The Science of Translation

Unit (5)

Arabic Abstract Style :

Translation Problems

It is amazing that modern standard Arabic (MSA) can be used in a

variety of ways today, all influenced by the ‘scientific mode’. I have

elsewhere dealt with the evolution of MSA, focusing on a few

structural features (cf. my Comparative Tone, Cairo, 1995); my

concern here is with the unbridled use of abstractions as a result of

translating or mistranslating foreign texts, and the rise of what I shall

call ‘translation style’ — a foreign flavoured variety of Arabic. As the

scientific mode gained a commanding position in recent times, the

tendency to use abstractions grew stronger. And, as recently shown in

Pinker's The Language Instinct (1994) language influences thought,

and this kind of writing has influenced our ways of thinking, not only

in academia but at the level of the popular press as well.

The change in language commonly thought of in terms of

‘development’, should not however be regarded as having changed in

value. The fact is that there are now sharper distinctions between

disciplines (literature as a creative effort not excluded) and a

tendency to interrelate all fields of human knowledge. People in the

west tend to think more in abstractions, and the tendency is assuming

vast proportions as many people opt for abstractions in the hope of

appearing ‘scientific’.

Modern Standard Arabic has been changing also — which is only

natural — in the direction of the scientific mode. But the specific

problem with Arabic is that the development has been directly

Part I

influenced by the abstractions of that ‘mode’ and Arab writers, no less

than foreign ones, are seeking to impress their readers by appearing

‘scientific’. Most readers are not, however, impressed. A typical

Arabic reader would like to have a text that is easy enough to

understand, and, if translated, the text should ideally explain the

unusual ideas or the unfamiliar concepts presented. To avoid the

undesirable impact of unfamiliar abstractions the translator may have

to ‘simplify’ by paraphrasing — but then he must also introduce the

new terminology regardless of comprehensibility — hence the

dilemma.

Take the prime example from a recent text on the World Trade

Organization. A writer tells us :

Any anti-dumping measures, such as quota-restrictions,

tariffication or other countervailing measures,

notwithstanding the difficulty of enacting the relevant

enforcible legislation, should be internationally

sanctioned.

The statement may be easy to understand in an economic context;

and the economist will have no difficulty in ‘translating’ the

compounds into simple statements. But the sentence is taken from a

newspaper report, and the assumption is that it is addressed to the

general reader. Can the translator produce an equivalent in Arabic ?

Most translators simply give the agreed terms (the ‘trade’

terminology) without considering the comprehensibility to the Arabic

reader; but others will try to explain. Here are the two alternative

versions :

أ - إن أى تدابير لمكافحة الإغراق ، مثل تحديد الحصص أو الجمركة

Arabic Abstract Style

أو غير ذلك من التدابير التعويضية ، يجب أن يوافق عليها دولياً ،

بالرغم من صعوبة سن القوانين المحلية ذات الصلة لتنفيذ ذلك .

) ترجمة الأمم المتحدة (

ب- يجب أن يوافق المجتمع الدولى على أى تدابير ] تتخذها دولة من

الدول [ لمكافحة الإغراق ، سواء ] كانت تتمثل فى [ تحديد

الحصص ] من الواردات [ أو الاستعاضة عن القيود المفروضة

على الحصص برسوم جمركية ) وهو ما يسمى بالجمركة ( أو

سوى ذلك من التدابير التعويضية ، رغم صعوبة سن القوانين

المحلية اللازمة لتنفيذ ذلك .

