Translating literary allusions remains a complex and dynamic challenge in contemporary translation studies. Literary allusions are deeply embedded in specific cultural, historical, and intertextual frameworks, often requiring not just linguistic accuracy but cultural sensitivity and creative adaptation [Aixelá 2017: 2; Vandaele 2011: 3]. Allusions, as culturally and intertextually loaded elements, require not only linguistic expertise but also an in-depth understanding of the source and target cultures. Their interpretation often hinges on shared cultural memory, making the task of translation highly sensitive to the expectations and knowledge base of the target readership [Alvarez & Vidal 2020: 5]. As such, translators must carefully balance fidelity to the source text (ST) with the need for accessibility and readability in the target language.

Recent scholarship has expanded on traditional translation theories, emphasizing more nuanced and audience-aware approaches. Scholars like Gambier and van Doorslaer argue that translation today must be viewed as an act of cultural negotiation rather than mere linguistic transfer [Gambier and van Doorslaer 2016: 4]. They argue that translators must navigate not only between languages but also between cultures, actively mediating and reshaping cultural meanings so that the text resonates with the target audience. This perspective challenges the traditional view of translation as a simple word-for-word substitution and emphasizes the need for cultural awareness, sensitivity, and ethical responsibility in the translation process. Similarly, Pedersen, in his work on subtitling and cultural references, offers updated strategies highly relevant to literary allusions, such as retention, specification, generalization, substitution, and omission — highlighting that the decision-making process is deeply contextual and reader-dependent [Pedersen 2011: 75].

Moreover, the increasing global interconnectedness has led to a reconsideration of Venuti’s concepts of “domestication” and “foreignization” in light of contemporary cultural dynamics [Venuti 1995: 91]. Munday stresses that in today’s world, translators often face the pressure of hybridizing these strategies, rather than adhering strictly to one, especially when dealing with texts rich in literary and cultural references [Munday 2016: 147].

Building on earlier models proposed by Leppihalme [Leppihalme 1997: 16], recent empirical studies suggest that successful translation of allusions often involves a flexible application of multiple strategies, depending on factors such as genre, audience familiarity with the source culture, and the function of the allusion within the text [Alavi & Mehrabi 2022: 22]. Some scholars advocate for creative compensation strategies that allow the translator to preserve the aesthetic and thematic impact even when direct equivalence is unattainable [House 2015: 4].

Thus, the translation of literary allusions today demands not only linguistic skill but also intercultural competence, creativity, and audience sensitivity. This study explores contemporary strategies for translating allusions, using examples from Uzbek and world literature, and demonstrates how translators can achieve a functional balance between fidelity to the original and the readability of the translated work.

Understanding literary allusions

Literary allusions are a pivotal device in literature, serving as intertextual signals that enrich a text’s meaning by drawing on prior cultural, literary, historical, or religious knowledge. They establish a dialogue between texts, often deepening thematic resonance, character development, or the setting of the narrative [Allen 2011: 83]. As Chandler emphasizes, allusions function by activating associations in the reader’s mind, thus presupposing a shared cultural and literary background between the author and the audience [Chandler 2017: 12].

Contemporary scholarship has highlighted that literary allusions are not merely ornamental but perform critical narrative and rhetorical functions. According to Sanders, allusions can create layers of irony, foreshadow future events, or offer commentary on the events within a text [Sanders 2016: 77]. In a multicultural and globalized literary environment, however, the assumed intertextual knowledge is no longer guaranteed, making allusions increasingly complex to interpret and translate [Alavi & Mehrabi 2022: 22].

Recent linguistic studies, such as those by Perri (2019), argue that allusions operate as semiotic condensations — highly dense signs that compress vast amounts of cultural meaning into minimal textual space. This semiotic complexity makes their accurate transmission across languages and cultures particularly challenging. Moreover, Gutt points out that the interpretive success of an allusion depends largely on the principle of relevance: if the cognitive effort to recognize and interpret the allusion is too high for the reader, the communicative effect may be lost [Gutt 2014: 68].

Another important dimension is the categorization of allusions. Building on Leppihalme’s (1997) earlier typology, updated frameworks (see Munday, 2016) classify allusions into proper-name allusions, key-phrase allusions, and implicit allusions, each presenting unique translation challenges. Proper-name allusions (e.g., referring to Shakespeare or Nasimi) often carry strong cultural specificity, while key-phrase allusions (e.g., “crossing the Rubicon”) may carry broader metaphorical significance.

Literary allusions enrich texts by invoking shared cultural or literary knowledge, adding layers of meaning. For example, in Western literature, references to the Bible or Greek mythology are common, while in Uzbek literature, allusions often draw from Islamic traditions, Persian poetry, or Central Asian folklore. The challenge lies in conveying these references in a way that preserves their significance without alienating readers unfamiliar with the source culture.

