Page 1
Domestication Vs Foreignisation in the Rendering of
Shakespearean Drama.With Particular Reference to Some Translations of The Tempest,
The Merry Wives of Windsor and The Merchant of Venice
A Thesis Submitted to
The Department of English Language & Literature
Faculty of Arts
Cairo University
In Fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
By
Samar Mahmoud Shehata Tulba
Under the Supervision of
Prof. Mohammed M. Enani
2011- 2012
Page 2
الدراسة ملخص " اتجاهات " تمثل ، شكسبير وليم لمسرحيات العربية الترجمات من عددا الدراسة تتناول
وضعهما مفهومان وهما والتغريب، التقريب مفهومي ضوء ،في الترجمة في مختلفة
" لمفهومي " مرادفين المفهومان يعد وال ، فينوتي لورنس األمريكي والمترجم المنظر
من متضادين موقفين يعكسان ال فهما التوالي، علي الحرفية والترجمة الحرة الترجمة
بين العالقة من وكذا الثقافات بين القوة عالقات من موقفين يعكسان بل األصلي، النص
تتيح إستراتيجية أية استخدام التقريب يعني فبينما األصلي، النص وكاتب المترجم
يهدف فيه، المترجم لتدخل أثر ال أصلي كنص تبدو شفافة ترجمة تقديم للمترجم
أو ، أصال ال ترجمة باعتباره المترجم النص هوية و المترجم دور إبراز إلي التغريب
من وذلك فيها، محوريا دورا المترجم لعب كتابة إعادة عملية نتاج باعتباره أخري بعبارة
. الغايتين هاتين تحقيق علي قادرة إستراتيجية أية إلي اللجوء خالل " الترجم " بأن فينوتي يعترف مر ةالتقريبي ةو علي المترجمين بين السائد االتجاه تمثل
أغلب يلتزم حيث اإلنجليزية، إلي العربية من الترجمة علي هذا وينطبق العصور،
ومع كترجمة، تبدو ال التي تلك هي الترجمات أفضل بأن القائل الرأي بتطبيق المترجمين
بدرجات وذلك العربية، إلي المترجمين أعمال في محالة ال قائم التغريب فإن ذلك
استخدام بنتاج فإذا التقريب إلي بها يهدف إلستراتيجية يلجأ قد المترجم إن كما مختلفة،
. خطوات تتناول فالدراسة هذا وعلي صحيح والعكس التغريب، هو اإلستراتيجية تلك
اتساق ومدي التغريب، إلي أو التقريب إلي إما بالمترجم تفضي التي القرار اتخاذ عملية
. للمترجم والمعلنة العامة اإلستراتيجية مع الخطوات تلكعلي تضفي رئيسية عناصر أربعة ترجمة مشكالت علي خاص بشكل الدراسة تركز و
إلي تشير التي األلفاظ أولها ، اإلنجليزية لثقافة ونتاج أدبي كعمل خصوصيته النص
الزمان، ذلك في اإلنجليزي بالمجتمع خاصة واجتماعية تاريخية و جغرافية ظواهر
و العادات إلي تشير التي واأللفاظأجنبية، ثقافة من جزء العناصر فتلك المناسبات،إلخ، و األعياد وأسماء اإلنجليزية، التقاليد
. هذا علي و نفسه المعاصر اإلنجليزي القارئ علي غريبا فصار الزمان عليه عفا وبعضها
تلك لمثل التصدي عند بها يستهان ال مشاكل الشكسبيري للنص العربي المترجم تواجه
. الخالصة الثقافية العناصرإلي الشاعر انتماء تعكس التي الشكسبيرية النحوية التراكيب فهو العناصر ثاني أما
شكسبير يستخدمها التي النحوية التراكيب أن كما األدبي، تفرده تعكس كما مجتمعه
الشاعر كان ما كثيرا أنه ذلك إلي أضف الزمن، بفعل التغير من الكثير انتابها لغة تخص
أحيانا المسرحي نظمه في يرتقي فنجده شكسبير، في المسرحي الكاتب علي ينتصر
ii
Page 3
الجمل، تطول و النحوية تراكيبه فتتعقد الواقعي، الحوار مستوي عن يختلف مستوي إلي
. األمانة المترجم رام ما فإذا هكذا و الصرف الشعر تميز التي البالغية الحيل تكثر و
من كثير في ذلك يؤدي قد و بل ، الواقعية عن ابتعد و التعقيد إلي جنح لألصل الكاملة
تحقيق سبيل في األصل عن ابتعد ما إذا و العربية، ابن يستسيغه ال نص إلي األحيان
. لألصل األمانة بعدم اتهم الشاعرية في إفراط دون المنشود الدرامي التأثيراستراتيجيات ترجمتها في المترجمون يتبع والتي الشعرية، الصور هو العناصر ثالث و