) ترجمة مقترحة (

The words between square brackets have been added for the sake

of clarity (and to slow down the rhythm of the text). The term

‘tariffication’, being new even in English, has been first explained,

before the new Arabic equivalent is given in brackets. The sentence

still contains two expressions not quite familiar to the Arabic reader,

viz. ‘anti-dumping’ and ‘countervailing measures’. Apart from using

the common ‘tricks of the trade’, such as changing the passive

construction into the active voice with the help of an appropriate

subject extrapolated from text (i.e. internationally sanctioned =

sanctioned by the international community = the international

community must give sanction to) the translator is faced with a host of

abstractions that cannot be avoided in the Arabic text. Some have

been successfully changed into concrete terms (quota-restrictions =

restrictions imposed on quotas of imports) and others have been

explained and repeated in the following phrase, though one or two

remain unexplained.

No translator can, obviously, undertake to explain every

Part I

abstraction (tariffication being an exception). Some are indeed

metaphors and the translator will be happy to find the equivalent.

‘Dumping’ has been translated into the agreed term إغ راق which

literally means ‘drowning’ or ‘sinking’, a near enough concept to that

of ‘jettisoning’. In today's Al-Akhbar (6 August 1998) a witty

journalist provides the punning headline Z حتى لا نسقط فى بحر الاغراق X

(p. 4) (approximately ‘How not to fall in the Sea of Dumping’). The

original sense of discarding as ‘rubbish’ is, however, lost. To explain

the term, by saying for instance that it means selling a product at a

price below the original cost to gain market advantage, may be too

much for the translator. The other term, countervailing, has been

explained by the use of an Arabic word which paves the way for the

accepted Arabic term, namely استعاضة leading to تعويض hence تعويضية

. This is not, however, always possible, and the translator is

sometimes forced to intervene to explain.

Lesson :

Remember that Arabic is capable of using the abstract style : the

main thing is that the writer should use modern reasoning which is

common to all languages.

Arabic Abstract Style

Unit (6)

Limits of Interpretation in Translation

The translator's dilemma is therefore whether to assume that his

reader is well versed in the subject (as most UN translators do) and

proceed to use what he believes to be the accepted Arabic terms for

the English abstractions, or to play the interpreter and volunteer any

explanations he deems necessary. Another example from a recent

glossary of sociological terms should further illustrate the dilemma :

Aristotle saw the state as a community involving

communication between a multiplicity of individual

perspectives. Whereas this concerns individual purposive

action in the political sphere, Aquinas introduced into

medieval Christian thought a broader theoretical

conception in which God's nature is communicated in the

creation of his creatures. This model led to the

generalization of the concept of communication to all

human beings and at the same time to a differentiation,

which became central for modernity, between the

particular (political) and the universal (social)

communication community.

This is the kind of writing one has come to expect in today's

scholarship — abstract, compact and elliptical, ‘complete with’ vogue

words and those with less precise meaning (such as ‘model’ and

‘involving’ respectively). The translator is forced here, if only to give

the straightforward meaning, to explain, even to paraphrase. Look at

the following two versions, the first ‘freer’ than the second :

كان أرسطو يعتبر الدولة مجتمعاً يجرى فيه التواصل بين العديد من وجهات

النظر الفردية ، وكان يعنى به التواصل بين الأفعال الفردية المتعمدة فى المجال

Part I

السياسى . ثم جاء طوما الأقوينى فأدخل فى الفكر المسيحى فى

العصور الوسطى تصوراً نظرياً أوسع نطاقاً إذ قال بأن عملية الخلق

تتضمن توصيل صفات ا> أو طبيعته إلى المخلوقات ، مما أدى إلى

تعميم مفهوم التواصل بحيث أصبح يشمل جميع أفراد الجنس البشرى

، وإن كان قد أدى فى الوقت نفسه إلى تفرقة أصبحت تحتل مكانة

أساسية فى الفكر الحديث ، وهى التفرقة بين التواصل الخاص ) فى

المجتمع السياسى ( والتواصل العام ) فى المجتمع الإنسانى ( .

