Word Repetition in the Qur’an: Translating Form or Meaning?

J. male monarch Saud Univ. , Vol. 19, Lang. & Transl. , pp. 17-34, capital of Saudi Arabia (A. H. 1427/2006) Word repeating in the Quran Translating determine or Meaning? Ahmed Ali Assistant Professor, De assortment of face, Faculty of Languages and Translation, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia (Received 13/10/1426 A. H. accepted for publication, 04/04/1427 A. H. ) Abstract. Word repeat is a suffer that exists in exclusively voice communications, and responds distinguishable purposes, blandishmental, emphatic, or otherwise.A moot issue arises when a adaptation is attempted of restate speech in a betoken take aim schoolbookual matter. The dilemma is that owing to the divergent ways of expression and tools available to either language, what fits one language may prove absurd in a nonher. When dealing with the displacement of reiterate lyric poem in a sacred school school text, this proves to be much more(prenominal) descentatic. This stem dea ls with this specific atomic number 18a as far as repeated interchanges in the divine Quran atomic number 18 concerned.The present paper argues that individu in solelyy repeated account book in the Quranic text serves a particular purpose which may be tout ensemble defeated, and, perhaps, the whole message distorted if the arranger fails to render repeat in the homogeneous way. This, by no promoter, go unders the repetition conundrum. However, to effectuate it in simple terms, the translator could, in an attempt to maintain the accuracy and faithfulness, and at the same time, maintain the flow of the adaptation, select use of footnotes to draw the attention of the ratifier/critic to the true(a) wording of the original.In this way, the translator minimizes the effect of, at least, the draw of the original on the commentary. The gist is (hopefully) preserved, and at that placeby, the allegeer/critic and most(prenominal) importantly the studyr, is satisfied by accounting for all the spoken communication in the text involved. Introduction The problems in translating a text from one language to another are legion. For sheath, it is quite parking area to find western critics referring to what they claim to be inco presentnce, inconsistency or lack of harmony in the Quranic port (c. f.Hyde Park Christian Fellowship 1 and Ghoneim 2). Such views ignore the fact that Ahmed Ali * it is both inconceivable and impossible to try one language according to the rules of another * what efficiency be considered elegant style, or legitimate mannequin, or appropriate function in one language is not necessarily looked upon the same way in another * different languages real often express the same thing differently, necessitating different phrasing in expression in displacement reaction * there is no perfect synonymy or exact equality among languages in translation. there will constantly be a translation loss of different degrees as a result of not only linguistic, only when also cultural factors. Therefore, no translation lav be the original, heretofore when the translation may seem to be better than the original. The inherently problematic nature of translation is further complicated when the principal text, as is the case with the Holy Quran, is considered to be a sacred one, containing the inspiration for a complete way of life.In much(prenominal) a case, accuracy in translation becomes a religious and moral duty, not except a linguistic or logistical exercise. Since it would be impossible here to discuss the multifactorialities encountered by innumerable translators in the field of translating the Quran, this paper focuses on one small but not in healthy aspect encountered in the sacred text, that is, the issue of repetition. The Quran Muslims believe that the religion preached in Arabia by prophesier Muhammad (peace be upon him) to be Allahs (Gods) final divine revelation to humanity.For Muslims, the Quran , which is Allahs words revealed to humankind, supplements and completes the earlier revelations on which all theistic religions are built and corrects the human interference and misinterpretations that corrupt and adulterated those earlier revelations. The whole of the Quran is arranged into 114 suwar (singular surah) of unequal size, though a analytic th enjoin of signification of revelation from Allah runs through and through them all. Each surah, which means degree or step, consists f a number of compose divisions, which are called ayat (singular ayah) which are usually determined by the rhythm and cadence in the Arabic text. sometimes, an ayah, content a sign, contains m some(prenominal) censures. Sometimes, a sentence is divided by a break in an ayah but, usually, there is a pause in kernel at the end. The ayah is the true unit of the Quran, since it is a verse of revelation as a sign of Gods wisdom and goodness, just as much as Gods beautiful handiwork in the materi al creation or His dealings in tale are signs to us (Ali 3, p. 3). The Quran, therefore, is the Holy Writ, sent down to us, as surah al-Nahl reveals ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? explaining all things, a guide, a mercy, and glad tidings to Muslim (Quran 1689). Word repeat in the Quran Translating Form or Meaning? The Quran exists in its original language, i. e. , Arabic.Muslim