البعض يغفلون حين في العربية إلي أمينا نقال فينقلونه ببعضها يتمسكون فهم ، مختلفة
يكون ما وعادة مجازية، عناصر أية دون للصور العام المعني بنقل يكتفون و اآلخر
لمعايير المترجم يخضع ما أحيانا أنه غير الشعرية، الصورة أهمية مدي هو معيارهم
القارئ علي غريبة ثقافية عناصر علي الشعرية،مثال ، الصورة احتوت ما فإذا أخري،
تعادلها صورة إلي المترجم يلجأ حينئذ و هي، كما نقلها المستساغ غير من كان العربي
لبيئته األمين التمثيل عن و األصل عن ابتعاد من فيه ما ذلك في و العربية، الثقافة في
الصور ترجمة في الشخصية ألهوائه األحيان بعض في المترجم يخضع قد بل الثقافية،
" من " بعضها يسقط و بعضها، يعرب و أمينة، ترجمة بعضها فيترجم المختلفة، الشعرية
. واضح سبب أي دون حسابهبعض يصر الذي و األحداث، شكسبير فيه صاغ الذي الشعري اإلطار فهو العناصر آخر أما
عنه يتغاضي و شعرا ، الشعر فيترجمون العربية في يعادله ما إلي نقله علي المترجمين
هو النظم أن األول الفريق فيري ذلك، في حجته لكل و نثرا ، النظم فيترجمون آخرون
من فالبد وعليه بدونه المعني يستقيم ال تفرده و األدبي العمل هوية من يتجزأ ال جزء
يري و أصيل، عربي نظم إلي اإلنجليزي النظم بتحويل األصل لتأثير معادل تأثير إحداث
المسرح كان إذ شكسبير عصر في الدراما تقاليد ضمن من كان النظم أن الثاني الفريق
في النظم محل النثر حل و الحال تغير قد و اآلن و أحوال، من ندر فيما إال شعرا يكتب
وركز نثرا الدرامية الشكسبيرية النصوص ترجم هو إن حرج المترجم علي فليس الدراما
. تتطلب فمثال خسائره، و أرباحه المذهبين من ولكل النظم ال الدرامي الحدث علي
لها بسط أو للعبارات ضغط و حذف، و إضافة من التضحيات بعض شعرا الشعر ترجمة
) ترجمة ) تظلم قد كما ، وجدت إن القافية و الشعري الوزن يستقيم حتي ذلك إلي ما و
و سبق، كما داللته للنظم يكون كثيرة أحيان في أنه إذ ككل، الدرامي العمل نثرا الشعر
في يكون حينئذ و صرفة، غنائية مقطوعات علي شكسبير مسرحيات تحتوي ما كثيرا
عن بالخروج المترجم يتهم عليه و لألصل، الدرامية للوظيفة إغفال المنثورة الترجمة
. " بناء " و فيها موسيقا ال منثورة أغنية العربية البن أخرج ما إذا لألصل األمانة مقتضيات
iii
Page 4
فيما دالالت من لها وما المختلفة المترجمين اختيارات الدراسة تتناول سبق ما كل علي
." فينوتي " يطرحهما كما والتغريب التقريب بمفهومي يتعلق
iv
Page 5
Abstract
Lawrence Venuti, an American theorist and translator of Italian origins, has come
up with the concepts of domestication and foreignisation in the context of describing
the stats quo in both the theory and practice of translation. Domestication can be
defined as the attempt to produce a target text that conforms to the expectations of the
target reader about text writing and translation through employing whatever strategy
capable of making the target text “look like” an original. Foreignisation involves
producing target texts that resist all the target reader’s attempts to conceive them as
texts originally written in his/her own language by depending on any strategy likely
to stress the fact that the target texts are essentially different from texts originally
written in the language of the target reader. In other words, in domestication the
translator sees to it that the target texts’ identities as translations be concealed, while
in foreignisation s/he does his/her best to bring into focus the fact that the target text
is a translation, not an original.