(93 words)

Now look at the more literal version :

كان أرسطو يرى أن الدولة مجتمع يجرى فيه التواصل بين العديد

من المنظورات الفردية . وإذا كان ذلك يتعلق بالأفعال الفردية الهادفة فى

المجال السياسى ، فإن الأقوينى أدخل فى الفكر المسيحى فى العصور

الوسطى تصوراً نظرياً أوسع يقول إن طبيعة ا> يجرى توصيلها فى

عملية خلق مخلوقاته . وأدى هذا النموذج إلى تعميم مفهوم التواصل

ليشمل جميع البشر وفى نفس الوقت إلى تفرقة أصبحت أساسية

للحداثة ، أى التفرقة بين مجتمع التواصل الخاص ) السياسى (

ومجتمع التواصل العام ) الاجتماعى ( .

(73 words)

The literal version is considerably shorter and, read after the first

version, seems more accurate; but this is quite deceptive; for the extra

20 words are essential to the interpretation. The central play on words

here concerns the key word “commune’ and its cognates. What the

translator faces here is a tour de force by the writer who deliberately

changes the meaning of the central word, used as a ‘root word’ or a

‘pivotal term’, every time he uses a cognate. The first ‘community’

implies, in fact, ‘having things in common’ as well as being members

of a group : the ‘political’ sphere points in the direction of the Greek

Limits of interpretation in translation

‘polis’, where the inter-related members of the group are bound

together by the locale (the city) and the community of interests (the

common life in the city). It is in the light of this that communication

becomes تواصل rather than توصيل or إتصال ; and the meaning is, of

course, reinforced by the use of the crucial between. The following

sentence corroborates this reading and forces the translator to stick to

the adjective فردى rather than any reference to الفرد or to . الأفراد

Individual comes to mean the opposite of ‘common’; it is where

interaction becomes meaningful; and it is the prerequisite for any kind

of communication. In other words, the perspective may belong not to

an individual but to a group (a party) — much in the same way as a

purposive action might. The idea of the individual is therefore not

fully developed here; and it is Aquinas who specifies the role of the

individual, more or less explicitly.

The second ‘communicate’, therefore, is essential to the change

in the concept. It does not refer to any communication in the sense of

ت واصل or اتصال but is confined to the sense of توصيل ! Note that the

crucial term ‘creatures’ should mean all beings not merely human

beings; but the translator, aware of the trap, sticks to the letter of the

text, until the next sentence specifies human beings. The final

sentence begins with the vogue word ‘model’, which cannot mean

anything to the Arabic reader and is judiciously omitted. Needless to

say, the change in the last words in that sentence is essential for the

meaning to be ‘communicated’ clearly and accurately.

Now consider the following sentence which comes immediately

after the preceding paragraph : it is vital for my argument about the

‘abyss of abstraction’ (modeled on Wordsworth's ‘abyss of idealism’)

into which many contemporary writers fall :

Part

This idealizing extension of the concept of communication

to all human beings, and its simultaneous differentiation

into political and social communication, made it a

favoured point of reference for modern sociology and

social philosophy.

Let us first try to translate the sentence without clearning the hurdle

‘idealizing’ :

وهذا التوسع فى مفهوم التواصل بحيث يشمل جميع أبناء البشر ،

مع تقسيمه فى الوقت ذاته إلى تواصل سياسى وتواصل اجتماعى ، هو

الذى جعله نقطة مرجعية مفصلة لعلم الاجتماع الحديث والفلسفة

الاجتماعية الحديثة .

The only change here is the use of تقسيم instead of تمييز or ; تفرقة

but the awkward نقطة مرجعية should perhaps be replaced by نقطة انطلاق

or, better still, ‘ معياراً ’ or من المعايير الأساسية (used by modern

sociology etc.) But the hurdle persists ! In what sense is that extension

‘idealizing’ ? To idealize, the dictionary will tell you, is to make

‘ideal’ (to think of or represent as ideal; to regard or show as perfect

or more nearly perfect than is true). And an ‘ideal’ is that which exists

as an idea, model, or archetype; or that which consists of ideas. The

other sense in which the term refers to a perfect model may also be

implied : after all, how can we be sure what the writer has in mind ?