scholars unanimously agree that the Quran is only the Quran when it is in Arabic, in its original wording as revealed to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Cook 4, p. 94 refers to Ibn Hizam (d. 1064), a scholar of Muslim Spain, who stated laconically that NonArabic isnt Arabic, so its not the Quran. This is derived from the fact that there are xi references in ten Quranic suwar Al-Laithy 5, p. 46 confirming on the nose this impression. By way of example, surah Fussilat states ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? And if We had sent this as a Quran in a foreign langu age (other than Arabic), they would hold back said Why are not its ayat explained (in our language)? What (A book) not in Arabic and (the Messenger) an Arab. (Quran 4144). As Ali 3, p. xi, in his preface to the first edition of his translation of the Holy Quran, states, it is the duty of e precise Muslim man, woman or child to read the Quran and understand it according to his own capacity. For non-Arabic Muslims, this poses something of a problem. As Cook 4, p. 8 points out, Arabic is not just the original language of the Quran (as quaint Hebrew was the original language of the Torah) it is the language of the Quran. Therefore, talking somewhat translating the Quran, is problematic. The question that needs to be posed is Is the Quran as a sacred text translatable? On the one hand, the view of the untranslatability of sacred texts is championed by Stieners comments (in Ali 6, p. 174) on the troubles encountered when translating the word of God. He states in his foreword to T ranslating Religious Texts 6, p. xiii Here we flounder in deep pisss.If a text is revealed, if its initial encoding is therefore transferred into a mundane and fallible sign-system, that of secular and post-Adamic speech, to what truth-functions, to what correspondent faithfulness scum bag any translation train? On the other hand, what do we call the well-known translations of Ali 3, Pickthal 7. Arberry 8, Asad 9 and others? It is the view of the present author that if an original text exists in another language, this second product is a translation. The translation of any text is a means of rewriting the pith/message of the original text using a target language.Yet, any translation of any text, no matter how immaculate and scholarly, shadower neer be the original, and will constantly be imperfect and subject to error. Therefore, the Quran is translatable, even though the translation might be laden with short(p)comings and inaccuracies, and can serve as no more than an int roduction to nonArabic speaking audience, Muslims and non-Muslims a worry. For the Muslim, anything other than the Arabic original will always be provided an interpretation, an attempt at conveying the message of the Quran, and will always be an bringing close together of the original. Ahmed Abdel-Fattah M. AliThe fact is, though, that conveying the message of the Quran has become imperative in the light of global interest for a variety of reasons in Islam and in the beliefs and practices of Muslims. As Muslims and Islamic affairs rise more and more to excrescence in global politics, the need to access the contents and meaning of the Quran, specifically through the medium of English, becomes more pressing. It is how this Holy Writ should be translated that forms the basis of this paper. Orignal and Translated Text As any translator knows, translating from a starting time language to a target language presents a minefield of complications.In his discussion of issues related t o the Soviet school of translation, Lauren G. Leighton 10, p. 17 asserts that few Soviet translators would agree with the dogmatic literalist Vladimir Nabokovs assertion that one should dismiss the conventional notion that a translation should read smoothly, and should not sound like a translation. Indeed, says Leighton, Nabokov asserts that any translation that does not sound like a translation is bound to be inexact upon inspection. Nabokovs assertion here justifiably raises the avocation questions What are the criteria that produce a translation sounding like a translation?How does a translation, sounding like a translation, sound? There essential, by implication, be certain peculiaritys in the translation itself that stirs it sound like one. Does this mean, for example, complete adherence to the linguistic rules of the source language, even at the put down of both the style and the linguistic integrity of the target language? Such an account raises more questions than answ ers because how a translation should sound is not defined. Whether a translation should sound like a translation or not, does not mean that bad translations are admissible.In other words, a translated text should read well and with no clumsiness of style cause by the interference of, for instance, the linguistic rules of the target (or second) language. Still, the majority of the translations of the meaning of the Quran f genuinely do sound like translations. The main reason for this is the inevitable impact of the Quranic form on the target language. The division of the Quran into ayat the translators weak attempt to adhere to the source texts wording the importance of the source text the attempts to follow the Arabic style n the translation the existence of terms that