Venuti admits that domestication has always been the ideal of translation
throughout history, the consequence being that translators have always sought to
make themselves invisible so that the target reader should have the impression that
s/he is encountering the original author in the target text without any sort of
mediation. This applies, to a great extent, to the practice of translation in the culture
of Arabic, where translators often seek to produce target texts likely to be conceived
as texts originally written in Arabic. However, it has been observed that
foreignisation occurs in target texts whose writers generally adopt domesticating
approaches. Similarly, domesticating effects are observed in the works of translators
who adopt foreignising approaches. This makes it necessary to investigate the
decision making process in which the different translators are involved to find out to
what extent the degree of intentionality underlying a certain decision has an effect on
the relationship between the process of translation itself and the product of it.
Therefore, the present study deals with some Arabic translations of
Shakespearean drama, investigating decisions that have either domesticating or
foreignising effects in an attempt to identify the steps of the decision making process
in each decision as well as the motives behind each decision with the aim of finding
v
Page 6
out whether there is a straightforward relationship of cause and effect between the
translator’s intentions as reflected in the strategies they use and the effects of using
such strategies. The study focuses on four areas handled by the translator’s of
Shakespearean drama in a way that can provide us with useful insights into
domestication and foreignisation as displayed by the different translations of
Shakespearean drama – namely, the culture-specific elements occurring in
Shakespeare’s plays, the images Shakespeare uses in the plays, the syntactic
strategies employed by Shakespeare and the verse form he chooses for his plays.
vi
Page 7
Summary
The present study deals with some Arabic translations of Shakespearean drama,
investigating decisions that have either domesticating or foreignising effects in an
attempt to identify the steps of the decision making process. The study focuses on
four areas handled by the translator’s of Shakespearean drama in a way that can
provide us with useful insights into domestication and foreignisation as displayed by
the different translations of Shakespearean drama – namely, the culture-specific
elements occurring in Shakespeare’s plays, the images Shakespeare uses in the plays,
the syntactic strategies employed by Shakespeare and the verse form he chooses for
his plays.
vii
Page 8
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my supervisor, professor Mohammed Enani, for his great
co-operation and understanding. I first met professor Enani in 2005, in which year he
became my supervisor for the MA thesis, and since then he has always been one of
the most influential people in my life. Professor Enani is not only a great scholar but
he is also a great human being, and this is his secret as I always say. While many of
my friends and colleagues complain about their supervisors not being co-operative I
have always considered myself lucky to have professor Enani as a supervisor. Enani
provided me with most of the books I depended upon in preparing this dissertation,
including old translations to which I could have never had access had not Enani made
them available to me. All of Enani’s translations that I used in preparing this
dissertation were given to me by him for free. Enani even photocopied many of the
reference books for me, not accepting a single penny in return. Enani has always
showed the modesty of a true scholar, a fact which all of his students know. He has
always found time to meet me, and when meeting was rather difficult he would call
me himself. He has always encouraged me to do better, and I will always be indebted
to him.
I would also like to thank my family members who have always been there for
me and made my life better and easier than it could have been without their love and
appreciation, especially my parents who have always appreciated knowledge in a way
that has always inspired me.
