Familiarization with Arabic texts from a translational perspective is analytically to seek the linguistic competence that can be implemented objectively. Precisely when such an argumentative text and an author are both involved in the reproduction of an effective Arabic translation. In the preceded sections, Edward W. Said who is the text writer has given a priority in order to see how his writing style is viewed among reviewers and critics. As Said argues, analysing his words seems difficult as these words connote a relentless character and utmost an intellectual whose linguistic knowledge looks incomparable. In this study, Hatim’s (1997) practical guide would be negotiated in details, for its being one of the many that this contrastive study has found reliable and approachable. Newmark (1988b:16) says, “The authority of the text is derived from good writing”, he adds that
the point is that ‘expressive texts, i.e. serious imaginative literature and authoritative and personal statements, have to be translated closely, matching the writing, good or bad, of the original…, have to be translated in the best style that the translator can reconcile with the style of the original.
In this concern, structural and grammatical differences among languages impose difficulties in the process of translation. For instance, if a translator does not consider the structures and norms of the target language, then s/he may fail to convey the message of the original. This is a clear indication to the complexity of the process of translating. The translator may enjoy the stylistic beauty of a text, as to be creative in reproducing on the target language reader an effect that can be compared to the original. What matters most, as it is the case in such argumentative text, is the choice of approach, whether to translate literally or not. It seems exceptional that the translator can be able to transmit Said’s eloquent style in argumentation into the Arabic language.
الأحد يناير 17, 2010 12:15 pm