For the first meaning, perhaps التجريدى will do as الفكرى followed by

‘concept’ will be too tautological; for the second only المثالى seems to

be acceptable. Which one should the translator opt for ?

هذا التوسع التجريدى فى مفهوم التواصل

is obviously vague; should the adjective be changed by a translator's

trick into a clause ?

Limits of interpretation in translation

وهذا التوسع فى مفهوم التواصل ، الذى يجرده ] من أى سياق

محدود [ حتى ...

Equally cumbersome. Should we try ? مثالى

وهذا التوسع المثالى فى مفهوم التواصل بحيث يشمل الجنس

البشرى كله ...

One wonders whether مثالى is the right word — for, to be sure, it

is not ideal, but idealizing ! Perhaps a whole sentence is required :

وهذا التوسع فى مفهوم التواصل ، الذى يسمو به إلى مستوى المثل

العامة ] أو المثال [ ، بحيث يشمل أبناء البشر جميعاً ... الخ .

To read on is to find confirmation of this interpretation; and ‘read on’

is what every translator should do before opting for a given

interpretation :

Marx, in the Grundrisse, uses the differentiation between

political and social communication to turn Aristotle's zoon

politikon into a ‘society’ of individuals ‘acting and

speaking together’. C.S. Peirce analyses the scientific

community from the perspective of an (idealized)

communication community and G.H. Mead brings the

social processes of individualization by means of

socialization into the framework of a ‘universal

discourse’.

فان كارل ماركس يستعمل التمييز بين التواصل السياسى

X للقول بأن ، Z الخطة الأساسية X والتواصل الاجتماعى ، فى كتابه

الذى تحدث عنه أرسطو ليس فى الحقيقة سوى Z الحيوان الاجتماعى

وأما بيرس . Z يعملون معاً ويتحدثون معاً X مجموعة من الأفراد الذين

فقد قام بتحليل مجتمع العلماء من منظور مجتمع التواصل المثالى ] أو

من منظور التواصل المثالى فى مجتمع ما [ وكذلك نرى أن ج.ه. ميد

Part I

يضع عمليات التفرد الاجتماعية ] أى اكتساب كل فرد وعيه بفرديته

فى المجتمع [ فى إطار ما يسمى بالكلام العالمى ] أو التواصل أو

الخطاب العالمى [ بفضل عملية الانتماء الاجتماعى .

Lesson :

The translator's dilemma is how far he fells free to interfere in the

text he's translating into another language ? How far he is allowed to

explain, adjust or even correct the phrasing to adapt his new text to the

culture of the target audience ?

Limits of interpretation in translation

Unit (7)

Communicating the Sense : The problems

The Translator as Interpreter :

It may be concluded that a good translator is expected to

undertake a measure of interpretation, if only to make such abstract

terminology comprehensible to unfamiliar audiences. There is,

however, a limit to the liberties he is allowed to take : he may get

round an expression, occasionally; he may paraphrase if all else fails;

but he must ultimately accept the typical terminology of each

discipline, regardless of whether his audiences will be equally capable

of grasping the meaning immediately or not. Arabic has adapted

reasonably well to the demands of the abstract language of science;

but the qualification is important. The language of teaching in many

university faculties remains English (Medicine, Science, engineering

etc), and many subjects that used to be taught in Arabic (Algebra,

Chemistry etc) are now being taught in English. This has inevitably

influenced the evolution of an abstract Arabic idiom, and many people

are annoyed by the abstractions used by the highly educated. True,

most people have grown accustomed to ‘dumping’ and to

‘anti-dumping measures’, as the new GATT and WTO (with its recent

TRIPS and TRIMS agreements) have come to be facts of daily life in

the Arab world. Popular abstractions, such as Intellectual Property

Rights حقوق الملكية الفكرية , privatization الخصخصة , and, indeed, the

New World Order النظام العالمى الجديد bother no one now. But the issue

at stake concerns not so much individual terms, however abstract, as

the willingness of the reading public to deal in abstract thought not

Part I

only in books but also in the daily press.