Thus, understanding literary allusions requires more than recognizing textual references; it demands an appreciation of cultural intertextuality, reader competence, genre conventions, and even media formats. This deep and multifaceted comprehension forms the essential foundation for any effective strategy aimed at translating literary allusions.

Strategies for translating allusions

The translation of literary allusions presents unique challenges due to the deeply embedded cultural, historical, and intertextual knowledge required for their full appreciation. Various strategies for translating allusions have been proposed to balance the need for fidelity to the original text and the readability of the translated work. These strategies, as explored in recent scholarship, offer distinct approaches to ensure that the allusion retains its original meaning, function, and impact within the target language [Munday 2016: 147; Wang & Wang 2020: 14].

1. Literal translation with explanatory notes

One of the most straightforward methods for translating allusions is to use a literal translation accompanied by explanatory notes or footnotes. This strategy ensures that the original allusion is preserved, while the notes provide the necessary context for the reader [Aixelá 2017]. While this approach maintains the ST’s integrity, it can disrupt the flow of the narrative, as the reader is frequently referred to additional explanations. Therefore, it is generally most appropriate for academic or specialized works where the reader is expected to engage deeply with the source material [Baker 2018: 86].

An illustrative example of literal translation accompanied by explanatory notes can be observed in S. Yuldoshev’s Uzbek translation of Miguel de Cervantes’ adventure novel The Adventures of Don Quixote. In this translation, the Spanish term hidalgo is rendered and further explicated in the footnotes as follows: “Idalgo - kichik yerga ega bo‘lgan dvoryan. Mavrlar bilan shiddatli kurash davrida (XI-XIV asrlar) Ispaniya hayotida mayda dvoryanlik muhim rol o‘ynagan edi. Ispaniyani chet elliklardan tozalashda ozodlik qo‘shinlari asosan shulardan tuzilgan. Shuning uchun ham bu dvoryanlar kurashlarda qo‘lga kiritilgan yerlarga puxta o‘rnashib olgan edilar. Biroq XV va XVI asrlarga kelib, qirollik hukmronligining kuchaygan davrida dvoryanlarning bu guruhi asta-sekin qirol qo‘shinining oddiy xizmatkorlariga, rasmiy amaldor va saroyning mayda xodimlariga aylanib, o‘z nufuzlarini yo‘qota bordilar. XV asr oxirlarida boshlangan kapitalistik xo‘jalik formasiga tomon burilish va birinchi darajali iste’mol bahosining tobora o‘sib borishi mayda dvoryanlikni asta-sekin to‘la xonavayronlikka olib keladi. Servantes davrida so‘nggi parcha yeridan ham ajralib qashshoqlashgan idalgo ispan hayotining xarakterli vakiliga aylanib qolgan edi.” [S. Yuldoshev 2019: 7] This detailed annotation not only provides a literal equivalent of the original term but also offers a comprehensive socio-historical background, essential for understanding the nuanced meaning of hidalgo within its original context. By incorporating a historical overview of the evolution of the Spanish petty nobility, from their prominent role during the Reconquista to their eventual socio-economic decline by the time of Cervantes, S. Yuldoshev ensures that readers grasp both the linguistic and cultural dimensions of the term. This strategy of literal translation supplemented with explanatory commentary proves particularly effective for maintaining cultural authenticity and avoiding oversimplification, especially when dealing with culturally loaded terms that lack direct equivalents in the target language. Such an approach also highlights the translator’s role not merely as a linguistic intermediary, but as a cultural mediator, bridging gaps between disparate historical and cultural contexts for the target audience.

1. Substitution with equivalent allusions

Substitution involves replacing a foreign allusion with one that is culturally equivalent in the target language, thus ensuring that the target audience can easily recognize and understand the reference. This strategy, advocated by Venuti, falls under the broader translation approach of “domestication,” where the foreign elements are adapted to the cultural context of the target language [Venuti 2013: 104]. While this strategy enhances accessibility, it may also lead to a loss of the original’s intertextual and cultural depth. As a result, translators must carefully choose whether the allusion’s function in the text can be adequately maintained with a culturally appropriate substitute [Munday 2016: 148].

In George Orwell’s novel Animal Farm, one of the key symbolic moments is the renaming of the farm after the rebellion. Originally called Manor Farm, it is changed to Animal Farm to reflect the animals’ new vision of a society built on equality and self-rule. In the English version, the name Animal Farm is simple, neutral, and straightforward. It mirrors the animals’ naïve optimism about the future they are trying to build, without adding any emotional or ideological color. The name sounds utopian but plain, fitting Orwell’s satirical style where grand ideals are exposed as fragile and easily corrupted.

