the word from the ST is substituted by the word with generic meaning in the TT. For instance, He comes over and visits me practically every weekend. - Он часто ко мне ездит, почти каждую неделю 10. As the matter of fact B. Zahoder does not often use this kind of Lexical Substitution.
Further in the context the translator interprets the idea: Надо вам сказать, что Вини-Пух очень хотел похудеть и потому старательно занимался гимнастикой.E.g.: Stoutness Exercises Утренняя зарядка Substitution based on cause-effect relations (when cause is substituted by effect or vice versa).
To balance means “to put your body or something else into a position where it is steady and does not fall: How long can you balance on one leg?” So, in the Zahoder’s translation cause is substituted by effect. He writes “с трудом держась” because the effect of balancing is rather a complicated action therefore it is being done with certain difficulty. Perhaps, using this type of substitution Zahoder wants to emphasize that Eeyore in spite the difficult balancing on his three legs is eager to hear once again that he is going to receive his birthday present. If the translator had opted for the word “балансировать” he would have lost much. First, this word is not an authentically Russian one. Second, the Eeyore’s attitude would not have been rendered.E.g.: Balancing on three legs he began to bring his leg very cautiously up to his ear. С трудом держась на ногах, Иа стал осторожно поднимать четвертую ногу к уху. 2. Antonymous Translation
Taking into account that the term “antonym” is usually used when speaking about the words with opposite meanings in one and the same language 11 we shall say that antonymous translation is a complex Lexico-Grammatical Substitution of the negative construction by the positive one or vice versa 12. B. Zahoder uses Antonymous Translation very often.
E.g.: Piglet scratched his ear in a nice sort of way and said that he had nothing to do until Friday. Пятачок мужественно почесал за ухом и сказал, что до пятницы он совершенно свободен.(the negative construction is substituted by a positive one) We also can give one more example:
You’ll be quite safe with him. С ним тебя никто не тронет. If the translator had given a positive construction like “с ним ты будешь в безопасности” it will be too formal and not altogether appropriate for the colloquial speech.
3. Compensation
It is used when some elements in the ST do not have their equivalents in the TT. In order to compensate this semantic loss the translator conveys the information applying some other means of his language. Very often Compensation serves to render stylistically marked words to convey the register of the whole passage. Like in this one, where Piglet’s curiosity is rendered.
When Compensation is applied, the equivalence of the translation is not provided on the level of separate elements but of the whole text translated.E.g.: he felt that he must see what a Heffulump was like. …нужно хоть одним глазом взглянуть на Слонопатама. E.g.: … and Pooh’s jar of honey at the bottom was something mysterious, a shape and no more. …а горшок с мёдом, стоявший на дне, был призрачным, словно тень. 4. Addition
As Barhudarov noticed, Addition in translation is necessary when the semantic components of lexical unit are not formally expressed13 . He writes that this phenomenon is quite typical of English. These semantic elements which are meant but not formally expressed Z. Harris calls “appropriate words”. He writes that the appropriate word is “the main word to occur with particular other words in the given culture or subject mutter" 14 . As an example he gives “violin prodigy” (where the missing element which is not formally expressed is “playing”) and “violin merchant” where the corresponding appropriate word is “selling”. Barhudarov gives another example where the phrase “I began the book” should be clarified with the help of the appropriate word (either to read or to write). It depends. But not “buy” which is not an appropriate word for this sentence.If we try to analyze the following example from Zahoder’s translation we will see that he has to add the adverbial modifier of time in order to render the grammatical meaning (prior action) of the Past Perfect .
E.g.: It rained and rained and rained. He had had a tiring day. Накануне он очень устал. Though, it could be interpreted as Grammatical Substitution, where grammatical meaning of a word in the ST is rendered semantically (see p. 41).
5. Omission
Omission is opposite to Addition. It means that translator omits superfluous elements. They are elements denoting the meaning which is already expressed in the text15 .“The most common elements – objects of omission– are pair-synonyms, which are characteristic of English stylistics”, writes L. Barhudarov 16. A propos of B. Zahoder translation, we, unfortunately, did not come across such phenomenon. However, we found another one, quite interesting as well.
