Document Type : Research

Authors

1 Assistant Professor and Faculty Member, Kharazmi University

2 PhD student of Comparative Interpretation, Kousar Islamic Sciences Education Institute

Abstract

Translation evaluation is one of the methods of critique that is used to determine the quality level of translated texts. The use of Qur’anic or moderate interpretations for unpleasant concepts has led to recognition of these interpretations and their influence on Quranic textures, and raised the problems of translating these interpretations into different languages including Persian. The exists the need for translators’ knowledge of the methodology of Qur’anic discourse, translation tools, and matching equivalents. In this comparative, analytical and descriptive study, Persian translations of these interpretations are presented using the second level of the Gaussian translation-grapheme syntax assessment model. The assessment of the translation of these interpretations in four well-known translations, from Persian literal and detailed translations, namely, Qumashi, Ma’azi, Ayati and Makarem Shirazi’s translation, especially in the use of examples of compassion, chastity, and eulogy, suggests that cultural differences existing between the Persian and Arabic languages, and equivalence at the lexical and grammatical levels are among the most important sources of challenge in this field. In rhetorical translation, the rhetoric of the structure of these interpretations is denied, and based on this kind of translation, the hidden meanings of Qur’an remain, verbal similarities in Persian are restricted, and the adequacy and acceptability are reduced.
     The term “good” Qur’anic terminology is a summation between two concepts; the first concept: idiomatic terms; the second concept: the stylized or good meaning of the term (nickname, word of mouth) that is defined in the new semantics of science: an expression that has a certain meaning and is obtained from the sum of words (Al-Bebalaki, 1990, p. 235; al-Qasemi, 1979, p. 25; Abuzlaal, 2006, p. 1 & 68). The stylization also means using a word or phrase as a mask or cover to cover painful, ugly and unpleasant concepts (Casas Gomez, 2009, pp. 725-739). For this reason, the compound term is the reference through a linguistic and explicit method. It seems to have become commonplace among linguists to use linguistic tools for what is ugly and banned in society, such as: disease, death, sexual relations, some parts of the body, poverty, natural disasters and some sensory and spiritual traits, etc. to make them interpreted as unobtrusive and acceptable. Regarding the stance of linguistic or stylized interpretation, it should be said that in the process of establishing communication, it is a positive and useful tool because it removes barriers from the ideal way of communication, promotes the level of dialogue, and transcends the boundary of passage implicitly and implicitly (Abu Khazdar, 2013, p. 10; Abuzlaal, 2006, p. 1 & 68; al-Qasemi, 1979, p. 25). It also brings about artistic dimensions through a rhetorical structure such as calligraphy, metaphor, and likeness. The Holy Qur’an, as the heavenly book at the height of eloquence and rhetoric, has a strong link with a well-interpreted or stylized discourse (Sini, 1996, p. 11).
     On the other hand, translation is institutionalized and expanded through the process of theorizing in the mind. In the translation process, an interpreter has two or more different languages; therefore, it is necessary to study and compare all levels (micro and macro) of these languages, to analyze them in the original text, then, to combine them in the context of the destination. The method for transfer from the source language to the target language is very important and requires the acquisition of translation techniques and strategies (Mobaraki, 1392, p. 151). The proper understanding of the concept of the text is the most important stage of correct equivalence and it is possible that the misunderstanding of the content generally changes the meaning of a text in general. Therefore, the translator must first and foremost, on the basis of a proper understanding, compare the words and phrases of the text to the correct equation, then, proceed to the next steps of the translation. Among these views, is the model of translation of Mrs. Carmen Grosses, one of the best and most recent models for the evaluation of literary translation, which is designed in four levels (lexical, grammatical, discourse, and lightness), in which the relevance of the translation of the text is an important issue. In this research, we aim to evaluate the use of the second level of the Garses-semantic grammatical level on four of the well-known translations, both literal and implicit types in Farsi (Elahi Qomshei, Ma’azi, Ayati and Makarem Shirazi) to the most important allegations of these translators, in the translation of the Qur’anic terminology to Farsi, and present a suitable way to solve the existing lexical challenges when translating from Arabic to Persian.