are untranslatable without detailed footnoting these are but a few reasons why numerous Quranic translations sound like translations or do not sound natural. This is a difficult problem to tackle. While the aim of translators should be to present the given text in the appropriate style and to production line up to the linguistic demands Word Repetition in the Quran Translating Form or Meaning? of the target language, in galore(postnominal) cases they might find themselves in a situation where the impact of the source language displays itself glaringly with sometimes unacceptable yet unavoidable results.Translating Repetition Repetition, as an element of rhetoric, is an important characteristic of Arabic texts (both ancient and modern), as it is in European dis fly the coop (Connor 11). It would not be apposite in a paper on translation to discuss how and why repetition functions as a rhetorical device in Arabic discourse, and the ratifier should refer to the noteworthy contribution of Al-Jubouri 12 in this regard in the Swales and Mustafa study English for precise Purposes in the Arab World. Suffice it to say that repetition plays a vital role, specifically in the context of use o f attempts to translate the Quran accurately.In the succeeding sections, a brief attempt will be make to square up the incidence of repetition in non-Quranic sources merely to show that repetition is a deep rooted feature in the Arabic discourse. The section after that will discuss repetition in the Quran, giving dickens examples, and erstwhile(prenominal) attempt to outline the problems that translating these presents. Repetition in Non-Quranic Sources Examples This dissonance between the source and the target languages refers most particularly (though not uniquely) to the incidence of repetition(1) in Arabic. As an ? ? ? ? Arabic literary critic once wrote A man may say to another ? Hurry up, says (3) hurry up, and to an archer ? Shoot, shoot. (2) A famous, yet anonymous, poem ? ? ? How many favors arrive at you had (upon us) how many, how many and how many (favors have you had) and how many and another says (1) For more detail near Repetition , see Holes 13, pp. 269-74 Nasif 14, p. 21 Ibn Qutaybah 15, p. 10 Ibn Faris 16, pp. 177-8 Al-Jubouri 12, pp. 99-117 Koch 17 and Tytler 18. According to Al-Mulla 19, p. 232 quoted from Al-Maydani, pp. 9-108 on Ibn Qayyim, pp. 159-167 Ibn Qayyim identifies three types of Repetition in the Quran Repetition with resemblance of meaning e. g. Q7419-20. Repetition with difference of meaning e. g. Q37. Repetition of meaning with different wording e. g. Q5568. (2) Ibn Qutaybah 15, p. 183 and Abu Hilal 20, p. 193. (3) Abu Hilal 20, p. 193 the poet is not named. This line is also found in Al-Murtada, Amali al-Murtada (1954), Vol. 1, p. 84. is, however, missing from this line in Ibn Qutaybah 15, p. 183, and Ibn ? ? Faris 16, p. 177. (4) Ahmed Abdel-Fattah M. Ali ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Why do you not ask the mickle of (the tribe of) Kindah, when they ran away from the battlefield, where, where (did they run away to)? where the underlined words are repeated successively. Muhalhal al so repeated the following more than twenty times in one of his poems (5) ? ? It was not fair of (the tribe of) Kulayb to (have done) Al-Harith ibn Abbad successively repeated, with owing(p) effect, the half-line (6) ? ? ? Make (you two) close to me Marbit Al-Naamah (the name of the place where his beloved one lives). The supra are sundry examples of repetition commonly used in non-Quranic sources. The author believes, however, that the repetition employed in these and similar instances are merely rhetorical devices. As such, they are not much different in structure, intent and meaning as that used in European prosody or poetry. Repetition in the Quran Two Examples The Quran, being in Arabic, is no exception to the need for the correct citation and elaboration of the repetitions as linguistic features during translation.However, the Quran, as has been pointed out, is a sacred text, and as such, requires more than just This line is ascribed to Abid ibn Al-Abras A l-Asadi according to Ibn Qutaybah 21, p. 224. The next line is ? ? ? ? ? ? The line is also found in Abu Hilal 20, p. 194, and in Al-Baqillani 22, p. 160, without the name of the poet, (or Al-Baqillani 22, pp. 136-7). However, the poet is named again in Ibn Qutaybah 15, p. 143 but not in p. 83, where the following line by Auf ibn Al-khari is quoted ? ? ? ? ? ? ? This latter line is also found in Ibn Faris 16, p. 194, where we have or else and the poets name ? is not mentioned, epoch Baqillani 22, p. 160 quotes it as . ? ? (5) Abu Hilal 20, p. 194. (6) Abu Hilal 20, p. 194. (4) Word Repetition in the Quran Translating Form or Meaning? literary critique of its form and usages repetition included.This is because those real forms and usages are intrinsic in, and an essential part of, the sacred message that Muslims believe is the original, unadulterated and incorruptible Word of God. They therefore invite, not mere literary critique, but meta c orporal reflection. Let us cite two examples Example one The opening ayat of surah Iqra read ? (? )? ?)