Lesson :

The translator is required at all times to act as medium : his Arabic

— speaking readers want to understand first. Comprehensibility is the

ideal. It does not matter how far he deviates from the structure of the

original as long as he can in the end reach his audience.

Communicating the sense

Unit (8)

What is ‘Translation Style ?

The adaptation of Arabic has been made to appear too sudden, to

the point of shocking an older generation; and the degree to which

Arabic style has come to accommodate modern learning has varied

considerably from one discipline to another. The reason, I believe, is

that in some disciplines translation has outpaced original writing (and

thinking). ‘Translation style’ sometimes dominates, with disastrous

consequences for the reader. By translation style I mean the literal

rendering of foreign texts, complete with abstractions (however,

incomprehensible), especially by inexperienced translators. Some of

these translators may be scientists; they may even be specialists of

high standing in their fields, but may lack the linguistic talent required

to get their ideas across to the reader. Cynically put by an expert,

‘some may even successfully handle the atom, but can never tell us

how !’ Some of them are not only thinkers but also doers, though alas

! They cannot communicate. Others have received their training in

English and seem to be totally at a loss when asked to express their

ideas in Arabic. To this category of ‘scientists’ must be added that of

the ‘beginners’ who, taking their first steps in translation, venture to

produce book after book of hopeless gibberish.

I fear the last category most. With ‘scientists’ I am only worried

about style and expression, (provided, of course, that the text is fully

understood) but with beginners I worry about everything. Translated

Style is used by both; and you could tell if the Arabic is original or

translated by observing the typical features of the English Structure in

Part I

the Arabic text. An experienced translator knows how to ‘disguise’

these features if he or she cannot ‘re-structure’* the ideas to make

them appear idiomatic in Arabic. I have elsewhere referred to the

transformational tricks (tricks of the trade) known to every translator;

but abstractions are a new added burden.

Now a good example of the confusion of a kind of ‘translation

style’ with original writing is found in a recent book on the Social

Conditions of Slaves in Egypt 642-1924 by Muhammad Mukhtar,

Cairo, 1996. In the ‘introduction’ the author writes :

وتبقى كلمة : هى أن المؤلف لايجد فارقاً كبيراً بين مجتمع كان يقبل بوجود

علاقات استرقاق داخله فى عصور سابقة ، ومجتمع آخر يسمح بالبغاء وينظمه

ويفرض عليه ضرائب كخدمة معترف بها ، أو مجتمع يعمل فيه أفراده مقابل

أجر لا يقيم أود الحياة .

إن وضع الجارية لا يختلف كثيراً عن وضع البغى . كما أن وضع العامل

الذى تعطيه جهة عمله أجراً يكفيه فقط لأن يبقى على قيد الحياة ليستأنف عمله

فى اليوم التالى ليس أفضل كثيراً من العبد الذى يكفله سيده لنفس السبب .

إن العالم لم يتحضر بعد .

1924 / القاهرة - محمد مختار - الأوضاع الاجتماعية للرقيق فى مصر 642

1996

What is ‘translation style’ ?

* Restructuring has come to acquire a specific economic meaning, comparable to

that of economic adjustment, both implying the change from central planning to

market economy. Those countries that are still changing from the old so-called

‘socialist’ system to the new so-called ‘free’ (laissez-faire system) are referred to

as countries in transition. The Arabic words for these abstractions are :

restructuring إعادة الهيكلة ; economic adjustment ; التكيف أو الإصلاح الاقتصادى

central planning التخطيط المركزى ; laissez-faire system ; نظام الاقتصاد الحر

transition economics اقتصاد البلدان التى تمر بالمرحلة الانتقالية this context refers to

بناء and hence ‘structuralism’ البنائية أو البنيوية (cf. my - معجم المصطلحات الأدبية

1996 — القاهرة ).