viii
Page 9
Table of Contents
Introduction………………………………………………………….1
Chapter (1):
Domestication and Foreignisation in the Rendering of Culture-Specific
Elements…………………………………………………………….23
Chapter (1) Notes……………………………………………………69
Chapter (2):
Domestication and Foreignisation in the Rendering of Shakespearean
Imagery……………………………………………………………70
Chapter (2) Notes…………………………………………………109
Chapter (3):
Domestication Vs. Foreignisation in Handling Syntax……………111
Chapter (4):
Domestication Vs. Foreignisation in Handling Verse……………..133
Chapter (4) Notes…………………………………………………..222
Conclusion………………………………………………………….224
Works Cited…………………………………………………………227
العربية 229..........................................................................المراجع
Bibliography…………………………………………….................231
ix
Page 11
Introduction
This study investigates different Arabic translations of Shakespeare’s
plays in the light of Lawrence Venuti’s concepts of domestication and
foreignisation with the aim of finding out how the translator’s orientation
affects the way s/he handles the areas of culture-specific terms, imagery,
syntax and prosody in translation. Before embarking on an attempt to
explain the two concepts on which the study is based it must be noted
that the study was originally meant to focus on the translations of three
Shakespearean plays- namely, The Merchant of Venice, The Tempest
and The Merry Wives of Windsor. However, the present researcher has
come to realise that investigating translations of more plays would help
us gain insight into the different ways which the different translators
follow in the process of decision making. Examining a greater number of
translations by different translators would make it possible to identify the
general tendencies and practices characterising translating Shakespeare
into Arabic. Besides, some translators have translated more than one
Shakespearean play, and there is no doubt that investigating a larger
number of the more prolific translators’ works would be useful in
verifying hypotheses formed about the work of these translators.
Domestication and Foreignisation:
One may be tempted to draw a parallel of some kind between
Venuti’s domestication – Vs. – foreignisation theory and the free/literal
translation dichotomy which has always informed the traditional
discussions of translation. Therefore, it is important to bear in mind that
Venuti’s theory significantly differs from the classical theory of
translation, notably in the way it defines faithfulness. Venuti’s approach
to translation is cultural. Venuti has been motivated to develop his theory
1
Page 12
by a view of translation as an area that reflects power relations and
ideological struggle as well as an industry where certain factors, mostly
economic, usually endanger the translator’s right to stand out as a
creative individual and a re-writer of the source text. He has always been
critical of the practices of translators in the Anglo-American culture,
where the ideal of translation seems to be a reflection of the Western
quest for hegemony. He believes the tendency to reproduce the foreign
texts in accordance with the Anglo-American values to be reflecting an
ethnocentric view. He explains that: )t(he aim of translation is to bring back a cultural
other as the same, the recognizable, even the
familiar, and this aim always risks a wholesale
domestication of the foreign text, often in highly
conscious projects, where translation serves an
appropriation of foreign cultures for domestic
agendas – cultural, economic, political.
)1995, pp. 18:19(
Venuti’s attitude to the Anglo-American situation soon turns out to be
a starting point as he goes on to point out that translation, in general, has
always been dominated by what he calls “the translator’s invisibility”
)1995, p.1( by which he refers to the self-denial, or even the self-
annihilation, characterising the nature of the role of the translator
throughout history. According to Venuti, translators have always seen to
it that their work should conform to the rules of writing texts as agreed
upon by the speakers of the target language. In other words, translators
have always been keen on making their translations as similar as possible
to texts originally written in the target language. Translators have always
held fast to the idea that a good translation is one that succeeds in
2
Page 13
convincing the target reader that it is not a translation. Achieving this aim
entails that the translator be invisible so that the target reader should feel
that the ideas of the original author were never “mediated”. The
translator, Venuti explains, seeks to create “the illusion of transparency”
which is: )a(n effect of fluent discourse, of the translator’s
effort to ensure easy readability by adhering to
current usage, maintaining continuous syntax,
fixing a precise meaning. What is so remarkable
is that this illusory effect conceals the numerous
conditions under which the translation is made,
starting with the translator’s crucial intervention
in the foreign text. The more fluent the translation,
the more invisible the translator, and, presumably,
the more visible the writer or meaning of the
foreign text. )1995, pp. 1:2(
Thus, for the sake of idiomaticity and readability translators tend to
domesticate the foreign texts so as to guarantee the target reader a smooth
reading experience in which the flow of the ideas should never be
interrupted by any idiosyncrasies likely to bring into focus the fact that
the text is a translation, not an original. This they achieve by referring the
target reader back to the modes of expression )and even the modes of
thinking( relevant to his/her target language, as well as by avoiding any
oddities which may distract the target reader from focusing on the
content of the target text: A translated text, whether prose or poetry,
fiction or non-fiction, is judged acceptable
by most publishers, reviewers, and readers
when it reads fluently, when the absence of
3
Page 14
any linguistic or stylistic peculiarities makes
it seem transparent, giving the appearance
that it reflects the foreign writer’gs personality
or intention or the essential meaning of the
foreign text – the appearance, in other words,
that the translation is not in fact a translation,
but the “original” )1995, p.1(
Venuti describes the translator’s invisibility as “a history of
translation” )ibid(, but also explains that translators have occasionally
challenged its dominance by producing translations which depart from
the norms of translation and text writing as defined by the target
language, achieving varying degrees of success. He discusses examples
of such foreignising translations, referring, for instance, to the
Zukofskys’ bilingual edition of Catullus’s poems )1969( in which the
translators depend on homophonic translation in adhering to the original
sounds of the Roman poet’s poems, often at the expense of intelligibility.
