Reproduction Peculiarities of the Modern Political Discourse

254 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVIII OLEKSANDRA V. POPOVA The State Institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky” ORCID id: orcid.org/0000-0002-6244-5473 Fields of research: teaching English and Chinese to future translators/interpreters (teaching tools and socio-political background for developing skills in listening comprehension, speaking, reading and writing); Translation Studies (discourse analysis, adequacy of translation, translatorial competence, tactic and strategic issues of translation); General Linguistics; Comparative Linguistics, etc. ILONA M. DERIK The State Institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky” ORCID id: orcid.org/0000-0002-8979-4745 Fields of research: Translation Studies, General Linguistics, Stylistic Interpretation, Discourse Studies, Germanistics. NATALYA S. ZHMAYEVA The State Institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky” ORCID id: orcid.org/0000-0003-3382-0155 Fields of research: Discourse Analysis, Text Linguistics, Translation Studies. DOI: doi.org/10.35321/all88-12 REPRODUCTION PECULIARITIES OF THE MODERN POLITICAL DISCOURSE Šiuolaikinio politinio diskurso vertimo ypatumai Straipsniai / Articles 255 Reproduction Peculiarities of the Modern Political Discourse ANNOTATION The article deals with the issues related to the concept of evaluative-attitudinal category represented in linguistics and its manifestation in political discourse. The authors investigate the structure of addressee’s positive and negative attitudes towards a certain situation, which generates emotional component of connotation. Special attention is given to the semantic structure of evaluative attitudes and means of their expression. The notions “evaluativeattitudinal category”, “political discourse” and “political communication” are considered from different viewpoints. The functions of the political text alongside translation strategies (the strategy of tertiary translation) and tactics (translational grammatical transformations – permutations, substitutions, additions and omissions) are determined. The authors give examples of how interlocutors’ particular feelings arise by means of emotional structure of exclamatory and rhetorical questions, exclamations, expressions of gratitude, praise, condemnation, etc. on the material of Ukrainian political texts. The ways of their reproduction in English are presented. KEYWORDS: political discourse, evaluative attitudes, translation strategies and tactics, emotional connotation, semantics. ANOTACIJA Straipsnyje analizuojami su vertinamojo požiūrio kategorijos sąvoka kalbotyroje susiję klausimai ir šios kategorijos apraiškos politiniame diskurse. Autoriai tiria teigiamo ir neigiamo adresato požiūrio į tam tikrą situaciją struktūrą, kuri sukuria emocinį konotacijos komponentą. Daug dėmesio skiriama vertinamojo požiūrio semantinei struktūrai ir raiškos priemonėms. Sąvokos „vertinamojo požiūrio kategorija“, „politinis diskursas“ ir „politinė komunikacija“ yra vertinamos įvairiais aspektais. Straipsnyje nustatomos politinio teksto funkcijos, vertimo strategijos (vertimo tretiesiems asmenims strategija) ir taktikos (vertimo gramatinės transformacijos – pakeitimai, sukeitimai, pridėjimai ir praleidimai). Autoriai pateikia Ukrainos politinių tekstų pavyzdžių, iliustruojančių, kaip tam tikri pašnekovų jausmai kyla naudojant šaukiamųjų ir retorinių klausimų emocinę struktūrą, sušukimus, dėkingumo, pagyrimo, pasmerkimo ir kitas frazes. Pateikiami jų vertimo į anglų kalbą būdai. ESMINIAI ŽODŽIAI: politinis diskursas, vertinamasis požiūris, vertimo strategijos ir taktikos, emocinė konotacija, semantika. 1. INTRODUCTION Evaluative attitude is considered a rather generalized phenomenon that can be equated with cognitive activity. Evaluative activity is characteristic of human OLEKSANDRA V. POPOVA, ILONA M. DERIK, NATALYA S. ZHMAYEVA 256 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVIII nature, since the entire environment perceived by a person correlates with the existing evaluative picture of the world. Evaluative attitude as a category has firmly entered the field of diverse linguistic studies. The term “attitude” has been widely used in articles, monographs and dissertations for a long time. The evaluation category was studied by many domestic and foreign scientists (Kosmeda 2000; Prychod’ko 2001; Ostrovs’ka 2001; Kolšanskij 2018; Arutjunova 1984; Vol’f 1985; et al.). The interaction between a person and his/her environment contributes to the development of an evaluative vision of the world. The evaluative nature of human cognition is highlighted in many studies. It is generally accepted that the decisive function of communication is given to vocabulary. Aleksander I. Iliadi (2022: 30‒63) focuses on etymological features of Slavic-Iranic compound words which have transformed their semantics. Thus, ancient and modern semantics of lexis must be taken into account while communicating under today’s conditions. The interaction between a person and his/her environment contributes to the development of an evaluative vision of the world. The evaluative nature of human cognition is highlighted in many studies. Nina D. Arutjunova (1984) attributes the evaluative attitude to pure human categories. On the one hand, the evaluation is determined by the physical and mental nature of a person, his/her being and feelings; on the other hand, it determines a person’s way of thinking, his/her activity, attitude to other people and objects of reality, perception of art (Arutjunova 1984). Evaluative attitude as a category is studied in various fields of knowledge like philosophy, logics, ethics, and psychology. Modern psychology claims that attitude is closely related to the cognitive function. Evaluative attitudes arise within communication which can be of different nature: social, interpersonal, cultural, political, mass-oriented (Lasswell 2006; McLuhan, Fiore 1967; Powell, Cowart 2016; Shannon 1948). The aim and course of communication are substantiated by social components (Habermas 2000; Motrenko 2005; Sosnin, Mychnenko, Lytvynova 2011). Communication is realized via language signs, a common system of symbols, as well as extralinguistic means (facial expressions, gestures, etc.) which may generate manipulation in compliance with speakers’ aims and goals (Oleškov 2006). Hence, we can assume that during information exchange communicants are inclined to change their ways of thinking (Harre, Smith 1995; Parygin 1999). The process of transferring information is classified into verbal, nonverbal, emotional, cognitive. Psychologists and language philosophers consider that communication must have persuasive tools, including manipulation techniques, for achieving positive effects and developing social consciousness (Andreeva 2000; Černova, Slotina 2012; Holovatyj 2006; Chmiljar 2017). Straipsniai / Articles 257 Reproduction Peculiarities of the Modern Political Discourse Political discourse, alongside other types of discourse (administrative, legal, military, pedagogical, religious, medical, economic, advertising, sports-related, scientific, media-based, etc.) belongs to institutional discourse (Van Dijk 1995). It is revealed, to a great extent, in social environment and involves the use of particular verbal and attitude-provoking means. The contextual background of each particular discourse should be analyzed in order to cognize how it functions and be able to model its process and outcomes (Harris 1952; Sсhiffrin, Tannen, Hamilton 