himself from the full principle of equivalent effect, since that effect is in operant if the text is out of TL space and time (1981).
Newmark said that semantic translation differs from literal translation in that it ‘respect context ‘, interpreters and even explain (metaphors for instance). Literal translation, on the other hand means word for word in its extreme version and, even in its weaker form, sticks very closely to ST lexis and syntax According to Newmark semantic translation remains within the SL culture while communicative translation transfers foreign elements into the TL culture (Munday, 2001).
Larson (1988) also introduced two main kinds of translation. Form-based translation and meaning -based translation. Form-based translation attempts to follow the form of the source language and is known as literal translation. Meaning-based translation makes every effort to communicate the meaning of the source language text in the natural form of the receptor language (Larson, 1988).Larson also proposed meaning-based translation for such words (reduplicative words), which makes every effort to communicate the source language in the natural forms of the receptor language. This kind of translation is also called idiomatic translation.
So regarding these explanations and classifications reduplicative words should not be translated literally if so they would lose the exact meaning and effect. Also because the form of this linguistic process (reduplication), it means repetition, has an effect it is better to be translated idiomatically (or communicatively) besides preserving the form. It should be considered in preserving the form and meaning, latter has priority (Hall, 1964).

2.4 Works done in Iran
Sheikhy (2007) has worked on repetition patterns in English and Persian. He studied the patterns for making reduplicative words in these languages. This study is a kind of contrastive analysis. Khanjan and Alinezhad(2012) have studied full reduplication in Persian language. This study first explained Persian reduplicative words and then provided English translation of Persian reduplicative words.
2.5 Works done abroad
The mechanism of reduplication and the manner in which copies can differ from each other have been of fundamental concern in theoretical and descriptive linguistics over the past twenty-five years (Inkelas & Zoll 2005). There have been two general approaches to reduplication in the existing literature: phonological copying and morpho-semantic (MS) feature duplication. Phonological copying is essentially a phonological process that duplicates features, segments, or metrical constituents, while under MS feature duplication, two identical sets of abstract syntactic/semantic features are to be accounted for (Inkelas & Zoll 2005). There are two different points of view regarding reduplication. The first point states that it is a process whereby phonological material is copied. That is the segmental content is repeated with various phonological constraints (Marantz (1982), McCarthy and Prince (1986) quoted in Ghomeshi et al, 2004). The second one explains that it is a process whereby a bundle of morpho-syntactic features are copied (Inkelas and Zoll , 2005).
Hague (2005) covered all types of reduplicative words. Several overviews of reduplication have been published in selected volumes that provide a survey of the types of reduplicative constructions found cross-linguistically (Hurch and Mattes 2009, Moravscik 1978, Rubino 2005). In addition, several works provide an overview of reduplication patterns within a specific language family (Fabricius 1998, Haeberlin 1918). Bauer (2003) argued that reduplication is a morphological process in which a root /stem or part of it is repeated or the part of the word which is repeated may be added to the end or the beginning of the base. In the other studies from Malay scholars , such as Haji Omar (1973), Karim et al. (1997), and Hassan (2006), reduplication was analyzed from morphological, syntactic, and semantic aspects. The importance and necessity of translation of reduplicative words in many languages is obvious. There are more studies on this area. Kadim (2008) has dealt with reduplication phonologically, morphologically, syntactically and semantically. The aim of this

قیمت: تومان