He also discusses Francis Newman’s nineteenth-century translations of
the Classics, where resorting to archaising and designating the ballad
metre as a medium for translating the Homeric hexameter helped the
translator to question, with his translations, the elitist, academic reading
of the Classics, maintained by such scholars as Matthew Arnold.
Venuti’s investigation of the different examples of foreignisation
throughout the history of translation shows that foreignisation can be
achieved through employing any strategy likely to produce a target text
that would depart from the target reader’s expectations about translation,
so that the target text’s identity as a translation should not be concealed.
Venuti particularly advocates shattering the illusion of transparency
which results from adhering to a standard variety of the target language
4
Page 15
when translating, pointing out that this can be attained through
experimenting with the different possibilities of the target language so
that the translation should be resistant to all attempts to read it smoothly
and regard it as a genuine product of the target language and culture.
Thus, according to Venuti the translator should seek to devise a
“heterogeneous discourse” )1998, p,11(that can hardly occur in a text
originally written in the target language. Venuti explains this in the light
of his own translation project which he describes as “minoritizing” since
it challenges the hegemony of American English )and its culture( by
exploiting its “multiplicity and polychrony” )ibid( in creating: sociolects striated with various dialects, registers
and styles, inventing a collective assemblage that
questions the seeming unity of standard English.
)ibid(
In the light of the foregoing it can safely be said that Venuti’s
foreignisation differs from such concepts as literal translation and
exoticism. Literal translation is actually a term loosely referring to any
strategy employed with a view to achieving conformity to the original.
Hockett )1954, p.313( states that “there are as many degrees of literalness
and freedom of translation as there are levels of hierarchical structure.”
Exoticism is a term used by Hervy and Higgins )1992( to describe the
transposition of the features of the source text )both linguistic and
cultural( into the target language with a minimum degree of change. One
should better think of literal translation and exoticism as potentially
foreignising strategies, as is pointed out by Shuttleworth and Cowie
)1997, p.59(. In fact, foreignisation differs significantly from such
strategies regarding the concept of fidelity. In literal translation and like
5
Page 16
strategies the translator is usually faithful to the source text, while in
foreignisation the translator is faithful to the individuality of artistic
creation and to the identity of the translation as distinguished from that of
the original. Venuti explains that the fidelity which should be sought is
Lewis’s “abusive fidelity” which “directs the translators’ attention away
from the conceptual signified to the play of signifiers on which it
depends, to phonological, syntactical, and discursive structures” )1995,
p.24(, the outcome being: [a] translation that values experimentation, tampers
with usage, seeks to match the polyvalencies or
plurivocities or expressive stresses of the original
by producing its own.
)Lewis, 1985, p.41(
It can be concluded that within the framework developed by Venuti
both the source text and the target language )and culture( are violated in
the translator’s effort to create a work of art that seems different from
what is originally written in the target language and according to its
values and norms. Venuti points out that “)f(oreignizing translations that
are not transparent, that eschews fluency for a more heterogeneous mix
of discourses, are equally partial in their interpretation of the foreign text,
but they tend to flaunt their partiality instead of concealing it.” )1995,
p.34(. The translator’s fidelity here should be to the individuality of the
literary work to be translated, though the means via which this
individuality is materialised can differ entirely form those employed in
the original as well as from those used in any work of art which is
considered to be part of the target-language canon literature. Venuti’s
foreignisation results in “different” translations, or translations that
6
Page 17
attract the reader’s attention to the effort exerted by the translator and the
fact that other literatures are by no means the same as the target
language’s literature.