2001; Bacevyč 2010; Karasik 2010; Shymko 2021). It should be noted that nowadays Ukraine is living through complicated times connected with the military actions. Therefore, political activity plays an essential role in all spheres of life: social, cultural, educational, economic, diplomatic, etc. The Ukrainians’ perception of the Government’s decisions depends upon their means and ways of rendering socially important information to the citizens of Ukraine. Since Ukraine is integrating into the European Union, the translator’s/interpreter’s mission has gained its significance. These are translators/interpreters who represent Ukraine on the world arena and their understanding of denotative and connotative semantics reflects on the results of transmitting political “messages” to partner countries. In view of the above, the relevance of the work is determined by the need for a more in-depth study of the problems related to reproduction of the evaluative-attitudinal category within the framework of political discourse in the translation studies aspect, as well as an analysis of the peculiarities of its reproduction when translating the designated texts from Ukrainian into English. The speeches of the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyi contain evaluative and attitudinal connotations which are endowed with negative and positive semantics. Under the designated conditions, it is of great importance to adequately decode them, on the one hand, and to transform their essence into English, on the other hand. Thus, the linguistic and extralinguistic framework of Volodymyr Zelenskyi’s original speeches and their actualizations in the target language (English) are our research objects; the means of translating evaluative and attitudinal vocabulary from Ukrainian into English within the material under study are the research subject. The aim of the current research is to reveal the meaning of the concept of evaluative-attitudinal category in linguistics and its manifestation in political discourse. The aim is based on the following goals: • to analyze the means of expressing attitudes in the source language (Ukrainian); • to detect translation means of rendering attitudes in the target language (English). OLEKSANDRA V. POPOVA, ILONA M. DERIK, NATALYA S. ZHMAYEVA 258 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVIII Research material and methodology. The Ukrainian texts of the speeches and daily addresses of the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyi within the period from March 2022 to December 2022 as well as their translations into English were chosen as the research material. These materials were posted on the official website of the Office of the President of Ukraine (available at: https://www.president. gov.ua/news/speeches), in Twitter, and Facebook. The volume of the source texts accounts for 65 conditional printed sheets. Comprehensive analysis of the Ukrainian public discourse in our case involves the integrated application of scientific research methods, in particular: • sampling method – to form the empirical material within political discourse; • linguistic analysis – to identify linguistic and extralinguistic evaluative and attitudinal markers of political discourse; • the method of theoretical generalization of the material under focus – to detect the adequate translation means to be used while reproducing the speeches of the Ukrainian political leader – the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyi – into English taking into consideration linguistic features of Ukrainian and English; • the method of translation analysis – to identify translation peculiarities of rendering the material under study into English. 2. THE EVALUATIVE-ATTITUDINAL CATEGORY: THE LINGUISTIC ASPECT, ITS SUBJECT AND OBJECT IN EVALUATIVE-ATTITUDINAL STATEMENTS Language enables the reflection of human relationship with the surrounding world in various aspects. This is especially true for the attitude (evaluation). Evaluation-attitude can be considered a comprehensive category; it is worth assuming that there is hardly a language in the world which has no proper names for good or bad. This issue still remains urgent due to the diversity of the study of the evaluative and attitudinal category and various approaches to the determination of evaluative and attitudinal values as well as the analysis of evaluative and attitudinal categories. In addition, evaluability is a rather complex phenomenon for further analysis and understanding and it is studied not only in linguistics, but also in many other sciences. The interest of linguists in the in-depth study Straipsniai / Articles 259 Reproduction Peculiarities of the Modern Political Discourse of the evaluative and attitudinal category is only growing thanks to the presence of a wide range of its expression means. Every day, a person has to learn about environmental phenomena and express his/her attitude towards them. Evaluation is a component of the process aimed at reflecting everyday reality and establishing an attitudinal relationship between the subject and the object. Today, the study of the evaluative and attitudinal category is of particular importance, as the issue related to the relationship and interaction between semantics and pragmatics becomes relevant, both in theoretical and practical aspects. The content of evaluation and attitude has always been the subject of debate among philosophers, logicians, and linguists. The concern was caused by the lack of clear criteria for evaluation and attitude. The philosophical category of evaluation and attitude is characterized by the following functions: worldviewcentered, methodological (gives a person a general orientation in the world), logical (participates in the mental process), practical, and the function oriented to the development of spiritual culture (Zagraevskaja 2007). The main direction in the study of the evaluative and attitudinal category by modern scientists is related to the definition of evaluative and attitudinal meanings and expression means. Nowadays, this research has expanded to the studies of its semantic, functional and pragmatic features, compared to the fact that scientists’ attention used to be focused only on the analysis of evaluative and attitudinal semantics and structure. There is an assumption that evaluation and attitude are closely related to pragmatics. That is, the speaker intends to influence the listener in order to form his/her appropriate reaction. In the field of linguistics, the category of evaluation causes a number of disagreements. Many authors often consider the terms “assessment” and “evaluability” to be identical. When explaining the relationship between these concepts, we should state that evaluability refers to the linguistic implementation of the logical category of evaluation, that is, the property of language units to express attitudinal significance. Evaluation is considered as an opinion about the attitude, level or property of an object. The concept “attitude” acts as a basis for evaluative judgment, that is, in the process of relating the subject of evaluation to the attitudinal picture of the world, the evaluation of the object of reality is formed. As a result, evaluation, objectified by language and expressed by linguistic means, turns into evaluability (Heleta, Žmaèva 2022: 31–43). Often, the word combinations “category of evaluation” and “category of evaluability” are used in a similar or the same context, but currently there is no clear distinction between these