В статье рассматриваются синтаксические функции английского инфинитива и особенности его перевода на казахский язык. Особое внимание уделяется инфинитиву в функции подлежащего, дополнения, определения, именной части сказуемого и обстоятельства. Анализ показывает, что несмотря на грамматические трансформации при переводе, семантические и коммуникативные функции инфинитивных конструкций в большинстве случаев сохраняются.

Ключевые слова: инфинитив, синтаксис, перевод, английский язык, казахский язык, нефинитные формы глагола.

The infinitive is one of the most important non-finite verb forms in English grammar. Due to its grammatical flexibility, the infinitive can perform various syntactic functions within a sentence and express actions without direct reference to tense, person, or mood [1; 4]. In modern English, infinitive constructions are widely used in both literary and everyday discourse, contributing to syntactic compression, stylistic expressiveness, and semantic precision.

In the Kazakh language, infinitive meanings are expressed through different grammatical mechanisms, primarily by means of the infinitive form and participial constructions [2; 65–69]. As a result, the translation of English infinitive constructions into Kazakh frequently involves grammatical and syntactic transformations. Despite these structural differences, translators often attempt to preserve the communicative meaning and functional role of the original construction [3; 6].

The relevance of the study lies in the increasing interest in comparative linguistics and translation studies, particularly in the context of English-Kazakh language interaction. The analysis of infinitive constructions is important not only for theoretical linguistics, but also for practical translation and language teaching.

The purpose of this article is to analyze the syntactic functions of the English infinitive and identify the main strategies used in translating infinitive constructions into Kazakh. The study focuses on the infinitive functioning as a subject, object, predicative, attribute, and adverbial modifier.

The infinitive demonstrates a wide range of syntactic functions in English. Depending on the context, it may function as a subject, object, attribute, predicative, or adverbial modifier. One of the most common functions of the infinitive is its use as a subject:

As can be seen from the table, the infinitive in the original sentence performs the function of the subject, whereas in the official translation it is transformed into a nominal construction ( қасиет “quality”). Consequently, the subject function of the infinitive is lost in translation. In the source text, to be so very guarded functions as the subject, which is a common syntactic pattern in English. In the official Kazakh translation, however, the infinitive construction is omitted and replaced by a noun. The sentence structure also undergoes transformation. While the original sentence is expressed through a semi-complex structure, the translation is rendered as a coordinate sentence. This change affects the logical organization of the statement: in the original text, the infinitive subject presents the idea in a concise and unified manner, whereas in the translation the meaning is divided into two relatively independent statements. The proposed alternative version attempts to preserve both the non-finite form and its syntactic function. In this version, the infinitive is translated through the Kazakh infinitive form, thereby maintaining its role as the subject. As a result, the alternative translation remains structurally closer to the original text, whereas the official translation is more strongly adapted to the norms of Kazakh syntax. Therefore, although the official translation conveys the general meaning accurately, the infinitive subject construction and the original syntactic relations are not preserved. By contrast, the alternative version aims to retain the grammatical structure of the source text more consistently, which is important for analyzing the transformation of English non-finite constructions in translation.

The infinitive may also function as an object within the sentence structure.

The table above illustrates the object function of the infinitive. In the original sentence, the infinitive form to play functions as the object. In the official translation, however, the infinitive construction is replaced with the modal-desiderative form ойнағысы келмейтінін . Although this form conveys the general meaning successfully and still performs the object function, the original infinitive structure is lost. In the proposed alternative version, the equivalent form ойнауға is expressed through the Kazakh infinitive, which preserves both the grammatical form and the syntactic function of the source construction more accurately. Structurally, both sentences represent semi-complex constructions. While the official translation is stylistically adapted to the norms of the Kazakh language, the alternative version remains closer to the grammatical organization of the original text. This demonstrates that the infinitive structure can be preserved in translation while maintaining semantic coherence.

The following example demonstrates the infinitive functioning as a predicative:

The table above illustrates the predicative function of the infinitive. In the original sentence, the infinitive construction to be imputed performs a predicative role. In the official translation, however, the infinitive construction is omitted and replaced with a stylistically adapted sentence expressing assumption. As a result, the original grammatical structure is not preserved. In the proposed alternative version, the phrase байланысты болуы is expressed through the Kazakh infinitive form, allowing the predicative function of the original construction to be retained more accurately. In addition, the word шамасы preserves the meaning of Isuppose found in the source text. Although both versions convey the general meaning, the alternative translation remains structurally and semantically closer to the original sentence.

The infinitive may also function as an attribute within the sentence structure.

In the original sentence, the infinitive to think functions as an attribute modifying the noun time . In the official translation, however, this attributive function is replaced with an adverbial construction, which changes the grammatical structure of the sentence. Although the meaning is preserved, the original infinitive construction disappears in translation. In the alternative version, the Kazakh infinitive form is used to preserve both the syntactic function and the structure of the source text more accurately.

The following example demonstrates the infinitive functioning as an adverbial modifier:

In the original sentence, the infinitive to beg functions as an adverbial modifier of purpose. In the official translation, however, the infinitive construction is replaced with the converbial form іздеп жүр , which changes the original syntactic structure. In the alternative version, the Kazakh infinitive form іздеу үшін preserves the purposive meaning and the adverbial function of the source construction more accurately. Although both translations convey the general meaning, the official version weakens the original stylistic tone and purpose relation, whereas the alternative translation remains closer to the grammatical and semantic structure of the source text.

The analysis demonstrates that the English infinitive performs a wide range of syntactic functions, including those of subject, object, predicative, attribute, and adverbial modifier. In translation into Kazakh, these constructions are rendered through different grammatical forms depending on the syntactic and semantic context. The study shows that although the general meaning of infinitive constructions is usually preserved, their grammatical structure and syntactic function often undergo transformation in translation. Official translations tend to adapt the sentence structure to the norms of the Kazakh language, which may result in the loss of the original infinitive construction. In contrast, the proposed alternative versions attempt to preserve both the non-finite character and the syntactic role of the infinitive more consistently. Thus, the translation of English infinitive constructions into Kazakh involves not only semantic transfer but also structural adaptation. The findings of the study highlight the importance of preserving syntactic features in translation analysis and contribute to further research in comparative linguistics and translation studies.

References:

1. Перельгут Н. М. Non-finite forms: Infinitive (Неличные формы глагола: инфинитив): рабочая тетрадь / Н. М. Перельгут. — Нижневартовск: Нижневартовский государственный университет, 2019. — 27 с.
2. Неталиева Қ. — -У тұлғалы қимыл есімі // ҚазКСР ҒА Хабарлары. Филология және өнертану сериясы. — 1960. — № 3. — Б. 65–69
3. Грацианова Е. А. Неличные формы глагола. Инфинитив: Учебное пособие. М.: МГЛУ, 2005. 35 с.
4. Austen, J. Pride and Prejudice [Electronic resource]. Available at: https://www.e-booksdirectory.com/details.php?ebook=1055 (accessed: 18.04.2026).
5. Остин, Дж. Тәкаппар ғашықтар: роман / Дж. Остин. — Алматы: Мазмұндама баспасы, 2024. — 472 б.