The syntactic structure of a language imposes restrictions on the way messages may be organized in that language. The order in which functional elements such as subject, predicator, and object may occur is more fixed in some languages than in others. Languages vary in the extent to which they rely on word order to signal the relationship between elements in the clause. Compared to languages such as German, Russian, Finnish, Arabic, and Eskimo, word order in English is relatively fixed. The meaning of a sentence in English, and in languages with similarly fixed word order such as Chinese, often depends entirely on the order in which the elements are placed. (cf. The man ate the fish and The fish ate the man).
The structural features of English language require structural completeness of the sentence. One can not omit a word without supplying another one instead. This criterion is governed by stylistic preference of the language to prevent word and make the sentence more emphatic. Even if the repetition is frequent in English its use in most cases is logically required and stylistically proved to be necessary. Otherwise, repetition is accepted as unnecessary component of the sentence or one of the stylistic shortcomings of the translation. The demand of syntactical completeness of the sentences and others stylistic criteria explain here the wide usage of structure filling words (слова заместители). The structure filling words include pronouns (one, ones, this, that, these, those) and verbs (to do, to be, to have, shall, should, will, would, can, could, might, may, must, ought, need, dare).
Its quite evident that the structure filling words do not have denotative meaning, they are absolutely contextual. They should be related to conforming nouns and the verb form the fill and only afterwards they acquire lexical completeness. The verb-filling words are usually divided into two parts: fully filling and partially filling ones. To the first group belong the verb to do in the Present Indefinite which act in the role of fully filling word. It can replace the verbs of function. To the second group belong all other structure filling words. They act like a part of the whole just like the representative of compound verb form.
While translating the structure filling words we have to use words with complete meaning (sometimes pronouns) or make use of some other kinds of functional filling.
Every word in a language carries some concrete notion. The semantics of a word reflects different signs of the subject and the relation of its meanings to other objects it denotes. The semantics of a word includes word perception characteristic to the studied language, being more precise to the bearers of the studied language. When studying the reality of some object we can identify that its name reveals its functions which finds the reflection in the semantics of the word. Lets take as an example the word glasses - очки. In English it reveals the substance of which the object is made and in Russian firstly it reveals its function - second eyes - очи.
Despite distinguishing all kinds of differences we should say that, both languages sufficiently reflect one and the same perception of reality. Therefore the difficulty stylistic devices represents to a translator is based on word play, if in corresponding words of both languages are featured different signs.
The second reason, causing lexical difficulties to translation of political literature is the difference in the semantic volume of a word. In every language a word exists in a close connection with the lexical-semantic system of a given language. It may have various kinds of lexical meanings (lexical-semantic) variants; it may widen or narrow its meaning and make it more abstract or concrete.
The third reason presenting lexical difficulties in translation the difference in combinability. Words in languages have some definite relation characteristic only to the given language. It should be mentioned that word combinability is possible if words point to similar objects they denote. This difference of word combinability in various languages is very important; therefore some types of combinability are easily accepted in one of language and are completely unacceptable in other languages.
Last but not the least is the accepted usage of words in a language. It is, of course related to the development of a given languages and formation of its lexical system. Every language worked out its own clich?s and some set expressions used by speakers, nevertheless those word expressions are not phraseological units but they possess complete form, which, in comparison with the phraseological units, are never broken by adding some introductory words or substitution of some of its elements.
Translation studies showed that there are cases when due to the distinguished signs a word acquires wider semantic volume and can not be covered by corresponding equivalent in the target language. Let us take teenager for example: etymologically it is related to the numerals from thirteen till nineteen. The Russian подросток does not semantically cover its meaning in complete volume for its is narrower in its meaning. Therefore the word teenager is usually translated by different words - подросток, юноша, and in plural as молодёжь.
Difference in the semantic structure of a word represents one of the main reason causing lexical difficulty in translation. These difference are related to peculiar features of separate words or word groups. And it is quite natural that this matter covers a wide range of examples. Practically, even identical words in different languages are not always equal in their meaning, they never correspond completely. Most often is the correspondence of first lexical-semantic variants of such words - their primary meaning - then we have various lexical-semantic variants for the course of development of these words was of different nature.
This is characterized by different functioning of a word inlanguage, different in usage and combinability, but even the primary meaning of an English word maybe wider of the corresponding one in Russian.
The semantic structure of a word predefines the possibility of its contextual use, and the translation of contextual meaning presents a hard task to translators.
Contextual meaning of a word in many instances depends on the character of semantic context, on the semantics of the words combining with it. Occasional meanings, suddenly originated in the context are not always arbitrary - its is based into the semantic structure of the word. In contextual usage of a word in poetry or prose - often point to the author's penetration into the depth of the word's semantic structure. For paradigmatic and semantic relations are characteristic to any words and the lexical potential of words can be revealed in both cases. But revealing these potentials of words is closely connected with the specificity of lexical-semantic aspects of every language and here forth we may observe the difficulty of translation of contextual meaning of words. What is possible in one language maybe impossible in another because of its difference in semantic structure and its usage.