concepts, and in most cases, they are used interchangeably. It is important to note that the use of the term “category of evaluation” is largely related to the definition of a logical category and OLEKSANDRA V. POPOVA, ILONA M. DERIK, NATALYA S. ZHMAYEVA 260 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVIII its implementation in language, while the category of evaluability manifests itself mainly as a linguistic concept, especially as a component of connotation (Heleta, Žmaèva 2022: 31–43). Evaluation is considered the main category of reality. A person analyzes the entire surrounding world: realities, objects, phenomena, properties, ways of behavior. Person’s thoughts, actions, and feelings are also analyzed. Therefore, almost anything can be the subject of evaluation. Evaluation is a factor generating the formation of a picture of the world values and attitudes, since values and attitudes are inherent in every culture. A positive or negative attitude towards a person, object or phenomenon, due to the conformity or non-conformity of its qualities with the evaluation criteria of the evaluation subject, i.e., emotional evaluation (Markelova 1993), like any evaluation structure, is reflected by two factors: objective and subjective, and represents the subject of the evaluation to the object and the properties of the object itself to which the evaluation is directed. All evaluations are based on the human system of values and represent a complex semantic polarity to the predicate pair, i.e., good/bad, positive/ negative, etc., which helps to determine the value of objects at all linguistic levels. The evaluation category has a lot in common with the modality category. Since the verbal expression of subjective attitudes and evaluations is actualized only in the process of communication, accordingly, the subjective modality is a category of communication expressing the subjective relationship to the content of the statement. Evaluation is a conscious phenomenon that reflects the result of understanding the value of environmental phenomena. Ways of evaluating life facts, perceived through person’s own or generally accepted systems of values, norms and laws, are inherent in each individual. Scientists’ attention is focused on the study of various aspects of evaluation: the correlation of expression, modality and evaluation; means of expressing evaluation, objects of evaluation, the meaning of evaluation categories in translation, gender aspects of evaluation thesaurus, classification of wordevaluation forms and evaluation; speech acts, etc. Evaluation, as a functional-semantic category, extends to all levels of language and is represented by a set of language units with an evaluative-attitudinal value which express the positive or negative attitude of the speaker to the content of the message aimed at the implementation of a certain communicative task (Krysanova 1999). Evaluation is a consequence of the functional-communicative focus of discourse. Its formation is influenced not only by its immediate operators, but also by many other factors: presupposition, cultural and social vision of the world, knowledge of psychology, habits, views of the sender of information, Straipsniai / Articles 261 Reproduction Peculiarities of the Modern Political Discourse knowledge of the content of the text that immediately precedes the message (Prychod’ko 2001). Due to the fact that evaluation is cognitive in nature, it can be considered logical-subjective. Evaluative and cognitive functions of language are closely related. At the same time, they are equal, evaluating accompanies cognizing. In the process of evaluating, cognition is created. The interdependence of evaluation and cognition belongs to the field of cognitive linguistics. An exclusively cognitive approach, which regulates the relationship between language and thinking, is more appropriate for the study of the evaluation category, as it studies a person’s cognitive activities. Evaluating, as a process of perceiving and processing information, is oriented towards decision-making and helps to choose further practical actions. A person acknowledges the surrounding world and makes sense of it, therefore, in his/ her everyday life, he/she has the ability to evaluate speech facts in his/her daily practice. The origin of the concept “evaluability” fixes in its meaning at least three essential elements: a description of the external properties of objects and things as objects of a person’s valuable attitude towards them; psychotypes of the person himself/herself as the subject of these relations, relationships between people and their communication. Thanks to this, values acquire a generalized meaning. Each category of values has a basic meaning of value – objective, psychological and social. By learning the nature of an object or phenomenon, a person reveals certain aspects of social relations. The importance of a thing or a phenomenon is determined primarily by the social attitude towards it, and values, both individual and universal. As the most complete expression of the life experience of a particular society, values are formed into a certain system which the individual adheres to in the process of his/her own evaluation. Individual values are a personal reproduction of general or collective values. Each person has his/her own ones, depending on the communication peculiarities of a particular person. Identification, assignment, and assimilation of social values by individuals are determined by their social identification with the values of small contact groups interlocutors belong to. Vinogradov’s opinion of that “the word shines with the expressive colors of social environment” still remains relevant. The scholar assumes that “reflecting the personality (individual or collective) of the speaker, characterizing his/ her evaluation of reality, it is expedient to highlight that his/her personal evaluation qualifies him/her as a representative of one or another social group. Expression is always subjective and personal – from the most fleeting to the most stable one, from the excitement of a moment to the permanence of a OLEKSANDRA V. POPOVA, ILONA M. DERIK, NATALYA S. ZHMAYEVA 262 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVIII person alongside his/her immediate environment, class, epoch, people, culture” (Vinogradov 1986: 135). In an individual evaluation, the author reflects not only his/her attitude, but also the generally accepted principle of things that exists in this society. That is, even in the case of a subjective evaluation, there is a concept of a normative position. Thus, the stereotypical perception of the subject of the evaluation in relation to the normative state of affairs, which is accepted in this society, is one of the criteria on the basis of which the evaluation is given. The lack of a general opinion regarding the independence of the evaluative and attitudinal category prompts us to consider it as a constituent element of the comparison category, highlighting the integral category of “comparison and evaluation”. Such a generalization is not devoid of meaning, because “to compare means to express one’s attitude, to “evaluate”, “to measure”, guided by our feelings and our passions” (Karcevskij 1976: 107–112). Elena M. Vol’f believes that evaluation involves the inherent qualities of the subject, i.e., it contains an objective component. According to Vol’f, the subject of evaluation is based on both personal attitude towards the object of evaluation and stereotypical attitudes towards the object (Vol’f 