E.g.: “Well”, said Christopher Robin, putting on his shoes. “I shall go and look at it. Come on.” - Ну, – сказал Кристофер Робин, надевая ботинки, – я должен на него посмотреть. Пошли. So, as you see no word “go” in Russian translation is used, because in the Russian variant it sounds rather superfluous. Logically, if one wants to look at something or somebody which is quite far away he certainly needs to go. Therefore Zahoder omits this very “go”.
Having analyzed all these methods of rendering adequacy, we came to the conclusion that Lexical Problems of Translation are extremely important for rendering stylistic peculiarities of the ST. We realize that B. Zahoder provides adequate reproduction of the English text professionally handling all the types of Lexical Transformation and adjusting them to Russian Stylistics.
§3 Stylistic Peculiarities of B. Zahoder’s Translation of A. Miln’s Book “Winnie-the-Pooh”.
There is no satisfactory explanation of style, no infallible guide to good writing. Nobody knows why certain notes in music are capable of hypnotizing the listener, though the same notes slightly rearranged do not produce such an amazing effect. The same is with style which gives to any contents its own individual and suitable form to be expressed in the best way. Every writer using the language, revealing something of his spirit, habits and capacities does it with the help of his own individual style, though applying stylistic devices common for all the writers possessing the same language.
“All writing is communication; creative writing is communication through revelation. No writer long remains incognito.”17We would like to paraphrase these words according to our investigation – no translator long remains incognito.
The mission of a translator is extremely difficult. The translation should preserve the sense as well as style, the author’s mood and peculiarities of the English language as a high idiomatic one. The translation of such books as “Winnie-the-Pooh” demands not just the knowledge of the details of English, but also sense of humor, possibility to create new original elements.
It is known that the principal stylistic effect of the text is created with the help of special stylistic devices. “To enhance the communicative effect of his message the author of the Source Text may make use of various stylistic devices such as metaphors, similes, puns and so on. Coming across a stylistic device the translator has to make up his mind whether it should be preserved in his translation or left out and compensated for at some other place” 18, writes V. Comissarov in his work devoted to translation from English into Russian.
Investigating stylistic peculiarities of B. Zahoder’s translation we followed the typology of rendering stylistic phenomena of the Sours Text elaborated by A. Popovitch 19. We applied his typology when analyzing translation of “Winnie-the-Pooh”. According to our analysis we singled out the most frequent phenomena characteristic of “Winnie-the-Pooh” translation as far as its stylistic peculiarities are concerned. As a result the classification runs as follows:
Stylistic Correspondence Stylistic Substitution Stylistic Individualization Stylistic Amplification Stylistic Weakening 1. Stylistic Correspondence
Stylistic Correspondence is defined by A. Popovitch as a correspondence between translation and ST when the translation adequately reproduces the stylistic invariant of the original text 20. It means that all the elements in the ST and TT correspond to each other on the stylistic and semantic level. It is amazing how B. Zahoder manages to translate adequately the stylistic device of pun which is one of the most difficult for translation. For instance, Piglet entirely surrounded by water writes a message “Help! It’s me, Piglet” , puts it into a bottle and drops it into the river. Then Pooh saw the bottle and took the paper out. “It’s a Missage!” he said. As a matter of fact it is considered a speech error usually made by children. But having a more scrutinizing look at this word we understand that the word “miss” is hidden there, which means that Piglet is alone, he is scared, and he misses his friends badly and hopes to be rescued by them. B. Zahoder, in his turn, writes, “Это спаслание- вот что это такое!” We would like to draw your attention to this word because B. Zahoder uses the same method of rendering the speech error with deep inner sense disclosed by the new invented “root” спас .
We found numerous examples of Stylistic Correspondence in Zahoder’s translation. Another instance deals with rendering Onomatopoeia, the most frequent stylistic device used by A. Miln in the book.
B.Zahoder renders Onomatopoeia using contextual coinage “бумкать” that certainly could be interpreted as a Stylistic Correspondence.E.g.: If only he could stop bumping. Если бы он только на минутку перестал бумкать. In the following example we can also trace Stylistic Correspondence as far as Personification and stylistically marked words are concerned.
E.g.: The sun was still in bed but there was a lightness in the sky over the Hundred Acre Wood which seemed to show that it was waking up and would soon be kicking off the clothes. Солнце еще нежилось в постели, но небо над Дремучим Лесом слегка светилось, как бы говоря, что солнышко уже просыпается и скоро вылезет из- под одеяла. 2. Stylistic Substitution
Stylistic Substitution happens when the translator does not have corresponding stylistic means for reproducing certain images from the original text. Thus, he substitutes them for others, more appropriate and more natural for his language.
