The authors of the article have studied the onomastic translation discourse considering, on the one hand, the common methodological concept - translation space, and, on the other hand, traditions of analysis existing in the Russian and Bulgarian schools of thought. Such approach creates new scientific view on the problem and leads to the new results. The work of modern French writer O. Bourdeaut “En attendant Bojangles” and its translation to the Russian and Bulgarian languages and entitled as “В ожидании Божанглза” and “В очакване на Боджангълс” correspondingly became the basic concept of the empirical analysis. The novel of O. Bourdeaut is distinguished by the richness of onomastic material which finds its reflection in translation discourse and is traced in the article by the material of three languages: French, Bulgarian and Russian. Taking into consideration the basic provisions of the theory of nomination by A.V. Superanskaya, V.V. Katermina, the theory of text/discourse by V.E. Chernyavskaya, the synergetic concepts of the language by N.L. Myshkina, G.G. Moskalchuk, N.V. Drozhaschikh and others, the interpretative theory of translation by D. Seleskovich and M. Lederer, the authors develop the ideas of the synergy of translation with reference to onomastic space of translation discourse which defines the aim of the present research. Versatile linguistic-and-translation analysis of French-Russian and French-Bulgarian anthroponyms has been carried out and harmonic/disharmonic conformity between them has been revealed. This conformity is opening the translation discourse possibility to become the inherent part of receiving culture. Obtaining harmonicity in the process of translating components of text/discourse onomastic space from one linguistic culture to another is conditioned by the augment of culturally meaningful senses in translation space, i.e. by their synergy. As appears from the research hypothesis which has found its confirmation in the process of analysis, harmonic translation, i.e. translation where senses are adequate to the senses of the original text, in different languages have different personification: the augment of culturally meaningful senses is varied depending on the abstract or routine national-cultural values of ethnos. The authors of this work have made a conclusion that every harmonic translation is as unique as the original text. In those cases when the components of onomastic space of translation discourse have translation mistakes and discrepancies the fragments including them are recognized to be disharmonic and unacceptable for receiving linguistic culture.
Licensing imperative subjects without an imperative operator