COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ECOTOURISM TERMS IN ENGLISH AND UZBEK: TRANSLATION AND EQUIVALENCE ISSUES

Authors

  • Abdullayeva Umida Nigmatullayevna Uzbekistan state world languages university

Keywords:

ecotourism terminology; translation strategy; terminological equivalence; Uzbek–English comparison; calque; borrowing; descriptive translation; functional equivalence; sustainable tourism discourse; term standardization.

Abstract

Ecotourism has expanded rapidly as a global practice and as a policy discourse, producing a dense network of specialized terms related to conservation, visitor management, community benefits, and sustainable mobility. Because English dominates international tourism communication, many ecotourism concepts enter other languages through translation, borrowing, or hybridization. In Uzbek, the growth of the ecotourism sector and environmental communication has intensified the need for terminological clarity, consistency, and functional equivalence—especially in legislation, destination branding, guide training, and academic writing. This article examines ecotourism terminology in English and Uzbek with a focus on translation and equivalence issues. Using a cognitive-semantic and terminological perspective, the study analyzes (i) structural types of ecotourism terms (single-word, compounds, multiword units, and acronym-based units), (ii) dominant equivalence relations (full, partial, and zero equivalence), and (iii) translation strategies used to render English terms into Uzbek (borrowing, calque, descriptive translation, functional substitution, and mixed strategies). The results show that the most frequent difficulty arises from multiword English terms with embedded conceptual relations (e.g., management, impact, and ethics frameworks) that do not map neatly onto Uzbek phrase structure without either explicitation or restructuring. Partial equivalence is common where Uzbek uses broader, culturally familiar concepts (e.g., tabiat turizmi) while English distinguishes narrower categories. The discussion proposes a practical guideline set for translators, lexicographers, and tourism stakeholders to standardize term formation, reduce ambiguity, and preserve communicative function across genres.

References

Baker, M. (2018). In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation (3rd ed.). Routledge.

Cabré, M. T. (1999). Terminology: Theory, Methods and Applications. John Benjamins.

Fennell, D. A. (2020). Ecotourism (5th ed.). Routledge.

Honey, M. (2008). Ecotourism and Sustainable Development: Who Owns Paradise? (2nd ed.). Island Press.

ISO. (2022). ISO 704: Terminology work — Principles and methods. International Organization for Standardization.

Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. Prentice Hall.

Sager, J. C. (1990). A Practical Course in Terminology Processing. John Benjamins.

UNWTO. (2019). International Recommendations for Tourism Statistics 2008 (IRTS 2008): Compilation Guide (and related terminology guidance). World Tourism Organization.

Buckley, R. (2009). Ecotourism: Principles and Practices. CABI.

Downloads

Published

2026-04-04

How to Cite

Abdullayeva Umida Nigmatullayevna. (2026). COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ECOTOURISM TERMS IN ENGLISH AND UZBEK: TRANSLATION AND EQUIVALENCE ISSUES. Ethiopian International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 13(4), 216–223. Retrieved from https://eijmr.org/index.php/eijmr/article/view/5905