? ( ? ? ? ? ? shoot in the name of your Lord who created (1) Created Man of a blood-clot (2) (Q961-2) In this example, the word (created) is repeated twice and while Read in the ? ame of your Lord who created Man of a blood-clot would read smoothly in English without the reviewer feeling that something more is needed to make the sentence sound like good English, the result is that the translator has omitted part of the original text. Whether such omission affects the meaning or not, it does not alter the fact that the translation did not cater for an item in the original. One might conjecture, therefore, that, in the science of translation, even if the meaning does not suffer as a result of such omission, all texts are words put together and translators must not forget that they translate on the basis of these words.Newmark 23, pp. 36-37 states Many translators say you should never translate words. You translate sentences or ideas or messages. I think they are fooling themselves. The SL source language text consists of words. That is all that is there, on the page. Finally, all you have is words to translate, and you have to account for each of them somewhere in your TL target language text, sometimes by deliberately not translating them , or by compensating for them, because if translated cold you inevitably over-translate them. In the example from Surah Iqra cited higher up, Q961 ends with the word , ? and does not require a complement unlike create which requires an object. Also, Q962, due to the Arabic structure and rules of grammar is a ? complete and meaningful sentence. Yet, if we compare this to English, we find that it goes against the rules of English to start a sentence in the way ayah 2 has been translated, i. e. Created Man of a blood-clot. While the fail ?( ubject) position can be filled in Arabic with no other pronoun but He, seven extracts are available in English to get from (i. e. I, you, he, Ahmed Abdel-Fattah M. Ali she, it, we and they). Considering the context of Q961-2, the translator will have to relate the two ayat together in his translation in localize to make sense. The significant difference in Arabic is that each ayah can also stand on its own, separately, as complete and meaningful in itself. The Quranic text indicates that the Lord created that is, He created all things, known and unknown, tangible and intangible, visible and invisible.This sense is conveyed in ayah 1. The vision of the power of creation is then narrowed, in ayah 2, to one specific item, where we are told what He created and then, He created mankind. In the Arabic, it is soak up that what we have here is a movement in focus between creation in general, and creation in particular. The translated text, without the repetition, reads Read in the name of your Lord who created man of a blood-clot. This makes the ayat lose the important dimension of generality. It loses, too, the dimension of specificity.Furthermore, the Quranic text clearly indicates parallel rhetorical movements -between generality and particularity on the one hand, and between elementary and complex on the other. But, these rhetorical movements have metaphysical implications. As has been shown above, the text your Lord who created shows the power of the Lord in His creation of all things. The text Created man is a movement to the particular, showing the power of the Lord in His creation of specific things. At the same time, we must be aware that humankind one of a host of Allahs creations is itself a composite of complex organisms, mechanisms and systems.The uniqueness of humankind (its generality) rests not only in being one of many, but, at the same time, the quintessence of creation (its specificity). Similarly, reference to the blood-clot indicates the basic-to-complex shift. Blood is a basic component i n the functioning of the human organism, but is also a complex component in itself. The blood-clot referred to is merely a speck on the lining of the womb, represented by the word , which, aside from meaning blood-clot also carries the meaning of leech-like, hanging and/or clinging (c. f. Ibrahim 24, p. 6 and Al-Rehaili 25, p. 1). Yet, in spite of being so basic a component, and so basic a stage of development, it still comprises all the elements of the complex human embryo. The dynamic between the poles of general-to-specific and the complex-to-basic, is rein ram downd in the Arabic text by the repetition, that is, the repetition of the word created ? . The repetition acts as a catalyst whereby the two movements are activated. The Arabic reader, reading the original, is immediately aware of the synonymy. The nonArabic speaker, reading a translation where the repetition has been left out, is not.Word Repetition in the Quran Translating Form or Meaning? Therefore, the string of complexities in meaning having occurred with the use of a repeated word that ties all the involved strings together is lost. Also, the word created ? ends (in the Arabic) with a syllable that rhymes with the last word in ayah 2. As a result, a rhythmic effect is created it possesses a poetic beat at short intervals emerging from a powerful, intense and meaning-laded pattern. ? This shows clearly the importance of ingeminate the word ith regard to meaning and rhythm. The translator might not be able to achieve such an effect in the translation because of the target language rules of grammar and the difference in assonance the sound feast between the source language and the