Metaphors are part of our life, every single day people unconsciously use metaphors in their speech to make it more expressive and sometimes sarcastic and funny. Metaphors connect concrete experiences and abstract concepts. Metaphors are good tools for beautifying the speech, they exaggerate, lessen, simplify, distort and intensify the discourse, and talk. Studies suggest that the use of metaphors is linked to cognitive abilities and intelligence levels. For instance, the article ‘Psycholinguistic Analysis of Metaphors in Speech: Theoretical Concepts and Experimental Results’ discusses the perception of metaphorical expressions among individuals with varying experiences in the subject area. Another scholar pointed out that “metaphor is a cognitive device that allows understanding one concept in terms of another, often bridging abstract and concrete domains” (Khkalay & Turabi, 2019). Furthermore, metaphor is not only a literary trope anymore, Lakoff and Johnson (1980) changed the perception of metaphor to a cognitive level stating that a metaphor is a cognitive semantic device, they were the pioneers of bringing metaphor to a large extent.” Metaphor processing involves complex cognitive mechanisms, allowing for the expression of abstract ideas and facilitating understanding of unfamiliar concepts” (Gentner & Bowdle, 2006).  Metaphor translation is also another challenge for translators as while translating they need to pay attention not only to a literal translation of metaphor but also to how it influences the linguistic and cultural part of the target language. “Metaphor translation poses significant challenges due to cultural and linguistic challenges due to cultural and linguistic differences between source and target language” (Al-Zoubi et al., 2007; Omar, 2021). Hence, not only the meaning should be taken into account while translating the metaphors, but also whether they are culturally relevant in the target language or not, specifically whether they have the analogy of the metaphor or not. Kamal Hassan Omar claims “Metaphors can become a problem during translation, since they are inherently tied to the culture of its source language, making them potentially meaningless in another” (Omar, 2021.) Moreover, he added, “Translators employ various strategies to overcome these difficulties, including direct translation, substitution with culturally appropriate metaphors, paraphrasing, and deletion (Omar, 2021). One scholar proposed an easier way of proposing the metaphors by conceptualizing them in cultures, specifically; he states, “A congo-cultural framework based on the Cognitive Translation Hypothesis suggests that the similarity in conceptualization between cultures influences the ease of metaphor translation (Al-Zoubi et al., 2007). Hence, in order to translate metaphor successfully one needs to know how to carefully take into consideration the cultural contexts, linguistic nuances as well as cognitive processes. In this way, a translator can effectively achieve the intended meaning. Direct translations are sometimes inappropriate, therefore Omar stated that ”Metaphor translation poses significant challenges due to its deep cultural roots, making direct translation often ineffective” (Omar, 2021). Translators should take into account the target and the source cultures to precisely translate the essence of the metaphor. This article explores these challenges of metaphor translation and proposes strategies for effective metaphor translation, with a focus on English, Uzbek and Russian languages.

This research was carried out using descriptive and comparative qualitative analysis methods to examine the ways of metaphor translation from English to Uzbek and Russian. A comparative method was applied to compare the strategies of metaphor translation according to seven strategies of metaphor translation provided by Peter Newmark and then the comparison of the translations in two chosen languages, specifically Russian and Uzbek. Furthermore, this method was accessible in examining and drawing comparisons, emphasizing both commonalities and distinctions. Moreover, with the help of these strategies helped identify the influence on translation strategies by cultural and linguistic factors. While the descriptive method is utilized to give a profound understanding of the functions of metaphor, translation strategies outlined below in the data analysis part. These methods were approachable and helped me to get the main meaning from the sources I was investigating. To write this article many books and articles by famous scholars in English Uzbek and Russian language were analyzed. Moreover, articles were chosen both modern and old to know the contrast of changing functions of metaphor. The study analyzed a corpus of metaphorical expressions of Uzbek, English and Russian literary and non-literary texts, idioms, sayings, proverbs and figurative expressions; we chose the translations of Shakespearean metaphors from officially published Uzbek and Russian translations of these texts. While comparing the metaphors in translation the degree of cultural and linguistic adaptation in Uzbek and Russian translations. For accuracy and validity, the study cross-referenced translation choices with prior research on metaphor translation, to compare trends across multiple studies. This method is approachable for other researchers too as it could be applied to the same framework but in other different texts to validate the findings.