Keywords

Abu Zalal, E. A. S. (2006). Inter-theoretical and comparative interpretation. Egypt: Dar al-Wafladiya al-Taba’i and Wazir [In Arabic].
Al-Albani, M. N. A. (1992). Al-Hadeeth al-Zaifi’s Theology and the effects of Al-Sisi. Al-Riyadh: Encyclopedia of Encyclopedia [In Arabic].
Al-Askari, B. (1998). Al-Farrukh al-Ghawi (M. I. Salim, Trans.). Egypt: Dar al-Alam & Walsafafi [In Arabic].
Al-Baghawi, A. I. M. (1997). Mu’aleem al-Tanzil (M. A. Al-Narmar, Trans.). Al-Riyadh: Daratibi [In Arabic].
Al-Bukhari, M. I. I. (2001). Al-Masjid al-Mas’id al-Sayyih al-Maktassar, commander of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the sunnah of weyama (M. Z. B. Nasser al-Nasser, Trans.). Beirut: Daratuq al-Naja [In Arabic].
Al-Hayek, S. (1999). Al-Qur’an translated by (M. Al-Rana’at, Trans.). Oman: Al-Bayt Society [In Arabic].
Al-Jarjani, A. Z. Sh. (1983). The book of Talefics. Beirut: Dar al-Kutab Al-Alimi [In Arabic].
Al-Juhari, I. H. (1956). Al-Sahih: Taj al-Laghi and Al-Arabi (A. Abdul Ghafour, Trans.). Al-Qahira: Dar al-Alam Lemlaine [In Arabic].
Al-Qasimi, A. (1979). The Arabic and Arabic terminology. Al-Lusan al-Arabi Magazine, 17(1), 17-34 [In Arabic].
Al-Sharbji, A. (2002). Tafsir al-Bashaer and tawnir al-Basaer. Damascus: Dar al-Bashaer [In Arabic].
Al-Zabidi, M. M. A. (2001). Taj al-Erouz Man Jawar al-Qamous (M. Hejazi, Trans.). Al-Kuwait: Al-Tharath al-Arabi [In Arabic].
Ayati, A. M. (1995). Translation of Qur’an Majid. Soroush: Tehran [In Persian].
Badakhshan, A., & Mousavi, S. (2014). A study of linguistics as if in Farsi. Tehran: Two Monthly Linguistic Queries [In Arabic].
Bayati, L. (2010). Structural study of good interpretation in Farsi. Tehran: Islamic Azad University [In Persian].
Elahi Qomshei, M. (1999). Translation of Qur’an. Tehran: Dar al-Qalb al-Islami [In Persian].
Eliazji, I. (1985). Nejad al-Riyad and the lawyer of Elvard F. Al-Mitradif Walthamwart. Beirut: Lebanese School [In Arabic].
Famous, J. (2016). Translation technique: theoretical and practical principles of translation from Arabic to Farsi and from Farsi to Arabic. Tehran: Khome Publications [In Persian].
Farhadi, P. (2013). A critique and evaluation of the translation of Arabic texts (case study: critique and evaluation of Ghassan Kanafani’s translated works in three sections of fasas, narrations, and mashrahiyat [Unpublished Master’s thesis], University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran [In Persian].
Garcés, C. V. (1994). A methodological proposal for the assessment of translated literary works: a case study. The Scarlet Letter (N. Hawthorne, Trans.), Babel, 40(2), 77-102.
Haqqani, N. (2007). Translation theories and opinions. Tehran: Amir Kabir [In Persian].
Ibn al-Mutaq, M. I. M. (n.d). Lesan al-Arab. Beirut: Darahiah al-Tharath al-Arabi [In Arabic].
Ibn Fars, A. (1979). Al-Maqasiyyah (A. S. Mohammedaron, Trans.). Egypt: Dar al-Fakr [In Arabic].
Ibn Sayyid, A. I. I. (1978). Al-Maisid. Beirut: Dar al-Fakir [In Arabic].
Makarem Shirazi, N. (2001). Translation of the Holy Qur’an. Tehran: Office of Islamic History and Studies [In Persian].
Maro'f, J. (2016). Translation technique: theoretical and practical principles of translation from Arabic to Farsi and from Farsi to Arabic.Tehran: SAMT [In Persian].
Moezzi, M. K. (n.d). Translation of the Holy Qur’an. Tehran: Joumhuri-e-Eslami [In Persian].
Mostafavi, H. (1981). Al-Karim Al-Karim words research. Tehran: Translation and Publishing Company [In Persian].
Motaghi Zadeh, A. & Naghi Zadah, S. A. (2017). Evaluating the translation of Persian literary texts into Arabic based on the Carmen Garses model (Message of the Leader of the Revolution on the occasion of Hajj 1395 for example). Tehran: Translation Studies in Arabic Language and Literature [In Persian].
Mustafa Ebrahim, M. (2008). Mo’amiz al-Wasit. Qom: Tebian Cultural Institute [In Persian].
Newmark, P.) 1988(. A textbook of translation. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Noorabadi, Q. (2011). Linguistic analysis of the Farsi interpretation process and its position in Persian language teaching materials for non-Persian speakers. Isfahan: University of Isfahan [In Persian].
Payandeh, A. (1945). Nahj al-Fasheh. Tehran: Javid [In Persian].
Rashidi, N., & Shahid, F. (2010). Evaluation and comparison of Persian translations of the English novel of the Prince and the Beggar, by Mark Twain on the basis of the Garces Model (1994). Journal of Language Studies, 2(3), 57-107 [In Persian].
Sini, M., Taher Hosein, M., & Al-doush, S. A. (1996). Al-Mujam al-Saqiqi for experimental studies. Beirut: Lebanese School [In Arabic].
Tahmasebi, A., & Samadi, V. (2016). A literary translation method based on the translation of the play by Saheb al-Jalaleh. Tehran: Jahad Daneshgahi [In Persian].
Tajli, Gh. (1989). Practical value of translation principles, (V. Komysarov, Trans.). Journal of Social and Human Sciences, Shiraz University, 2, 101-113 [In Persian].
The Holy Qur’an. (M. M. Elahi Qomshehei Trans.). Qom: Al-Hadi Institute (2005). [In Persian & Arabic].