1985). The selection of evaluation types is one of the problems of evaluation research. There are a number of rating classifications based on various criteria. Vol’f (1985) divides evaluations into emotional and rational ones. Emotional evaluation is primarily an individual evaluation which is a direct reaction to an object. It is based on individual stereotypes contained in the imagination of a particular speaker. The value of rational evaluation tends to remove time frames. Emotional evaluation is aimed at changing the emotional state of the interlocutor and causing an appropriate reaction, while rational evaluation is designed to agree or disagree with the expressed opinion (Heleta, Žmaèva 2022: 31–43). Depending on the number of evaluation objects, absolute or relative evaluations are distinguished. To define absolute evaluation, we can use the terms “good” and “bad” and to define the relative (comparative) one – the terms “better” and “worse”. When dealing with absolute evaluation, usually, the evaluation object is one, and when dealing with relative evaluation, there are two objects. In other words, absolute evaluation contains an implicit comparison based on the commonality of social stereotypes, whereas comparative evaluation consists in comparing objects with each other (Sapir 1985: 43–78). As a result, according to the nature of evaluation, it can be divided into positive, negative and neutral, based on approval, condemnation or the absence of pronounced characteristics. Scientists claim that different types of evaluation can be expressed differently in language (Heleta, Žmaèva 2022: 31–43). Straipsniai / Articles 269 Reproduction Peculiarities of the Modern Political Discourse 4. THE SPECIFICITY OF THE EVALUATION CATEGORY TRANSFER IN POLITICAL DISCOURSE Over the past decades, most research in the field of political discourse analysis has focused on the relationship between language and politics. For example, the study of political discourse by Paul Chilton (2004) reports that language and politics are closely related at a fundamental level. Similarly, Sara Rubinelli (2018: 17–29) found that language is important for politics because politicians use their power to make decisions and influence citizens through language. In other words, the connection between language and the political life of society is quite close. First, the proposed type of communication takes on the characteristics of the means of mass manipulation. Secondly, the language mechanisms used to manipulate the mass consciousness are seen as planting democratic ideas and values. Third, to trace these mechanisms, scholars need to turn to political discourse and find appropriate methods of its analysis. Indeed, understanding the argumentative nature of political texts is keynote to being able to appreciate the political strategies (Fairclough, Fairclough 2012). The translation of political discourse is a set of incompatible requirements: it must be accurate and capable to correctly and quickly perform some specific tasks, and at the same time be politically correct and accurate. The term “discourse” embodies many concepts but it is difficult to define it precisely. In the middle of the 20th century, representatives of the Oxford and Cambridge linguistic schools defined the theoretical foundations for the study of political discourse. The most promising findings in this area and its systematic research were reported by Teun A. Van Dijk (2009). Based on the concept of political discourse, the scientist showed that in addition to differences in the very construction of social situations as contexts, cultures can also differ depending on how context definitions affect a text and a conversation. The image of a politician is a reflection of his/her personal “picture of the world”, his/her axiological attitudes and evaluation. Evaluation is generally a very characteristic tool of influence on the listener, and in the political sphere it generally plays a special structuring role. It is without evaluation that the expansion of political views is impossible. Political discourse is based on utilitarian, moral, and ethnic values. For more in-depth research, discourse analysis is widely used. Its main purpose is to describe the conventions of encoding and interpreting culture in certain discursive fields, as well as the underlying assumptions of culture OLEKSANDRA V. POPOVA, ILONA M. DERIK, NATALYA S. ZHMAYEVA 270 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVIII (Fetzer, Lauerbach 2007: 3–30). In addition, it can reveal a hidden meaning and show the difference between a politician’s speech and his/her true intentions. After all, the results of such an analysis make it possible to reveal baseless promises and manipulative strategies verbalized by linguistic means. The value of this method in the study of political discourse is undeniable. Power, relationality and difference are said to be keynote characteristics of global politics in translation (Berger, Esguerra 2018: 1–21). Thus, the main goal of translation studies is to study the specific situation in which the authorities had an influence on translation activity and cultural development. Translation, which is understood as a mechanism of representation of another culture, plays an essential role in the modern world. This is not just a linguistic transfer, but also an intercultural activity (Bánhegyi 2014: 139–158). The accuracy of the translation is achieved not only due to the knowledge of the algorithms of the other language but also to the intersection of the original message and the cultural space of the translator. In this respect, translations and translators are situated in very specific social and political contexts and are inevitably subject to the changes, ruptures and upheavals these contexts undergo (Berger, Esguerra 2018: 1–21). Political discourse is an integral part of social relations. In the implementation of political discourse, the language means alongside extralinguistic factors and cognitive structures are involved. There is an opinion among translators that the translation of political texts does not require a specialist to have specific knowledge in a narrowly focused topic, when compared with a special translation which requires in-depth knowledge in the specific field of translation activity that is being carried out. It should be stressed that when translating political topics, the translator’s “background knowledge” is still an important component and the broader it is, the more adequate the translation will be. The implementation of the translation of the political discourse enables considering and analyzing the features related to the translation, as well as a high lexical level, since the vocabulary of political topics is very prone to semantic changes. A large number of scientists agree that translation is a rather complex process. In order to adequately and correctly convey the content of the original expression, it is necessary to choose the necessary version of translation and to correctly convey its grammatical construction. Sometimes it is complicated by the fact that stylistic factors are subject to translation which are also important to take into account. The success of a translated text of political discourse is determined by how effective the linguistic means of influencing the listener are and how a translated text meets the generally accepted norms of the other language within the framework of mass communication. Straipsniai / Articles 271 Reproduction Peculiarities of the Modern Political Discourse