One last word : the present writer sees no great

difference between a society that had accepted, in ages

long gone, relations of slavery, and a society which

allows, organizes and taxes prostitution as a recognized

service, or, indeed a society whose members receive no

more than subsistence wages.

The status of a slave girl does not differ much from

that of a harlot. The status of a worker who receives from

his employer enough wages for survival, so as to resume

work in the following day, cannot be different from that of

slave supported by his master for the same purpose. The

world is as yet uncivilized.

On pages 158-159 we read :

ولم تبدأ الجهود المصرية للقضاء على تجارة الرقيق فى الأقاليم

التابعة لمصر وحتى داخل مصر نفسها تأخذ شكلاً جدياً إلا مع قدوم

الخديوى إسماعيل ، والذى استغل الرغبة القوية التى ظهرت فى الغرب

للقضاء على النخاسة لخدمة ما كان يسعى إلى تحقيقه من تطوير لحركة

الكشوفات المصرية فى الأقاليم الاستوائية وضم المناطق الجديدة التى

يتم اكتشافها إلى الممتلكات المصرية ، وهو ما دفع به إلى عقد اتفاق مع

السير صموئيل بيكر فى 27 مارس سنة 1869 م للقيام بقيادة حملة

عسكرية فى هذه المناطق بدعم من الحكومة المصرية ، كان أحد أهدافها

القضاء على الميليشيات المسلحة التى كان يديرها أشخاص من العرب

والبرتغاليين لصيد الرقيق ، ثم استغلال الرقيق الذى تم صيده فى نقل

كميات العاج التى يتم نهبها حتى الساحل ، ثم تصدير الصنفين معاً أو

بيعهما للتجار المحليين .

The initial subject is too long for idiomatic Arabic; stylistic infelicities

suggest that this text may have been translated, or copied or based on

an original English text; the original may only have been consulted.

The translator of the original may have slavishly followed the ‘advice’

of beginning a sentence in Arabic with a verb; of turning passive

Part I

constructions into the awkward يتم + مصدر and of linking all sentences

with relative pronouns or similar ‘connectives’. Structures such as

خدمة تطوير and كان يديرها are glaring examples of foreign idiom badly

translated. Perhaps the original was :

Egyptian efforts to combat the slave trade in the

territories under Egyptian control, even in Egypt itself, did

not begin in earnest until khediv Ismail came to power.

Taking advantage of the strong desire in the West to

abolish the slave trade, he hoped to develop the Egyptian

exploration of the equatorial zone and to annex any newly

explored territory to the Egyptian dominions. An

agreement was therefore made with Sir Samuel Baker, on

27 March 1869, to lead a military expedition in that

region, with support from the Egyptian government. One

of its aims was to disband the armed militias run by a

number of Arab and Portugese merchants who captured

slaves, used them in transporting the ivory they have

plundered to the coast, then exported or sold both slaves

and ivory to local traders.

A possible Arabic rendering is :

أما الجهود المصرية لمكافحة تجارة الرقيق فى المناطق الخاضعة لمصر ، بل وفى

مصر نفسها ، فلم تبدأ بداية جادة حتى تولى الخديوى إسماعيل حكم مصر ، إذ أنه

استغل ما أبداه الغرب من رغبة قوية فى إلغاء تجارة الرقيق فى تنمية حركة الكشوف

الجغرافية فى المناطق الاستوائية ، وضم ما يكتشف من أراض جديدة إلى الممتلكات

المصرية . وهكذا عقد الخديوى اتفاقاً مع السير صموئيل بيكر فى 27 مارس 1869

لقيادة حملة عسكرية فى تلك المناطق بدعم من الحكومة المصرية . وكان من أهداف

هذه الحملة تشتيت العصابات المسلحة التى كانت تحت إمرة عدد من التجار العرب

والبرتغاليين ، والذين كانوا يستخدمونها فى صيد الرقيق ، واستخدام هذا الرقيق

نفسه فى نقل العاج الذى نهبوه إلى الساحل ، ثم يصدرون الرقيق والعاج معاً إلى

الخارج ، أو يبيعون هذا وذاك إلى التجار المحليين .