target language. The wording of the Quran is deliberate and every word serves a purpose. Therefore, it is excusable to say that if a word is repeated in the original it should, if possible, be repeated in the translation, unless of course the context dictates a different rendering for the repeated word.Un like other texts (be they sacred or not), when it comes to translating the Holy Quran, every word must be catered for. The translator has to account for each and every word in the original text, in addition to considering their meaning in context. Example two Another example, of the literally hundreds to postulate from, that can be cited is in Surah Yusuf, which relates the story of Prophet Joseph, may peace be upon him, who says ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? I see eleven planets and the sun and the moon I saw them prostrating themselves to me(7) (Quran 124) (7) Many translations, such as most of the ones used in this work render as star not planet (see Pickthall 7) perhaps the translators have been influenced by Genesis 379 where Prophet Joseph told his brothers and father about his dream the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me. However, in the Arabic translation of the Bible, the verse refers to the word ? which is the same as in t he Quran.One wonders where the translator of this Biblical verse into English, assuming the correctness of the Arabic, got the word star from? Genesis 379 in Arabic reads . ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? c. f. 26. On the other hand, Al-Nuwayri 27, pp. 38-9 & pp. 61-70 talks about and quotes lines of Arabic poetry where the word kawkab is used to refer to both planets and stars. The Quran uses the word kawkab to refer to a shining body as in Q676, Q2435.See also, the plural form kawakib in Q376 and Q822. Ahmed Abdel-Fattah M. Ali The verb ? ( saw) is repeated twice in the Arabic as well as in the translation, although the translation could have done without such repetition. It would have still made perfect sense if the translation had been I saw eleven planets, the sun and the moon prostrating themselves to me. (8) We have already said that the wording of the Quran is deliberate every word serves a purpose and deformation of the texts original meaning can oc cur if the repetition in not adequately catered for in the translation.The above should not be interpreted as a defence of literal translation (see the discussion on Nabokov above) for all kinds of text. Still, it cannot be denied that literal translation can sometimes be a most sound form of translation, therefore its value for certain texts the Quran in particular should not be devalued. However, if adopting such a method results in inaccuracy, or deviation from the original sense and intent of the source language text, it should be abandoned. Baker 28, p. puts it like this text is a meaning unit, not a form unit, but meaning is realized through form and without understanding the meanings of individual forms one cannot interpret the meaning of the text as a whole. Translating words and phrases out of context is certainly a futile exercise, but it is equally unconstructive to expect a student to appreciate translation decisions made at the level of text without a reasonable un derstanding of how the lower levels, the individual words, phrases, and grammatical structures, control and shape the overall meaning of the text. aft(prenominal) quoting and analyzing many Arabic texts, Johnstone 29, p. 177 concludes An arguer presents truths by making them present in discourse by repeat them, paraphrasing them, doubling them, calling attention to them with external particles. Argumentation by presentation has its roots in the history of Arab society Arabic literary argumentation is structured by the notion that it is the presentation of an idea the linguistic forms and the very words that are used to describe it that is persuasive, not the logical structure of proofread which Westerners see commode the words. The present author challenges Johnstones assertion that Arabic resorts to linguistic forms rather than logical structure of proof in the science of persuasion. Such an assertion ignores the fact that it is impossible to prove the truth of anything by merely presenting it as a rhetorical structure like repetition, paraphrase and so forth. Linguistic features of this kind are merely elements of style and discourse, not elements of deductive or inductive argument. Linguistic devices for the purposes of persuasion are (8) It is clear that the connective ? waw (? ) is also repeated which is one of the features of ? ? Arabic. For details about the uses and functions of the waw, see Holes 13, pp. 217-20. Word Repetition in the Quran Translating Form or Meaning? used in every language (which, essentially, is what the art of rhetoric is all about). elaborateness, however, can never substitute for proof neither in English nor Arabic What Johnstones argument does do, however, is to shed light on the importance of repetition in Arabic and that, as a feature, it is deeply rooted in the language itself. The example in surah Yusuf cited above provides a relevant dimension to this argument.It is mute that Prophet Joseph (peace be u pon him), saw what he believed was real in a dream although he did not say this himself. This is