Though foreignisation is advocated by Venuti as a means of
redressing the unequal situation resultant from the hegemony of the
culture of English it is noticeable that Arab translators of English
literature usually shy away from adopting it. Probably the main reason
for this is that a literary work translated in a foreignising way would
never present a faithful image of the original. The systematic changes
effected by the translator are sure to change the message radically. In
extreme cases of foreignisation such changes can transform the textual
world altogether, or even result in a totally opaque target text which can
hardly be understood if such strategies as literal translation or
homophonic translation are strictly employed. This means that the
relationship between the target text and its reader will certainly differ
from the relationship between the source text and its reader.
Besides, though Venuti is mainly concerned with doing both
translators and translations justice adopting the approach he advocates
would not win translations a higher position in the “literary polysystem”
of the target language, to use Even-Zohar’s term for the hierarchical
relationship between the different literary types in the literature of a
certain culture )1978(. As foreignisation entails departing from the
features giving the canon literature of the target language its canonicity
translations based on foreignisation are not likely to meet with much
success. Experimentation will always be experimentation, or deviation
from the norm. It is noteworthy that Even-Zohar explains that translation,
in general, does not occupy the highest position in the literary polysystem
7
Page 18
of a certain culture unless the literature of that culture is young, marginal
or experiencing some sort of a turning point )ibid(. Accordingly,
foreignising translations will usually occupy a relatively low position in
the literary polysystem of Arabic simply because Arabic literature is both
well-established and reflecting a remarkable degree of stability.
Translators usually tend to identify with the distinguished literary figures
of Arabic by designating mediums capable of making their translations
appear as works genuinely written in Arabic so that they should be
classified as part of the canon literature.
Shying away from foreignisation also has to do with the reading
public which the translator intends to address. What gives works based
on experimentation their peripheral position in the literary polysystem is
the expectations of the target reader, who usually regards literature as an
imitation of life that should be as realistic as possible. Therefore, a
literary work that seeks to shatter the illusion of reality ) usually
maintained by the mainstream literature( is usually conceived by the
average reader as an exception to the rule, an exception which s/he may
find interesting or disappointing, but in both cases experimentation rarely
becomes the rule. In the same vein, a translation that capitalises upon
foreignisation is not likely to be much appreciated by the average reader.
In fact, though Venuti describes his translation project as minoritising he
is still aware of the fact that experimentation can reduce the reading
public of the target text into a limited elite. He explains: In so far as minoritizing translation relies on
discursive heterogeneity, it pursues an
experimentalism that would seem to narrow its
audience and contradict the democratic agenda
8
Page 19
I have sketched. Experimental form demands
a high aesthetic mode of appreciation, the
critical detachment and educated competence
associated with the cultural elite, whereas the
communicative function of language is
emphasized by the popular aesthetic, which
demands that literary form be not only
immediately intelligible, needing no
special cultural expertise, but also
transparent, sufficiently realistic to invite
vicarious participation.
)1998, p.12(
Consequently, Venuti suggests that the translator be selective about
foreignisation so that s/he can maintain a proper balance between the
goal of creating a resistant translation and the goal of readability. He
explains that a foreignising translation should not necessarily be totally
unintelligible. The foreignising strategies, he points out, can be used “at
significant points in a translation that is generally readable”, so that “the
reader’s participation will be disrupted only momentarily” )ibid(.
Venuti’s theory derives much of its importance from the fact that it is
flexible enough to accommodate such factors as popularity and
readability in the decision making process in which the translator is
always engaged. Venuti does not treat domestication and foreignisation
as mutually exclusive extremes, but believes them to be two concepts
which can be materialised in the same target text. One would rather speak
about different degrees of domestication and foreignisation than handle
foreignisation as a wholesale endeavour, an idea that needs to be
investigated in the light of the different Arabic translations of
9
Page 20
Shakespeare’s plays, which will be treated briefly in the following
section.