What is ‘translation style’ ?

The passage may not have been copied from any foreign (English)

source; but the ‘facts’ are not thought out by the writer, and must have

been taken from some book or similar source. His references in the

footnotes clearly show that he consulted translated books, and he

often quotes freely without specifying the cited words or indenting.

So, even if he had written the passage himself, certain parts read as

though they are translated or copied from somewhere, or, which is the

more likely, adapted from a translation. Consider the use of the Arabic

verb القضاء على in the three sense of ‘combating’, ‘abolishing’ and

‘disbanding’. The Arabic word is categorical and, as such,

symptomatic of the tendency of Arabic writers to think in black and

white (no shades of grey) : the translator uses it as an umbrella term

for the entire gamut of meanings placed by a thesaurus under a single

entry. It is the laziness of the beginner that makes the translator try to

convey such specific meanings with one general term. This is merely

an offshoot of the translator's dilemma, for even if he is experienced

enough to overcome the structural weaknesses I referred to earlier in

the Arabic text, he will have to decide whether to give his style a

distinct Arabic flavour by using the umbrella terms or to be specific

and use a word for each meaning. The amazing thing is that this

‘offshoot’ contributes to the original dilemma : for the umbrella terms

might create an air of familiarity with the ideas (as most Arabic

readers hate the shades of grey) but they seem to sit uneasily in a text

containing foreign ideas. If, on the other hand, the translator opts for

the specific equivalents of the original terms, the result may be a text

smacking too much of a foreign original. Most of the writing done in

academia these days in Arabic tends to adopt one of these two choices

: some writers especially in the human sciences, seem to care more for

Part I

precision than for genuine Arabic style (idiomatic, elliptical and

rhetorical); but others sacrifice a good deal to attain that style. Behind

both attempts (choices) lies a desire to appear ‘scientific’ by using

abstractions. But while the advocates of precision opt for the foreign

abstractions which reflect a foreign mode of thinking, as illustrated by

the passages quoted from the glossary of sociological terms, the

masters of Arabic style try to dress their novel (foreign / modern) ideas

in a language whose terms have come to be too loose to convey modern

ideas.

The crux of the dilemma for the translator is, as I have endeavored

to illustrate, whether to interfere adequately in the translated text to

render comprehensible those concepts that are too unfamiliar (because

based on different principles of classification) to be rendered in single

terms and so to play the interpreter as well as the translator,

notwithstanding the dangers herein involved, or to try to transmit the

original abstractions, regardless.

The trouble with foreign abstractions is that some of them seem to

belong to the category of ‘scientific terminology’ without actually

being scientific at all. Indeed, some of them appear awesome enough to

appear incapable of having more than an Arabic version. They cast a

spell on the translator (who is, in most cases, a learner) who becomes

afraid to change what he believes, or what he was taught, to be the

correct Arabic equivalent. The passage on communication has

furnished a good example; and even here, where no scientific terms

seem to have been used, words like ‘develop’ loom large as a vogue

word whose meaning varies from يطور to ينمى to يضع or even . يبتكر

Translation style is a fact of modern Arabic writing; and it owes more

to the misunderstanding of abstractions than to any poor structure or

departure from idiomatic Arabic.

What is ‘translation style’ ?

Lesson :

As a result of the universalization of the language of science,

modern standard Arabic has developed an abstract style similar to that

of most living European languages. Some people call it ‘translation

style’, but it is in fact the outcome of an interaction between our

indiginous mode of thought and the universal language of science.

Part II