زبان کاوی کاربردی (Aug 2024)
An Examination of Equivalence in Translating "Maf\'ul Lahu" Based on Antoine Berman’s Theory; A Case Study on Naser Makarem Shirazi’s Translation of the First 100 Sermons from Nahj al-Balagha [In Persian]
Abstract
Numerous theories addressing translation challenges have been proposed, each providing a distinct framework for mitigating translation issues. One notable theory is that of Antoine Berman, who focuses on a text-centered approach and introduces the notion of "disruptive tendencies." He underscores the significance of adhering closely to the source text and advocates for translators to maintain fidelity to both its form and content. Berman is particularly critical of prevalent practices such as domestication and denigration of foreignization within translation processes. A specific challenge faced when translating from Arabic to Persian involves rendering "maf'ul lahu" and its various forms; translators must ensure precise equivalence while considering the speaker's intent. The term "maf'ul lahu" inherently implies causality—a concept that Persian translators frequently find difficult to convey accurately. Explicitly indicating causality may disrupt the fluidity and elegance of the target text, while omitting it can result in an inaccurate representation. This study seeks to conduct a descriptive and analytical critique regarding how "maf'ul lahu" is translated in Naser Makarem Shirazi’s rendition of the first 100 sermons from Nahj al-Balagha, with a focus on Berman’s theoretical framework. From among Berman’s twelve components related to disruptive tendencies, three significant elements—rationalization, expansion, and clarification—are selected for detailed analysis concerning sermons featuring "maf'ul lahu," thus assessing how faithfully the translator adheres to the original text. Although Makarem Shirazi’s overall approach can be characterized as source-oriented, he often fails to translate "maf'ul lahu" accurately in numerous instances. Furthermore, contextual analysis indicates that he does not consistently achieve appropriate equivalences aligned with Berman’s source-oriented perspective. His application of clarification and expansion techniques has led to distortions in several cases; additionally, he has modified structural elements as a form of rationalization. While some alterations may be necessary for achieving greater fluency in translations, they are nonetheless viewed as distorting factors according to Berman’s theoretical framework.