The results of the research and analysis show that cultural metaphors often require adaptation rather than direct translation. The analysis of the research shows that Peter Newmark identified seven strategies for translating metaphors, and with the help of his strategies it identified that this research shows that in translating metaphors Uzbek and Russian had quite divergencies, Russian translations tend to use more direct equivalents and simile and figurative language, while Uzbek translation tend to use explanation method and direct meaning. As Newmark once told about metaphor translation “Metaphors are not mere ornaments; they are rooted in the cultural and linguistic soil of the source text. Translators must decide whether to transport the image or cultivate a new one.” ( (Newmark, 1988, A Textbook of Translation, p. 106) By telling this he wanted to tell that word for word translations can’t always work when it comes to metaphor translations, because culture and mentality play a big role here, and whether using the same animal in translating idioms will convey the same meaning and won’t carry any offensive connotation. Previous studies of Russian scholars suggest that Russian translators maintain figurative language more frequently than Uzbek translators do. Our findings confirm this trend, as Russian translations predominantly retain metaphorical expressions, whereas Uzbek translations favor direct meanings.  Newmark in his book “A Textbook of Translation” identified the cultural and linguistic nuances while translating metaphors and idioms.

Reproducing the same image in the target language. Newmark states that if a metaphor is widely known, universally accepted culturally transparent and easily understood across languages, then this metaphor should not be changed and should remain verbatim. This technique will preserve the original meaning and the aesthetic of a metaphor.

For example: “The world is a stage” the widely recognized metaphor of William Shakespeare, keeps its meaning when translated into other languages, such as “Мир – это сцена”, but it can’t be translated the same in Uzbek, as “Dunyo bu sahna “  sounds unnatural. Most universal metaphors are retained in the Russian language.

This metaphor can be universally understood, but the strategy cannot always work as in some languages universal metaphors are not widely used as in Uzbek, but looking at it culturally, it is clear that it can be kept due to the existence in both cultures.

Replacing the image in the source language with a standard image in the target language. This method is typically utilized when the target language cannot do word-for-word translation, so the translator should find a more culturally appropriate equivalent to convey the same meaning.

For example in: It’s raining cats and dogs” the English idiom will be replaced with an idiom that conveys the same meaning as there are no literal translation examples in Russian and Uzbek languages, hence it will be translated as “Льет как из ведра” and “ Yomg‘ir quduqdan quyilgandek yog‘yapti” . Here in both translations, we used the method of finding analogies, as there is no such animal in Uzbek and Russian languages that can be associated with heavy rain. It presents that translation must adapt to the culture and language. This method is by far the most effective and common one, as it finds cultural associations with the metaphor or idiom.

Translating the metaphor by simile, retaining the image. In this part, we use words like “LIKE” and “AS” to make the comparison explicit while keeping the original meaning of the metaphor.

For example: “He is a lion” while translating it to Russian we use the Simile method and translate it like this “Он как лев” The metaphor is softened to a simile and retains the image of a lion. In Uzbek translation we do the same “U sherga o‘xshaydi”. This strategy reduces the risk of misunderstanding.

Nevertheless, culturally this method of translation is not as effective as some cultures use strong metaphors and others prefer utilizing softer expressions.

Translating the metaphor by simile plus sense. This strategy is similar to the third strategy but has a slight difference, as at the end of the translated metaphor here in brackets there should be the meaning or the definition of the metaphor, idiom or a cultural word.

For example: “He’s a snake in the grass” In translating this idiom/metaphor, we should use a smile strategy and add the explanation at the end. Hence, it will be translated into Russian and Uzbek like this ”Он как змея в траве(то есть коварный и опасный)” and “U ilonga o‘xshaydi (u xavfli inson). This strategy ensures the understanding of the metaphor at a high level; the explanation also ensures that the metaphor’s aim is not lost.

This method is also much needed to express it deeply as in some languages even the simile interpretation may not work effectively. Nevertheless, in the modern world, it’s not so widely used as people understand the metaphor with simile without the extra definition.

