This paper focuses on the concept of a subjectivized grammatical metaphor and its practical application in the translation of English fiction. At first, it explains the theoretical concept of a grammatical metaphor in general, following Halliday and other scholars. Later it gives the wide array of translation transformations of subjectivized grammatical metaphor to illustrate this theoretical overview with the examples of its practical application. / Šis darbas pristato gramatinės metaforos savoką ir atvejus, kai ji eina sakinyje veiksniu, bei jų vertimą į lietuvių kalbą iš anglų grožinės literatūros kūrinių. Darbo pradžioje aptariama teorinė gramatinės metaforos sąvoka, remiantis Halliday ir kitais mokslininkais. Antroje darbo dalyje nagrinėjami konkretūs gramatinės metaforos vertimo pavyzdžiai, iliustruojantys šią teorinę apžvalgą.

The object of this work is emotional evaluation while translating from Lithuanian into English. Emotional evaluation means the opinion of the subject (an individual or a group) regarding the assessment of a certain object that can not be viewed as a logical decision but expresses feelings and emotions of the speaker. The translation of emotional evaluation from Lithuanian into English has been little analysed, so the aim of the work is to explore possibilities of the rendition of the emotional evaluation from Lithuanian into English. The aim of present study into investigate the ways of rendering objectives emotional evaluation in translation of B. Sruoga’s novel Dievų miškas into English. The objectives of the study are as follows: 1. To define expressivenes and emotional evaluation. 2. To analyse the role of metaphors, phraseological units, similes, ocassionalisms, pejoratives, diminutives, rhetorical questions and exclamations in emotional evaluation. 3. To analyse the ways and means the emotional evaluation into English. 4. What is the aspect of the word meaning and how it is reflected in the translation; Emotional evaluation has been analysed by Russian researchers: Lukjanova (1986), Ariutiunova (1982), Galkina-Fedoruk (1957); Lithuanian lingvists: Gudavičius (2000), Pikčilingis (1967, 1975), and foreign scientists, such as Arnold (1975), Nida (1975) and Beiker (1992). The study was carricdont by using contrastive and descriptive methods. The examples from... [to full text]