E.g.: But whatever his weight is in pounds, shillings and ounces. He always seems bigger because of his bounces. Не знаю я сколько в нем метров И литров и килограмм. Но тигры, когда они прыгают Огромными кажутся нам. We may see that B. Zahoder substitutes shillings and pounds absolutely unfamiliar to Russian children. More over, equivalence of the translation does not suffer, because he preserves the same incompatibility of words aimed at producing humoristic effect.
There is another example of Stylistic Substitution.
Russian rabbits do not scratch their whiskers. It is obvious. If the translator had echoed the English variant the style of the translation would have been damaged.E.g.: Rabbit scratched his whiskers. Тут кролик задумчиво почесал за ухом. The same problem occurs with rendering the image of Hundred Acre Wood. Acres as well pounds are superfluously exotic for the Russian reader. That is why Zahoder substitutes it with the expression Дремучий Лес , where “дремучий” is a fixed epithet that is characteristic of Russia folklore like добрый молодец, красна девица.
3. Stylistic Individualization
In accordance with A. Popovitch’s classification Stylistic Individualization means that the translator can change the structure of stanza, the rhythm of the poem or the way of creating images.
This approach is typical of translators who are poets too. Since Zahoder is not only a translator but a poet as well, we can easily prove he inclines to use this Stylistic Transformation.
E.g.: It’s very very funny Куда мой мед деваться мог? ‘Cos I know I had same honey Ведь был полнехонек горшок! ‘Cos I had a label on Он убежать никак не мог – Saying “Hunny” Ведь у него же нету ног A galuptious full- up pot too Не мог уплыть он по реке And I don’t know where it’s got to (Он без хвоста и плавиков) No I don’t know where it’s gone не мог зарыться он в песке, Well, it’s funny. не мог, а все же – был таков! 
Не мог уйти он в темный лес Не мог взлететь на небеса. Не мог, а всё - таки исчез! Ну это прямо чудеса. If we try to analyze the prosody of both poems we undoubtedly will see the difference.
The number of lines is different (Miln’s poem consists of 8 lines, Zahoder uses 12 ones). Despite the fact that A. Miln and B. Zahoder begin with jambus they continue with different metre. A. Miln shifts it to trochaic foot whereas B. Zahodeer prefers to go on with jambus. Though, he preserves the Pyrrhic foot, which appears when the stress is lifted from the syllable on which the language will not allow stress 21.English poem Russian poem u – | u – | u – | u u – | u – | u – | u – u u | – u | – u | – u u – | u – | u u | u – u u | – u | – u | – u u | u – | u – | u – – u | - u u u | u – | u – | u – u u | – u | u u | – u u u | u – | u u | u – u u | – u | u u | – u u u | u – | u u | u – u u | – u | u u | – u u | u – | u u | u – - u | - u u u | u – | u – | u – u u | u – | u – | u – u u | u – | u – | u – u u | u – | u u | u – u u | u – | u u | u – Besides that the way of creating images is quite different. The translator makes the pot of honey the key image of the poem. Unlike the author of “Winnie- the-Pooh” he builds it up with the help of Anaphora.
4. Stylistic Amplification
Stylistic Amplification is the intentional emphasizing of the excessive means. The translator can introduce his own metaphors, epithets or other stylistic devices which are not stated in the original text.
There are a vast number of examples concerning Stylistic Amplification. Compare:
My birthday present? Мой деньрожденный подарок ? Russian translation sounds much stronger than English phrase which is neutral. It is due to contextual coinage, which reflects Eeyore’s disappointment. B. Zahoder emphasizes that the balloon Piglet has burst was of great importance for Eeyore – it was his birthday present - деньрожденный подарок.
Sometimes the translator opts for more strong interjections than in the original text.
E.g.: “Help!” “Help!” – cried Piglet -Караул! Караул! – закричал Пятачок. Let us take another example:
My spelling is wobbling. У меня правильнописание какое-то хромое. B Zahoder does not only preserve the Personification – he even amplifies the whole phrase intentionally violating the traditional use of the Russian set-phrase “правописание хромает”.