The primary purpose of translating political discourse is to elicit a response from the target recipient somewhat similar to that of the original speaker. In this regard, the role of the translator is growing. Since political discourse appeals to a hierarchy of values prevalent at a certain stage of social development, the translator must take a certain political position (Gentzler 2002: 195– 218). Therefore, the latter must interpret the source text and find appropriate linguistic means to fully preserve its pragmatics and emotionality in the target text. In addition, political texts lack logical sophistication. As a result, certain linguistic stereotypes are involved in translating with “awkward” phrases and often conventional or meaningful phrases. It should be borne in mind that the translation process involves certain mental efforts on the part of the translator. An important feature of political discourse is its influence on the listener or audience. Therefore, it is important to understand the communicative-pragmatic attitude which is a purposeful set of linguistic means used by the subject of expression for further influence on the recipient. Discourse by its very nature is related to pragmatics, the pragmatic aspect of language and communication is related to a person’s attitude to language signs aimed at expressing his/her evaluations, emotions, intentions when performing and perceiving linguistic operations in discourse. Issues of translation strategies have received considerable attention in translation studies. Some linguists have proposed different strategies to resolve the conflict between syntactic and communicative functions in translation. For example, Mona Baker (2018) lists eight translation strategies that professional translators use to transfer linguistic and pragmatic meanings from the source language to the target language. They include translation containing more general words, translation containing neutral vocabulary, translation with cultural substitution, translation using loanwords with explanations, translationperiphrasis using related words, translation-periphrasis using unrelated words, omission and addition. However, the environment in which translation takes place inevitably influences the strategies used by the translator (Baker 2018). Political discourse is created to obtain, maintain and use political power. It is aimed at expressing views on the world and convincing the audience to whom attention is directed in the undoubted correctness of such a view. Fiodorov states that “the main reason for accurate translation is the knowledge of the subject” (Fiodorov 2002: 34). It is also important for the translator of political texts to realize that “language organizes the world in its own way according to language norms. It reflects the historical development of an ethnos, people’s customs and traditions, cultural traditions that are refracted and changed at each new stage of development of this linguistic and cultural community” (Popova 2011: 105‒107). OLEKSANDRA V. POPOVA, ILONA M. DERIK, NATALYA S. ZHMAYEVA 272 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVIII The translation of political discourse has a number of stylistic and functional properties that are interdependent with the features of political discourse itself. The most relevant function of political discourse is influence on the addressee. Modern translation theory sees a close relationship between translation and sociolinguistic factors. The recipient always perceives a translated text through the lens of their national culture and, accordingly, some meaningful aspects may be incorrectly interpreted or not understood at all. Political discourse can be described as a “complex form of human activity” based on the recognition that politics cannot be done without language. Politics is about people and the lives they lead in organized communities. Politics, like any other social activity, has its own characteristics, the variety of language characteristic of a certain group. The discourse needs detailed analysis. Although research on the relationship between language and power began a long time ago, a detailed and nuanced approach from a critical perspective is certainly new. The analysis of a text in the original language should not be limited to the study of syntactic relationships between linguistic units or the denotative meaning of words but it should consider the connotative meanings of the formal structure of communication. A connotative evaluation of the formal structures of a message is essentially an analysis of a communication style and discourse is the main area of stylistic concern. The nature of a message, the purpose of the author and the translator, as well as the audience can influence the type of translation. In many cases, the translator may have an imperative goal, that is, to make the action clear and convincing, and this is precisely what happens in the translation of political discourse. Translation studies and intercultural communication are closely related. Translators must be able to work at a high level of intercultural competency which is where complex problems come into play. The cultural aspect is an important indicator of the interdisciplinary nature of modern translation studies and refers to the analysis of translation in its cultural, political, and ideological context. The translator must come to recognize the ideological devices that are typical of a particular discourse and period in order to use them to restructure the semantic relations in the target text. In modern translation studies, there has been a shift in focus from language to human activity in a cultural context. The translator must be aware of the characteristics that define a discourse in which a text is located if it is to preserve any sense of historical or semantic identity. The translator must understand that the connection between a discourse and a text is of a particular importance: discourse is embodied in texts, and texts make up a discourse. Discourse goes beyond a set of texts, that is, abstract structures are connected to material conditions that underlie the articulation of meaning (Scott, Bruce 1994: 580–607). Straipsniai / Articles 273 Reproduction Peculiarities of the Modern Political Discourse 5. MEANS OF EXPRESSING THE EVALUATION CATEGORY IN THE UKRAINIAN POLITICAL DISCOURSE Having analyzed the actual material, based on the classification of Wolf who distinguishes between rational and emotional evaluations, some means of expressing the evaluation category were highlighted. Both rational and emotional evaluations are present in the original text. During the analysis, we also divided the evaluation into absolute or relative; positive, negative or neutral. Lexemes of positive semantics are the representatives of rational evaluation, such as adjectives, nouns, and phraseological units (available at: https://www. president.gov.ua/; Twitter, and Facebook): “Це був результативний для України тиждень. Багато різних активностей – за моєю участю, за участю першої леді України, за участю Премʼєр-міністра та міністра закордонних справ.” (It was a productive week for Ukraine. Many different activities – with my participation, with the participation of the First Lady of Ukraine, with the participation of the Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs.) “Провів сьогодні засідання Ставки Верховного Головнокомандувача. Питання зрозумілі. Передова. Забезпечення наших військових…” (Held a meeting of the Staff of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief today. The issues are clear. Frontline. Provision of our military. And new threats created by Russia.) “Хто насправді міцний, а хто вдає міцність. Хто справді відчуває свою силу, а хто намагається з усіх сил приховати слабкість і невпевненість.” (Who is really strong, and who pretends to be strong. Who really feels his own strength, and who tries his best to hide weakness and insecurity.) “До речі, з моменту започаткування такої відзнаки для наших військових підрозділів – а вона була започаткована у травні цього року – вже 46 військових частин відзначені за мужність і відвагу. Героїзм, мужність наших воїнів, прагнення до незалежності та справедливості […].” (By the way, since the establishment of such an award for our military units – and it was established in May of this year – 46 military units have already been awarded for courage and bravery. The heroism and grit of our warriors, the striving for independence and justice […].) “Наша держава демонструє безпрецедентну сміливість […].” (Our country shows unprecedented courage […].) Words that have an evaluative meaning, namely effective, clear, strong, helpcentered, heroic, frank, courage-filled, unprecedented courageous, tangible, truth-oriented, strength-based, initiative can be attributed to rational evaluation, OLEKSANDRA V. POPOVA, ILONA M. DERIK, NATALYA S. ZHMAYEVA 274 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVIII since the speaker has no goal to provoke a reaction from the listeners, he/she only states his/her own opinion. Since the object of evaluation is the same in each of the sentences, the evaluation can be considered absolute which, in most cases, has a positive character. “Дякую за влучність нашим воїнам!” (I am grateful to our warriors for accuracy!) “Вдячний усім у світі, хто допомагає нам захищати життя і свободу!” (I am grateful to everyone in the world who helps us protect life and freedom!) “Я дякую всім нашим воїнам – від командувачів до рядових! Дякую кожному, хто допомагає нашій обороні!” (I am grateful to all our soldiers – from commanders to ordinary soldiers! I am grateful to everyone who helps our defense!”) “Дякую партнерам за ці вагомі кроки солідарності. Завдяки таким рішенням наших друзів ми зберігаємо соціальну стабільність […].” (I thank the partners for these weighty steps of solidarity. Thanks to the decisions of our friends, we maintain social resilience […].) “А зараз окремо подякую прикордонникам Чопського загону, які воюють саме на Бахмутському напрямку […].” (And now I would like to separately thank the border guards of the Chop detachment, who are fighting near Bakhmut […].) “Кожного дня здобуваємо для України нові сили, щоб пройти цю зиму, і я дякую всім, хто працює заради цього і хто допомагає нашій державі.” (Every day we gain new strength for Ukraine to get through this winter, and I thank everyone who works for this and who helps our state.) “І я ще раз дякую всім нашим партнерам, які допомагають. Дякую всім нашим героїчним працівникам ДСНС, нашій поліції, військовим, які проводять розмінування.” (And I thank once again all our partners who help. I am thankful to all our heroic employees of the State Emergency Service, our police, and the military who carry out demining.) “Це відчутний тиск. І я вдячний усім нашим воїнам, які його витримують. Вдячний і партнерам, які розуміють, що в таких умовах ми потребуємо збільшення оборонної допомоги. Я дякую всім, хто воює, працює й допомагає, захищаючи Україну!” (It’s a palpable pressure. And I am grateful to all our soldiers who endure it. I am also grateful to the partners who understand that in such conditions we need an increase in defense assistance. I thank everyone who fights, works and helps to protect Ukraine!) These sentences are an example of an expression of gratitude on the part of the speaker of the original text and by their nature, in addition to being rational, they can also be considered absolute with a positive meaning. “Коли Росія заявляє, що нібито хоче переговорів, а сама оголошує мобілізацію […]. Усім усе зрозуміло. Росія сама ховає перспективу переговорів своїми ж руками” (When Russia declares that it supposedly wants negotiations, but Straipsniai / Articles 275 Reproduction Peculiarities of the Modern Political Discourse it itself announces […]. Russia itself hides the prospect of negotiations with its own hands.) “Розбиті будинки, катівні, масове поховання […].” (Ruined houses, torture chambers, mass burial […].) Evaluability is expressed in whole sentences; this is evidenced by the semantic load of the sentence reinforced with the help of graphic signs in writing and the corresponding falling intonation in oral speech. The evaluation can be characterized as rational, absolute and negatively expressed. A large part of the source information of these political excerpts of speeches is endowed with a certain pronounced emotional content similar to the nature of evaluation. Here are some of them: “Уже 218 днів ми захищаємось від тих, у кого більше, ніж у нас, ракет та людей […]. І ми робимо все, щоб захистити своїх людей та незалежність України. Це наш святий обов’язок. Обов’язок перед нашими батьками. Обов’язок перед нашими дітьми. Обов’язок перед усіма поколіннями нашого народу – тими, хто жив, і тими, хто житиме на нашій землі. Нам не потрібно чужого!” (For 218 days, we have been defending ourselves against those who have more missiles and people than we do […]. And we do everything to protect our people and the independence of Ukraine. This is our sacred duty. Duty to our parents. Duty to our children. Duty to all generations of our people – those who lived and those who will live on our land. We don’t need what’s not ours!) “Що на них усіх чекає? Ви знаєте відповідь […]. ” (What awaits them all? You know the answer […].) The speech of the speaker of the source text is oral, so thanks to the increased intonation and emphasis on individual words, we can understand which of them are evaluative. By the type of evaluation category, such words as vile, criminal, senseless, cruelty, terrible are emotional aimed at causing a certain reaction of recipients to the content of the statement. It can also be emphasized that all of them are absolute and negative in nature. “Катастрофічна ситуація в окупованому Криму. Повністю підтверджується інформація щодо кримськотатарського народу: більшість мобілізаційних повісток розписана там саме на киримли […] ще одна причина для негайної й жорсткої реакції всього світу.” (Catastrophic situation in the occupied Crimea. The information about the Crimean Tatar people is fully confirmed: most of the mobilization summonses are written there specifically for Crimeans […] another reason for the immediate and harsh reaction of the whole world.) The adjective “catastrophic” is characterized by the negative nature of the assessment with an emotional and absolute meaning. “Депортації. Спалені міста й села, знищені повністю – нічого не залишається живого […]. Ракетний терор. Масові поховання […].” OLEKSANDRA V. POPOVA, ILONA M. DERIK, NATALYA S. ZHMAYEVA 276 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVIII (Deportations. Burnt cities and villages, completely destroyed – nothing remains alive after racism […]. Rocket terror. Mass burials […].) By nature, the evaluation of these expressions can be classified as negative and absolute with a pronounced implicit emotional content of the statement. “Очевидний контраст із нами.” (An obvious contrast with us.) “Що на них усіх чекає? Ви знаєте відповідь.” (What awaits them all? You know the answer.) “Хотите