understood from his ? ? fathers answer not to tell his brothers about his dream (your dream) (Q125). The repetition of (I saw) indicates that there was not the least doubt in the dreamers mind that what he saw was real it was at least a bit more than just a normal dream. He, of course, could not prove that he saw what he claimed, owing to the very nature of dreams. Therefore, he resorted to that feature in the language that gave his argument the confirmation it needed and that was repeating the key word (I saw). In this ayah, the reason Prophet Joseph repeated the verb was not to persuade his listeners, but to emphasize that, what he saw, was true. This example shows recourse to a feature of the language when concrete proof cannot be provided. The proof of the veracity of what Prophet Joseph saw lay, not in his linguistic presentation of simply saying it again and again (as clai med by Johnstone 29, p. 155), but in the physical coming true of his claim his dream near the end of the narrative.There is no doubt in the mind of the Arabic-speaking reader of the Quran that the repetitive nature of Prophet Josephs language is verbally precursive to, and predictive of, an actual event fated to occur by the virtue of Gods divine will. This is not, as Johnstone 29 would have us believe, mere linguistic form in order to persuade or convince, devoid of logical proof. The Prophets convictions, emphasized by repetition, serve as testimony to his faith, and to his submission (Islam) to his God. His visions cited by repeated words, confirm his prophethood.The repetition here is no mere rhetorical device it serves, instead, to confirm the Divine get hold of behind the Prophets visions and what subsequently occurred. The rational argumentation for the actuality and the veracity of the events is implicit, rather than explicit and is vested in the repetition. Translating this implicit rational argumentation is not easy. Of course, in cases where explicit rational argumentation (logical proof) is needed, we find that repetition becomes a means that communicates the truth and supports the proof. Ample examples can be found in Surah al-Naml. ?) ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?) ( ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Ahmed Abdel-Fattah M. Ali ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?) ( ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?) ( ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?) ( ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ( ) ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ( ) ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Say Praise be to Allah, and Peace on His servants whom He has chosen (for His subject matter). ( Who) is better?Allah or the false gods they pertain (with Him)? (59) Or, who has created the heavens and the earth, and who sends you down rain from the sky? Yea, with it We cause to grow well-planted orchards full of beauty and delight it is not in your power to cause the growth of the trees in them. (Can there be another) god besides Allah? Nay, they are a people who swerve from justice. (60) Or, who has made the earth firm to live in made rivers in its midst set thereon mountains immovable, and made a separating bar between the two bodies of flowing water? (Can there be another) god besides Allah? Nay, most of them know not. 61) Or, who listens to the (soul) distressed when it calls on Him, and who relieves its suffering, and makes you (mankind) inheritors of the earth? (Can there be another) god besides Allah? Little it is that ye heed (62) Or, who guides you through the depths of darkness on land and sea, and who sends the winds as heralds of glad tidings, going before His mer cy? (Can there be another) god besides Allah? High is Allah above what they associate with Him (63) Or, who originates Creation, then repeats it, and who gives you sustenance from heaven and earth? (Can there be another) god besides Allah?Say, need forth your evidence, if ye are telling the truth (64) Say None in the heavens or on earth, except Allah, knows what is hidden nor can they perceive when they shall be raised up (for Judgment). (65) (Q2759-65) Word Repetition in the Quran Translating Form or Meaning? Generally speaking, one of the functions of repetition in Arabic is to give army to the point made, and to add emphasis to the argument in most cases, the repeated words are not redundant nor do they affect the style in a way that makes it gauche or clumsy. Consider, for example, the different ranslations for Surah al-Rahman where the word almizan (balance) is repeated three times. (9) The English translations, do, to the English ear, have a tiresome, repetitive qual ity which is get rid of in the Arabic )? ( ?)? ( ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? (? ) ? ? (Q557-9) From Khan & Helali 30 7. And the heaven He has raised high, and He has set up the balance. 8. In order that you may not transgress (due) balance. 9.And observe the weight with equity and do not make the balance deficient. From Ali 3 7. And the firmament has He raised high, and He has set up the balance (of justice). 8. In order that ye may not transgress (due) balance. 