This is quite a strong stylistic device, for the translator achieves the effect by pretending to understand the phrase literally. More over, he gives a childlike interpreting of the word правописание – правильнописание. (compare: лопатка – копатка, язык – лизык, вентилятор - вертилятор) “It is amazing, writes poet K. Tchukovsky, how children can change one or two sounds in a word and make it subdue to their logic and their own ideas of the things.”22 The word “правильнописание” is definitely stronger than “spelling” which is a neutral one. “Правильнописание” can be interpreted as folk etymology. According to N. Kunina words like that being introduced in a text always make it emotionally coloured and more expressive 23. This fact is very important when analyzing speech characteristic of Winnie-the-Pooh, who is full of humor and optimism.
Sometimes B. Zahoder uses Stylistic Amplification by adding a stylistic device (in this case it is Personification) which is not stated in the original text.]
E.g.: Splash! – and in a little while it bobbled up again on the water. - Плюх! – сказала бутылка и закачалась на волнах. He often uses synonyms instead of one word twice repeated in the original text.
E.g.: It’s me Piglet Help! Help! Это я, Пятачок Спасите! Помогите! Sometimes B. Zahoder amplifies the style by extending the situation given in the original text.
E.g.: … he (Piglet) was so ashamed of himself that he ran straight off and went to bed with a headache. …Ему стало так стыдно, что он стремглав помчался домой и лёг в постель с головной болью, и в то утро он почти окончательно решил убежать из дому и стать моряком. He emphasizes Piglet’s shame which Piglet himself considers even a disgrace, that is why he wants to flee from home and become a sailor.
Often times the translator amplifies the style of the original text substituting italicized words by emotionally coloured ones. For example, to render Piglet’s fear (in the chapter about the Heffulump)
E.g.: “What’s that?” -Ой, мама! Кто там? 5. Stylistic Weakening
Stylistic weakening is “muffling” of expressive means of the original text and their substitution for neutral ones. The register of the ST becomes one grade lower.
. The specific function – emotional colouring – of the phrase epithet is not involved. The phrase “так беззаботно как только мог” does not render the tone of the passage. According to V. Bolotov 24 the contextual conversion sentence > word, which is performed in the phrase epithet, results in emotional connotation of the whole passage. As to Zahoder, he translates it quite neutrally. However, sometimes he manages to translate this stylistic device adequately.E.g.: (about Piglet) … and as to seem quite at ease he hummed tiddely-pom once or twice in a what-shall-we-do-now kind of way. ... а чтобы не подавать виду, что он смущался, он раз другой тирлимбомбомкнул так беззаботно как только мог.
A propos of phrase epithet, it does not exist in Russian Stylistics and should be substituted by an adequate construction. That is why the translator takes risks of rendering it neutrally. In other words – he weakens the Style. Let us take another example of Stylistic Weakening:E.g.: … and what-have-we-got-here noises… …чмоканье, означающее: ” Интересно, что это нам такое дали?” 
Isn’t us funny Мишка очень любит мёд How a bear likes honey Почему? Кто поймет? Buzz! Buzz! Buzz! В самом деле почему I wonder why he does! Мёд так нравится ему. It is obvious that the translator does not preserve the stylistic device of Onomatopoeia. It undoubtedly could be considered Stylistic Weakening.
The main character of the book Winnie-the-Pooh is always singing. He is noisy and optimistic. If you begin to read the book in English you immediately spot that Pooh’s beloved expression is “Bother”. “Bother” may stand for expression of surprise, fear, joy, irritation, etc. Despite the fact B. Zahoder’s translation of this words always perfectly suites the context it is not observed as individual graphon of Winnie-the-Pooh.
E.g.: “Bother!” said Pooh. “Isn’t there anybody here at all?” -Простите, - сказал Винни-Пух. - А что, совсем-совсем никого нет дома? E.g.: “Oh, bother!” said Pooh “I shall have to go on.” -Ой, спасите! Я лучше пойду назад. E.g.: “Bother!” said Pooh “It all comes of trying to be kind to Heffulumps -Ай-ай-ай! – сказал Пух, - Вот что получается, когда чересчур заботишься о Слонопотамах. E.g.: “Bother!” said Pooh as he opened it “All that wet for nothing.” -Жаль, жаль! Сказал Пух, открыв бутылку. – Столько мокнуть и совершенно зря! Используются технологии uCoz