In K. Bakhriev’s Uzbek translation Molxona, however, the translator renders Animal Farm as Khayvonobod. This choice is not a literal translation but a clear case of substitution with equivalent allusion. The word Khayvonobod is formed by combining “khayvon” (animal) with the suffix “-obod,” a very common and culturally loaded element in Uzbek place names. The suffix “-obod” carries a strong positive connotation, meaning a prosperous, flourishing, or civilized settlement. Place names such as Toshkentobod, Khalqobod etc. are deeply familiar to Uzbek readers and often signify ideals of growth, peace, and prosperity.

Through this substitution, K. Bakhriev does not merely translate the name; he transforms it to fit the cultural expectations of the Uzbek audience. While Animal Farm in English suggests a modest agricultural experiment by animals, Khayvonobod in Uzbek evokes an image of an organized, ideal settlement - a place of hope, community, and success. The translation strengthens the utopian feeling of the animals’ dream in a way that would be immediately accessible and meaningful to Uzbek readers.

This substitution also subtly intensifies the ideological reflection of the story. In Uzbek, Khayvonobod sounds like a place destined for flourishing - a perfect dream - which makes the eventual collapse of the animals’ revolution even more tragic. The optimism inherent in the “-obod” suffix heightens the irony of Orwell’s political satire, even though it slightly shifts the tone compared to the more neutral English name.

In summary, K. Bakhriev’s rendering of Animal Farm as Khayvonobod represents a textbook example of substitution with equivalent allusion. He adapts the naming convention to the target culture, maintaining the essential meaning (a society built by animals) while enriching the emotional impact for Uzbek readers. This strategy respects the ideological core of Orwell’s work while ensuring that the translation resonates naturally within the Uzbek cultural and linguistic context.

1. Omission

Omission, or the deliberate exclusion of an allusion, is sometimes used when the reference is deemed irrelevant or untranslatable, especially when it would disrupt the flow or comprehension of the translated text. This strategy is often a last resort but can be justified if the allusion does not contribute significantly to the overall meaning or if its absence does not undermine the reader’s understanding. However, omission can lead to a loss of nuance, and translators must be cautious when choosing this approach to avoid undermining the text’s artistic or rhetorical goals. For instance, in Jack London’s short story An Odyssey of the North, the sentence, “And it wasn’t as if Strange One didn’t know the value of sea-otter; he was an Indian of some sort, and what little he talked showed he’d been among white men,” portrays Strange One as a native individual familiar with the ways of Europeans. In F. Abdullaev’s Uzbek translation, this sentence appears as: “Mister Uliss terining bahosini bilmaydi deb o’ylamay ham qo’ya qol, uning o’zi hindu bo’lsa ham, gapidan oqlar orasida yashagani bilinib turadi.” [London 2023: 46] In the source text, the term white men explicitly refers to people of European descent, particularly men with fair skin. A literal translation into Uzbek would render it as oq (tanli) odamlar. However, the translator, F. Abdullaev, chose to omit the noun men (odamlar) and instead pluralized the adjective oq by adding the suffix -lar, thereby forming a metonymic expression. Through this technique, the translator successfully conveyed the essential meaning without sacrificing clarity or emotional nuance.

This strategy aligns with Peter Newmark’s observation that omission in translation often serves the purpose of enhancing clarity, simplicity, and conciseness, occasionally necessitating the complete removal of certain words [Newmark 1988: 80]. Additionally, as noted by Eugene Nida, omission can be essential to avoid redundancy and stylistic awkwardness, particularly when the source language exhibits repetitive tendencies [Nida 1964: 3].

Although Jack London did not deliberately employ any stylistic devices in the original phrase, the translator’s use of metonymy added a subtle emotional layer to the Uzbek version. Importantly, readers of both the original English text and its Uzbek translation are able to extract an equivalent and profound semantic meaning.

In conclusion, the translation of literary allusions demands a careful balance between preserving the source text’s integrity and ensuring accessibility for the target audience. Translators must skillfully navigate linguistic nuances and cultural contexts, employing strategies such as literal translation, cultural substitution, and omission, depending on the demands of the text and its readership. By drawing on established theoretical frameworks and conducting thorough audience and genre analyses, translators can effectively bridge cultural divides without sacrificing the semantic depth and aesthetic resonance of the original allusions. Ultimately, a sensitive and flexible approach allows literary allusions to retain their evocative power across languages and cultures, enriching the target text and honoring the spirit of the original work.