9. So establish weight with justice and fall not short in the balance. We can see from such examples that the original (source) language text does have a clear impact on the translation. This impact, especially when dealing with religious and sacred texts, is inescapable. It shows further how important the form is what considerable influence form exercises on translated text and what effect form has when translated. is repeated 31 times, Q3020-25 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? where is repeated h alf-dozen times in six successive ayat. See also Q54 15, 17, 22, 32, 40 and 5 ? , Q691-3 , Q7419-20 , Q7534-3 , Q7615-16 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? , Q8217-18 ? , Q955-6 ? , Q1011-3 , Q1023 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? , Q109, etc. ? ? ? ? (9) Other examples are also found in Q55 where Ahmed Abdel-Fattah M. Ali Conclusion The most difficult problem to resolve in translating Holy Writ is, certainly for Muslims, a moral one. This paper has focused on the literary argument of whether or not to translate repeated words which appear in the Arabic Quran into the target language. It has been shown that if translators choose to deliberately ignore the repeated words, they have actually failed to cater for all the words and, thereby, all the meanings in the original.It is of secondary importance whether the translator may be justified or not for not translating repeated (or unrepeated) words as long as the meaning is not affected. This is because every word in the Quran (repeated as well as unrepeated) serves a purpose and if translators fail to see this, it is not for them to decide that the reader, too, will not see what they have failed to translate. (10) This brings one to the opinion that what the translator of the Quran should do is opt for the straight translation. This does not disallow the fact that translators might labor in vain.They might be genuinely sincere in preserving the rhetorical features of the original text, hoping always to maintain, as best they can, the stylistic beauty of the repetition they find there. Yet, there is always the possibility that those very labors might be doomed to failure owing to the differences between the source and target language systems of meaning-making and functioning. (11) (10) (11) This is explained clearly in the Arabic saying ? ? ?. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? The following examples are meant to shed some more light on this point.According to Nasif 14, p. 22, Sibawayh says The Arabs say ? and ? . The former is used when ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? something good happens and as a result one praises Allah, while the latter is used when one expresses how he is. In his own words . ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? By way of example, Dickins 31 also suggests comparing ? ? with ? ? ? . He says Clearly, these two are distinct in Arabic, and in some contexts it might be possible in ? ? English to translate ? ? ? ? ? as This man is indeed great. In many contexts, however, ? both ? ? ? and ? ? ? ? ? would have to be translated as This man is great ? ? (etc. ) the very real difference between the two sentences simply cannot be relayed in English. Word Repetition in the Quran Translating Form or Meaning? ? Several sincere attempts have been made in the past to minimize the effect of these differences, which result in unnatural sounding translations of the Quran. However, the result is always at the expense of something else. Arberry 8, p. x, for example, compares the Quranic translations prior to his own, saying In making the present attempt to improve on the performance of many of my predecessors, and to produce something which might be accepted as echoing however faintly the sublime rhetoric of the Arabic Koran, I have been at pains to study the intricate and richly varied rhythms hich apart from the message itself constitute the Korans undeniable claim to rank amongst the greatest literary masterpieces of mankind. This very characteristic feature has been almost totally ignored by previous translators it is therefore not affect that what they have wrought sounds dull and flat indeed in comparison with the splendidly decorated original. I have striven to devise rhythmic patterns and sequence-groupings in correspondence with what the Arabic presents, paragraphing the grouped sequences as they seem to form original units of revelation. As is clear from his comments above (as wel l as in many other places in the introduction to his translation of the Quran), much has been lost in previous translations and even his own attempt is but a faint echo of the sublime rhetoric of the Arabic Koran. The question of what to do about translating repetition becomes consequent on recognizing the limitations of translating (or not translating) repetition in the Quran. Gaining a better understanding of the Arabic language definitely diminishes such misperceptions of incoherence.Since Arabic is spoken by approximately one billion people, Muslims can hope for a greater awareness of Arabic as a religious, cultural and social force on the planet on the part of non-Arabic and/or non-Muslim countries. Where Arabic recognized as the world language it is, the study thereof could conceivably be introduced throughout the various tiers of education in the rest of the world, and through that, attune non-Arabic speakers throughout the world to the differences and