Converting the metaphor to its sense or meaning. This strategy replaces the metaphor image with its literal and direct explanation, by this they bring clarity. This strategy might be very useful in the Uzbek language, but it’s not frequently used in the Russian language they have a lot of analogies.

For example: “He’s a couch potato”, this metaphor might be too culture-specific so while translating they just give definition to it like in Russian translation “Лежебока или Диванный эксперт”, but in Uzbek it will just be given in a definition form such as “U dangasa inson”, in Uzbek culture the image of couch potato may not resonate.

So, this method needs to be utilised when the metaphor is too culture-specific and when the language needs the translation of a direct meaning.

Deleting the metaphor. Here if the metaphor or idiom is too culture-specific or irrelevant to translate the metaphor is just excluded. Again this method is not useful for the Russian language as they prefer using the second strategy more often, but very popular in the Uzbek language as they prefer giving definitions and avoiding unnecessary metaphors.

For example, the idiom “She’s a social butterfly” will not be translated as an idiom as the image of a butterfly may not have the same connotation in Uzbek language, so they just translate it this way “U juda kirishimli”. It is useful to use this strategy when the metaphor can mislead the person if translated. The Russian form of a social butterfly would be “душа компании”.

Still, this very strategy might be the least used one out of others.

Using the same metaphor with the sense or meaning added. Here the metaphor is translated conveyed and the analogy or equivalent in the target language and still gives clarification by giving definitions.

For example: “He’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing” the metaphor will find its equivalent in the target language and hence it will be retained, the Russian analogy is “Он волк в овечьей шкуре (он скрывает свои плохие намерения под маской доброты)” it is the same in the Uzbek language “U qo‘y terisidagi bo‘ri (U yomon niyatini yaxshilik niqobida yashiradigan yomon odam)”. This strategy makes a balance as it finds similar metaphors in the target language and still gives the definition.

 The research of the analysis of linguistic and cultural influences in translating metaphors shows several differences between the Uzbek and Russian languages. Uzbek language translators prefer direct meaning and giving definitions and explanations, while Russian language translators tend to find analogies and keep the metaphorical form of the text due to their rich phraseological vocabulary length. With the help of Newmark’s seven translation strategies, we identified that the first two strategies are commonly used in both Uzbek and Russian languages. Deleting the metaphor is preferably highly used in the Uzbek language while others like simile and explanation are used in both of them; still, the Uzbek language prioritizes this more. The research showed how language and culture influenced translation strategies. Both linguistic and cultural nuances affect the translation; hence, the Russian language tends to use figurative translation whereas the Uzbek language uses directness more with explanation. While the research confirmed the general trend that Uzbek translators prefer direct explanations and Russian translators favor figurative language, some exceptions were observed. In several cases, Uzbek translations retained metaphors when they had direct equivalents in the Uzbek language, contradicting our initial assumption that Uzbek translators would always opt for explanation. For example the metaphor “The Tip of the Iceberg” as expected it should be translated “Bu moliyaviy firibgarlikning faqat kichik bir qismidir”, but it is popular and more common to translate it as “Bu muammo muz tog‘ining uchi xolos.”

This research aligns with literary text, but cannot reflect metaphor translation strategies to scientific technical texts. Moreover, the number of examples was lacking which may affect the generalizability of the findings.

The analysis of how culture and linguistics influence the metaphor translation strategies highlights that they are deeply interconnected in Uzbek, Russian and English languages. Uzbek translators tend to choose clarity and translate the metaphors with direct meaning and explanations. Whereas Russian translators opt for translating the metaphors preserving the figurative meaning by finding the analogies and using similes. Mostly in the Uzbek language, most English metaphors must be translated with explanations, omissions or substitutions, as the cultures have slightly big differences in terms of the meaning of the image, and hence direct translation will be ineffective due to cultural differences.

The research compares the way English metaphors are translated in two different cultures; specifically, Uzbek and Russian, according to the seven metaphor translation strategies of Peter Newmark. Nevertheless, there is a limitation of the metaphors, as only literary and non-literary texts are utilized, but no mention of technical and scientific metaphors such as “launching pad” etc. Hence, future studies might explore this field, understanding the nuances can help in analyzing cultural differences of each culture more deeply and learn how to preserve the metaphorical meaning of the texts in cross-cultural challenges.