vels, graphical and prosodic including. Moreover, not only the reproduction of usually characteristic features should be studied, but also of those which are highly unusual for the author, and thus violate his usual style of writing.reproduction of author s style in the translations to other languages ​​is a very interesting problem, the one which has been frequently discussed by numerous scholars: I. Kashkin, K. Chukovskiy, A. Parshyn. For instance, A. Parshyn states that style and manner of writing of the translation should be the same as in the original, and strongly supports the stylistic assimilation (that is, when the style of the original and translation is similar if not the same) as opposed to stylistic creolisation (so -called transfusions) [19]. R. Zorivchak defines the ideal style of translation as the best possible representation of author s idiostyle, the result of finding of the best means to express sense, and to render functions of all components of the original in the target language [qtd. in: 19]. is a well known fact, that each translator, as each reader in fact, views the source text in a different way. Furthermore, translator s personality influences not only the process of reading and interpreting of the original text, but also the process of actually writing the translation. As K. Chukovskiy properly notes, each translator introduces into translated work a part of his own personality [21]. Thus, the notion of translator s style and the vision of translator as author s rival appear. The notion of a translator as a figure not dependent on the author can be seen in the views of the school of Manipulation, or descriptivists. J. Holmes and A. Lefevere believed, that translation products were to be traced back to the soc iohistorical conditions of their emergence in the (mainly literary) "systems", "états de société", " ; fields "or" spaces "making up the host environments; their main idea was that the" sociocultural inscription "of translation can be described and accounted for [23]. Neither deep structure level, nor abstract core of meaning were important, and their translation method presupposed domestication, thus leaving the author `s style out of the scope of translator` s interest.
The Soviet school of translation, as well as the Ukrainian one later, considers that for the most adequate rendering of the original the more translator is able to reproduce the author s style, the ...