больше? Нет? Тогда протестуйте. Боритесь. Убегайте […]. Это – варианты для вас, чтобы выжить” (Russian variant). (Want more? No? Then protest. Fight back. Run away […]. These are options for you to survive.) “Та й коли це сталося? Одразу, як в Індонезії завершився перший день саміту «двадцятки» і найбільш помітні заяви прозвучали, основні зустрічі відбулися.” (And when did it happen? As soon as the first day of the G20 summit ended in Indonesia, the most significant statements were made, the key meetings took place.) “Чому саме Одеса? Чому саме Україна? Чому саме Чорне море? Цьогоріч Україна стала світовим взірцем сміливості […].” (Why Odesa? Why Ukraine? Why the Black Sea? This year, Ukraine became a global example of courage […].) “Ці слова я казав на цьому ж місці у цей же день рівно один рік тому. Що відтоді змінилося? Чимало. В нашій країні, Європі й усьому світі.” (I said these words in the same place on the same day exactly one year ago. What has changed since then? A lot in our country, Europe and the whole world.) Taking into consideration the obvious evaluative negative connotation, these sentences are endowed with a significant emotional content, since they are rhetorical questions, the answer to which is already clear to everyone. “Ми встановимо всі особистості тих, хто катував, хто знущався, хто приніс це звірство […] на нашу українську землю.” (We will establish all the identities of those who tortured, abused, who brought this atrocity […] to our Ukrainian land.) Thanks to the use of lexical repetitions in sentences, emotionality is enhanced. The words “tortured”, “abused”, “atrocity”, “crimes” that are negative, as well as absolute in their expression, are valuable in translation. “Світ шукає засоби для захисту людей від голоду та цінової кризи, і Україні є що запропонувати. Ми постійно збільшуємо експорт продовольства, ми допомагаємо Продовольчій програмі ООН, відправляємо зерно як гуманітарну допомогу країнам, які цього потребують – Ефіопії, Сомалі. І ніколи, ніколи Україна не провокувала жодних криз на продовольчому ринку.” (The world is looking for means to protect people from hunger and price crisis, and Ukraine has something to offer. We constantly increase food exports, we help the UN Food Program, we send grain as humanitarian aid to the countries that need Straipsniai / Articles 277 Reproduction Peculiarities of the Modern Political Discourse it – Ethiopia, Somalia. And Ukraine has never ever provoked any crisis in the food market.) In the original text, there is a double negation which also emphasizes the emotionality of the statement and expresses a negative attitude. “Дякую вам усім, хлопці! Молодці!” (Thank you all guys! Well done!) “Бити ракетами по території НАТО […]. Це дуже суттєва ескалація. Треба діяти.” (Firing missiles at NATO territory. This is a very significant escalation. We must act.) “І я хочу зараз сказати всім нашим польським братам і сестрам. Україна завжди вас підтримає! Перемога можлива, коли немає страху!” (I want to say now to all our Polish brothers and sisters: Ukraine will always support you! Victory is possible when there is no fear!) “Робимо все, щоб допомогти нашим хлопцям на цьому напрямку. Нашим героям, які тримають там оборону. Кожен, хто там, заслуговує найвищої подяки!” (We do everything to help our boys in this direction. Our heroes who are holding the defense there. Everyone there deserves the highest gratitude!) “Ми про це пам’ятаємо. Мусимо! І ми бачимо, що відбувається сьогодні у світі, що відбувається в Україні.” (We remember that. We have to! And we see what is happening today in the world, what is happening in Ukraine.) “Звільнили Ірпінь. Молодці! Вдячний кожному і кожній – усім, хто працював на цей результат.” (Irpin has been liberated. Well done! I am grateful to everyone who worked for this result.) The evaluation of these examples can be characterized as rational, absolute and positively or neutrally expressed. Due to the semantic load of sentences, it is possible to understand the mood of the speaker and his attitude to situations thanks to graphic meanings in the form of exclamation marks. The communication manner of the speaker has characteristic features and expresses his attitude to reality using the nouns with an evaluative component: “Допомагайте тим в окупованих районах, хто цього потребує: літнім людям, одиноким, родинам із дітьми. Україна повернеться на всю свою землю, і маємо зберегти там якнайбільше наших людей.” (Help those in the occupied areas who need it: elderly people, single people, families with children. Ukraine will return to all its land, and we must keep as many of our people there as possible.) “Відсутність масованих ракетних ударів говорить лише про те, що ворог до них готується і може вдарити в будь-який час. Хоча очевидно, що і без світла ми добре знаємо, куди стріляти та що звільняти […].” (The absence of massive missile strikes only means that the enemy is preparing for them and can strike at any time. Although it is obvious that even without light we know well where to shoot and what to liberate […].) OLEKSANDRA V. POPOVA, ILONA M. DERIK, NATALYA S. ZHMAYEVA 278 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVIII All evaluative nouns from these text passages are examples of emotional evaluation aimed at causing a certain reaction of the listener, and the evaluation is absolute, with a vivid negative meaning. 6. LINGUISTIC INTERPRETATION OF THE OBTAINED DATA In the presented work, the evaluation category was classified according to various criteria. One of the main classifications was presented by Vol’f (1985) who distinguishes emotional and rational evaluation. Other linguists and scientists distinguish evaluation as relative or absolute: they divide it into positive, negative and neutral in nature. Emotional evaluation is aimed at causing the audience a certain reaction to a specific event or circumstances; therefore, by the nature of the message of these examples of political speeches, it is mostly endowed with negative content. Rational assessment, in its turn, does not set itself the goal of changing the emotional state of the interlocutor, but involves expressing one’s own opinion aimed at agreement or disagreement on the part of the addressee. Because of this, almost all examples of rational evaluation are positive or neutral in nature. Translators/interpreters tend to use the strategy of tertiary translation (creation of a target text that satisfies the needs of the target language speaker, the purpose of a target text may be different from the one of the creator) when dealing with political texts. In the cited texts of political speeches used in this work, there is no relative evaluation at all. Then, as the absolute value occurs in all the examples given, the role of the only object of comparison is usually implicit. Many examples of both emotional and rational evaluations are expressed in whole sentences, for example: Emotional evaluation: “Вони хіба що не роблять мило з людей, не роблять абажури зі шкіри... Масштаб не на всю Європу […].” – “They don’t make soap out of people, they don’t make lampshades out of leather... The scale is not the whole of Europe […].” “Дякую всім, хто воює й працює заради перемоги України!” – “I am grateful to everyone who fights and works for the victory of Ukraine!” “Вдячний усім у світі, хто допомагає нам захищати життя і свободу!” – “I am grateful to everyone in the world who helps us protect life and freedom!” “Скільки разів Україна говорила про те, що нашою країною державатерорист не обмежиться?” – “How many times has Ukraine said that the terrorist state will not be limited to our country?” Straipsniai / Articles 285 Reproduction Peculiarities of the Modern Political Discourse Parygin Boris D. 1999: Парыгин, Борис Д. Анатомия общения [Anatomija obščenija], Санкт Петербург: Издательство Михайлова В. А. [Sankt Peterburg: Izdatel’stvo Michajlova V. A.]