uniqueness inherent in the language.This would aid readers of the Quran believers or otherwise to make the necessary mindshift from the rhetoric and discourse of their mother tongue to the translated text. In his The Quran A New Interpretation, Colin food turner says When one considers the complexities involved in translating a work such as the Quran, one often wonders whether it might not be easier for the whole English-speaking world to learn Arabic in order to read the Quran than for one translator to bring the Quran to the whole of the English-speaking world.As far-fetched as this option might sound, it is the one favoured by most Muslim scholars, whose opinion it is that the Quran is only the Quran if it is in Arabic and that however much it is translated, and into however many languages, the product which emerges on the other side can never be anything more than one mans humble and, it goes without saying, fallible interpretation. (Turner & Bahbudi 32, p. xiii) In the meantime, until Arabic becom es more widely studied, the answer to the conundrum of how to translate repetition extant in the Quran must be a simple one.The translator could, in an attempt to maintain the accuracy and faithfulness, and at the same time maintain the flow of the translation, make use of footnotes to draw the attention of the reader/critic to the actual wording of the original. In this way, the translator Ahmed Abdel-Fattah M. Ali minimizes the effect of, at least, the form of the original on the translation. The meaning is (hopefully) preserved, and thereby, the reader/critic and most importantly the believer, is satisfied by accounting for all the words in the text involved. References 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Hyde Park Christian Fellowship. Downloaded fifth June, 2002 from the Internet at http//debate. org. uk Ghoneim, M. Some Answers to the Claimed Grammatical Errors in the Holy Quran. Downloaded 5th June, 2002 from the Internet at http//www. angelfire. com/mo/Alborhaan/Gram. htm l Ali, Abdullah Yusuf. The Meaning of the Holy Quran Revised Translation And Commentary. Maryland Amana Corporation, 1992. Cook, M. The Koran. Oxford UK Oxford University Press, 2000. Al-Laithy, Ahmed Abdle-Fattah. What Everyone Should exist about the Quran.Abha, Saudi Arabia Sarawat Printing House, 2002. Ali, Ahmed Abdel-Fattah Muhammad. Measuring and Weighing Terms in the Quran Their Meaning with Reference to half-dozen English Translations. PhD Thesis (unpublished), Durham University, 1998. Pickthall, Mohammad Marmaduke. The Meaning of the Glorious Koran. New York New American Liberary, n. d. Arberry, Arthur J. The Koran Interpreted. Oxford Oxford University Press, 1991. Asad, Muhammad. The Message of the Quran. PA Noblebook, 1980. Leighton, Lauren G. Two Worlds, One Art Literary Translation in Russia and America.Dekalb Northern Illinois University Press, 1991. Connor, U. Contrastive Rhetoric Cross-cultural Aspects of Second-language Writing. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press, 1997. Al-Jubouri, Adnan J. R. The Role of Repetition in Arabic Argumentative Discourse. In J. Swales and H. Mustafa (Eds. ), English for Specific Purposes in the Arab World. Language Studies, Aston University, 1984. Holes, Clive. Modern Arabic Structures, Functions and Varieties. London & New York Longman, 1995. K K K K K Koch, B. J. Repetition in Cohesion and Persuasion in Arabic. PhD Thesis, 1981. K K K K 16 17 18 19 20 K Tytler, Alexander Fraser. Essay on the Principles of Translation. London J. M. Dent and Sons Ltd. , 1907. Al-Mulla, S. A. The Question of the Translatability of the Quran with Particular Reference to Some English Versions. PhD Thesis, University of Glasgow, 1989. K W K ? K K Word Repetition in the Quran Translating Form or Meaning? 21 K K K ? ? ? ? ?K 22 K K K ?K KE F?K K K K K 23 24 25 26 27 Newmark, Peter. A Textbook of Translation. Exeter Prentice manor hall International, Ltd. , 1988. Ibrahim, I. A. A Brief Illustrated Guide to Understanding Islam. 2nd ed. , 3rd printing, Houston, Texas, USA Darussalam Publishers & Distributers, 1997. Al-Rehaili, Abdullah M. This Is the Truth Newly discover Scientific Facts Revealed in the Quran & Authentic Hadeeth. 2nd ed. , Makkah, Saudi Arabia Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, 1998.Baytallah. http//www. baytallah. com/bible/genesis31-40. htm. Downloaded 6th June, 2002 from the Internet at http//www. baytallah. com K K K 28 29 30 31 32 Baker, Mona. In Other Words A Coursebook on Translation. London Routledge, 1992. Johnstone, Barbara. Repetition in Arabic Discourse, Paradigms, Syntagms, and the Ecology of Language. Amsterdam/Philadelphia John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1991. Khan, Muhammad Muhsin and Al-Helali, Muhammad Taqi-ud-din.Interpretation of the Meanings of the Noble Quran in the English Language A Summarized Version of Al-Tabari, Al-Qurtubi and Ibn Kathir with Comments from Sahih Al-Bukhari Summarized in One Volume. Riyadh Dar-us-Salam, 1994. Dickins, James. (p ersonal communication), Center for Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, Durham University, April 1998. Turner, Colin (translator) and Bahbudi, Muhammad Baqir. The Quran A New Interpretation. 1st ed. , Surrey Curzon Press, 1997. ? ? K Ahmed Abdel-Fattah M. Ali ? E L L L L F K K ? ? K ?