Shakespeare’s Plays in Translation:
Some of the translations to be investigated in this study can be
described as displaying a more systematic tendency to foreignisation than
others. Similarly, some translations seem to reflect a domesticating
tendency more systematically than the rest of the translations. To the first
category belong Ahmed Zaki Abu Shadi’s translation of The Tempest
and Jabra Ibrahim Jabra’s versions of such Shakespearean tragedies as
Hamlet, Macbeth and Othello. The second category is represented by
Amer Buhairy’s translations of The Tempest and The Merchant of
Venice. Apart from these three translators of Shakespeare’s plays almost
all of the translators whose works will be treated in this study seem to be
making use of both domestication and foreignisation. Even the
translators who may be described as more bent on domestication )or
foreignisation( than others, such as Buhairy or Jabra respectively, also
tend occasionally to employ strategies which seem to be at odds with
their general approaches. This makes it more realistic to think of
domestication and foreignisation as two areas that can sometimes
converge and overlap.
Abu Shadi wrote his translation of The Tempest in the 1930s.
Foreignisation in his version of the play stems from his insistence on
following the original as much as possible, the result being a sense of
awkwardness which makes it extremely difficult for the target reader to
forget that Abu Shadi’s The Tempest sounds foreign as far as the Arabic-
speaking reader is concerned, but this is not everything. Abu Shadi
shatters the illusion of reality by contradicting the target reader’s
10
Page 21
expectations based upon the latter’s knowledge of the target language and
its literature as well as of the world. His translation of Iris’s song can
serve as a good example:Iris: Ceres, most bounteous lady, the rich leas
Of wheat, rye, barley, vetches, oats, and peas;
The turfy mountains, where live nibbling sheep,
And flat meads thatch’d with stover, them to keep;
Thy banks with pioned and twilled brims,
Which spongy April at thy hest betrims
To make cold nymphs chaste crowns; and thy broom groves,
Whose shadow the dismissed bachelor loves,
Being lass – lorn; thy pole – clipt vineyard;
And thy sea – merge, sterile and rock – hard,
Where thou thyself dost air; the queen o’the sky
Whose watery arch and messenger am I,
Bids thee leave these and with his sovereign grace,
Here, on this grass – plot, in this very place,
To come and sport; her peacocks fly amain:
Approach, rich Ceres, her to entertain.
)IV/I, 69:84(
! الشعير و القطاني و بالقمح الغنية حقولك عن سيدة أكرم يا سيريس
تعيش حيث العشبية جبالك عن و البسلي، و بالزمير و الدب حشيشة والغليظ بالكأل المغطاة المنبسطة المروج عن و المتعشبة، األغنام
الخطوط المنسقة حوافك و المفــونة جسورك عن و لتصونها،الشبمة البحر لعرائس ليصنع أمرك عند الممطر أبريل يشذبها التي
الطريد األعزب يعشقها التي الرتمية غياضك عن و نقية، تيجانا الجرداء بحرك حافة عن و العمد المعانق كرمك عن و محبوبته، هجرته قد و
نفسك تهوين حيث السماء –الصلدة ملكة بالنزوح تأمرك هذه عن
الرشيقة الملكية ذاتها مع تأتي أن و المائي، قوسها و رسولها أنا التيتتريضي . و المكان هذا ذات في العاشبة الرقعة هذه إلي
سيريس يا فاقتربي سرعة، بأقصي تطير طواويسها إن
11
Page 22
( . لتنادميــــــــــها (70،ص1930الغنيــــــــــــــــــــــــــــة
In this example Abu Shadi adheres not only to the wording of the
original, but also to its structure. The original speech of Iris is actually a
song which derives its remarkable musicality from the regularity of the
iambic pentameter as well as from the use of the heroic couplets. Abu
Shadi decides to sacrifice the identity of the song by rendering it as prose,
for he believes his priority to be conforming to the original as much as
possible. Encountering prose where verse is expected is sure to awaken
the target reader to the fact that the work s/he is reading is a translation,
not an original. Besides, Abu Shadi’s decision to conform to the original
leads him to preserve the original inverted structure of Iris’s song. The
song begins with a long list of the things and the places associated with
Ceres, and the reader cannot know the reason why these are enumerated
as such unless s/he reaches the end of the song, which finally makes it
clear that Ceres is ordered by Juno to leave the beautiful places where she
dwells to keep the queen of goddesses company. The song begins with a
vocation followed by a number of noun phrases .Some of these noun
phrases are modified by relative clauses which eventually turn out to be
direct objects of the verb “leave” occuring by the end of the speech.