. Pisanova Tat’jana V. 1997: Писанова, Татьяна В. Национально-культурные аспекты оценочной семантики: Эстетические и нравственные оценки [Nacional’nokul’turnye aspekty ocenočnoj semantiki: Èstetičeskie i nravstvennye ocenki], Москва: Издательство Икария [Moskva: Izdatel’stvo Ikarija]. Popova Tat’jana G. 2011: Попова, Татяна Г. Cинтагматические особенности юридического дискурса [Sintagmatičeskie osobennosti juridičeskogo diskursa]. – Инновации в преподавании иностранных языков студентам-юристам [Innovacii v prepodavanii inostrannych jazykov studentam-juristam], материалы межвузовской научно-практической конференции [materialy mežvuzovskoj naučno-praktičeskoj konferencii], 25 марта 2011 г. [25 marta 2011 g.], Москва: Издательство Российская правовая академия Минюста РФ [Moskva: Izdatel’stvo Rosijskaja pravovaja akademija Minjusta RF], 105–107. Prichod’ko Hanna I. 2001: Приходько, Ганна І. Способи вираження оцінки в сучасній англійській мові [Sposoby vyražennja ocinky v syčasnij anhlijs’kij movi], Запоріжжя: ЗДУ [Zaporižžja: ZDU]. Powell Larry, Cowart Joseph 2016: Political Campaign Communication: Inside and Out, 2nd edition, New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. Romanova Tat’jana V. 2008: Романова, Татьяна В. Модальность. Оценка. Эмоциональность: монография [Modal’nost’. Ocenka. Èmocional’nost’: monografija], Нижний Новгород: НГЛУ имени Н. А. Добролюбова [Nižnij Novgorod: NGLU imeni N. A. Dobroljubova]. Rubinelli Sara 2018: Rhetoric as a Civic Art from Antiquity to the Beginning of Modernity. – The Routledge Handbook of Language and Politics, ed. by R. Wodak, B. Forchtner, London, New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 17–29. Sсhiffrin Deborah, Tannen Deborah, Hamilton Heidi E., eds., 2001: The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Sapir Edward 1985: Сепир Эдуард. Градуирование [Graduirovanie]. – Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. Лингвистическая прагматика [Novoe v zarubežnoj lingvistike. Lingvističeskaja pragmatika], вып. 16 [vyp. 16], ч. 16 [č. 16], сост. Н. Д. Арутюнова [sost. N. D. Arutjunova], 43–78. Shannon Claude E. 1948: A Mathematical Theory of Communication. – Bell System Technical Journal 27, 379–423. OLEKSANDRA V. POPOVA, ILONA M. DERIK, NATALYA S. ZHMAYEVA 286 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVIII Scott Susanne G., Bruce Reginald A. 1994: Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path Model of Individual Innovation in the Workplace. – Academy of Management Journal 37(3), 580–607. Shymko Vitalii 2021: Discourseology of Linguistic Consciousness: Neural Network Modeling of some Structural and Semantic Relationships. – Psycholinguistics 29(1), 193–207. Sosnin Oleksandr V., Mychnenko Anatolij M., Lytvynova Ljudmyla V. 2011: Соснін, Олександр В., Михненко, Анатолій М., Литвинова, Людмила В. Комунікативна парадигма суспільного розвитку [Komunikatyvna paradyhma suspil’noho rozvytku], Київ: НАДУ [Kyjiv: NADU]. Šejgal Elena I. 2004: Шейгал, Елена И. Семиотика политического дискурса [Semiotika političeskogo diskursa], Москва: ИТДГК «Гнозис» [Moskva: ITDGK “Gnozis”]. Telija Veronika N. 1986: Телия, Вероника Н. Коннотативный аспект семантики номинативных единиц [Konnotativnyj aspect semantiki nominativnych edinic], Москва: Наука [Moskva: Nauka]. Gentzler Edwin 2002: Translation, Poststructuralism, and Power. – Translation and Power, ed. by M. Tymoczko, E. Gentzler, Amherst, Boston: University of Massachusetts Press. Van Dijk Teun A. 1995: Esoteric Discourse Analysis. – Discourse & Society 6(1), 5–6. Van Dijk Teun A. 2009: Society and Discourse: How Social Contexts Influence Text and Talk, Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo: Cambridge University Press. Vinogradov Viktor V. 1986: Виноградов, Виктор В. Грамматическое учение о слове [Grammatičeskoe učenie o slove], Москва: Наука [Moskva: Nauka]. Vol’f Elena M. 1985: Вольф, Елена М. Функциональная семантика оценки [Funkcional’naja semantika ocenki], Москва: Наука [Moskva: Nauka]. Chmiljar Oleh F. 2017: Хміляр, Олег Ф. Психологія символічної регуляції поведінки особистості [Psycholohija symvoličnoji rehuljaciji povedinky osobystosti], Київ: НАПН [Kyjiv: NAPN]. Zagraevskaja Tat’jana B. 2007: Заграевская, Татьяна Б. Категория оценки как лингвистическая проблема [Kategorija ocenki kak lingvističeskaja problema], Пятигорск: ПГЛУ [Pjatigorsk: PGLU]. Straipsniai / Articles 287 Reproduction Peculiarities of the Modern Political Discourse Šiuolaikinio politinio diskurso vertimo ypatumai SANTRAUKA Straipsnyje aptariami su vertinamojo požiūrio kategorijos sąvoka kalbotyroje susiję klausimai ir šios kategorijos apraiškos politiniame diskurse. Analizuojami kai kurie vertinimo klasifikacijos tipai. Vertinimo pagrindai analizuojami iš žmogaus vertybių sistemos požiūrio taško, apimančio modalines konotacijas, aktualizuojamas komunikacijos procese. Pabrėžiama, kad individualaus vertinimo atveju kalbėtojas perteikia ne tik savo požiūrį, bet ir visuotinai priimtinus, visuomenėje egzistuojančius principus arba, kitais žodžiais ta riant, stereotipinį požiūrį į objektą. Emocinis vertinimas (asmens tiesioginė reakcija į objektą) yra priešingas racionaliam vertinimui (kuris remiasi protu, o ne emocijomis). Autoriai teigia, kad emociniu vertinimu siekiama pakeisti pašnekovo emocinę būseną ir sukelti atitinkamą reakciją, o racionalaus vertinimo tikslas yra sutikti arba nesutikti su išreiškiama nuomone. Absoliutus vertinimas yra susijęs su sąvokomis „geras“ ir „blogas“, o santykinis vertinimas išreiškiamas sąvokomis „geresnis“ ir „blogesnis“. Tyrime analizuojama teigiamo ir neigiamo adresato požiūrio į tam tikrą situaciją struktūra, kuri sukuria emocinį konotacijos komponentą. Daug dėmesio skiriama vertinamojo požiūrio semantinei struktūrai ir raiškos priemonėms: šaukiamiesiems ir retoriniams klausimams, sušukimams, dėkingumo, pagyrimo, pasmerkimo ir kitoms frazėms. Politinis diskursas yra susijęs su politine komunikacija, kurios pagrindinis tikslas yra įtikinti adresatą, pasitikėti juo ir paskatinti jį veikti, o politinis tekstas – su masiniu informavimu apie pagrindines visuomenei svarbias problemas ir įvykius, kurie šiuo metu vyksta visuomenėje. Straipsnyje analizuojami Ukrainos prezidento Volodymyro Zelenskio kalbų ir kasdienių kreipimųsi tekstai, apimantys laikotarpį nuo 2022 metų kovo mėnesio iki 2022 metų gruodžio mėnesio, ir jų vertimai į anglų kalbą. Kadangi ukrainiečių ir anglų kalbos turi tam tikrų struktūrinių skirtumų, straipsnyje aptariamos šios gramatinės vertimo transformacijos: pakeitimai, sukeitimai, pridėjimai ir praleidimai (vertimo taktikos). Įteikta 2023 m. gegužės 23 d. OLEKSANDRA V. POPOVA The State Institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky” 34, Staroportofrankivska Str. 65020, Ukraine, Odesa [email protected] OLEKSANDRA V. POPOVA, ILONA M. DERIK, NATALYA S. ZHMAYEVA 288 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXVIII ILONA M. DERIK The State Institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky” 34, Staroportofrankivska Str. 65020, Ukraine, Odesa [email protected]om NATALYA S. ZHMAYEVA The State Institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K. D. Ushynsky” 34, Staroportofrankivska Str. 65020, Ukraine, Odesa [email protected]om