Conforming to the original structure of the song has a foreignising effect,
not only because using prose makes preserving the inversion )typical of
verse( seem odd but also because it makes the song less reader-friendly
than expected; working out the syntactic relations here requires much
effort on the target reader’s part, which makes it difficult for him/her to
focus on the content of Iris’s song.
12
Page 23
Buhairy’s rendering of this song is an interesting example of
domestication. Buhairy preserves the identity of the song by rendering it
into verse as follows:المثقلة: الحافالت المروج ذات مفضلة و منعمة يا ، سيريس أيريس
الكثــير الوافر الجلبــــان و الشعير و الشيلم و بالقمحبالماشية حفلت المراعي في و العالية المعشبات الجبال علي
يمشي حيث الماشي لتمنع بالقش غطيت بالسهول وأبريل من البحر عروس تاج بالنخيل فضن بالشطوط و
العزاب فرقة إليها تأوي الغاب حنايا في بالظالل واألمواج تضربه إذ الصخر و سياج حولها بالكروم و
ألبستني الثوب قزحي في أرسلتني السماء مليكةفورك من ساعة تصحبيها و أمرك من تعرضي أن طالبة
الطاووس رقصة أداء بعد الجلوس و المراح و للهوالكريمة الضيافة لتقبلي و عظيمة يا سيريس فأقبلي
ص 1978) ،96)
Buhairy’s version of Iris’s song is highly musical as Buhairy depends
in rendering the song on one of the classical metres of Arabic verse –
namely, Rajaz, which makes it easy for the target reader to conceive it
both as a song and as a genuine product of his/her language and culture.
Achieving this aim has undoubtedly entailed that significant changes be
made. Perhaps the most important of these changes is the addition of
in rendering the second hemistich of the first line, which helps the ذات
translator do completely away with the inversion which would have been
cumbersome had Buhairy insisted on preserving it. Changes also include
the addition of يمشي حيث الماشي in the fourth line, and the لتمنع
omission of “to come” in rendering line )15(. Such changes are dictated
by the strict form Buhairy chooses for his translation; they are necessary
for the regularity of the metre he uses. The overall effect of these changes
13
Page 24
is not only a gain in domestication but also a gain in dramatic adequacy.
As Buhairy’s version of the song adheres to the conventions of writing
songs in Arabic it is sure to fulfill the task with which the original is
entrusted. Thus, Buhairy sacrifices faithfulness to the meaning for the
sake of faithfulness to the dramatic function, while Abu Shadi adheres to
the former at the expense of the latter. Enani strikes a compromise by
choosing to render the song using one of the metres of what may be
called “the New Verse”, or the poetic medium developed by the Arab
poets during the second half of the twentieth century, which makes use of
the different kinds of feet used in the classical Arabic verse without
setting limits on the number of times these feet can be repeated in a
single line. Enani translates Iris’s song as follows: ! : الخصبة العامرات المروج ذات ربة أكرم يا سيريس –إيريس
! بيقة و شيلما و بل بازالء ثم شعيرا ، شوفانا ، و قمحا ! ! قضمة كل منها األغنام تقضم و بالكأل تموج التي جبالك هذي
باألعالف لألغنام تزخر انبساطها في المروج وهذهالضفاف لتدعم تشابكت أغصان تلك و
مطلبك تجيب بأزهار وشاها المطير إبريل و! العفاف .. بإكليل المقرورة حورياتها تزين بأن
المكدود ظاللها يهوي التي الرتم خمائل –فيها
! الصدود من لظاه يشكو منالمشذبة، بالنواصي الكرم حقول هذي
! الصلبة صخوره بدت قد العقيم البحر ساحل والسماء ! ملكة أرسلتني قد النسيم عنده تنشقين إذ
رسولها الغمام –فإنني أدعوك –قوس كي أتيت قد والجالل ذات تصحبي و ، المقام ذاك تغادري أن
السندسية ! ! األراضي وسط عندنا المراح و اللهو فيالطواوس بها تجري التي عريبتها هذي
نأتنس ! حتي الثراء ذات يا سيريس اهبطي هيا
14
Page 25
ص 75 – 1/60م/4ف ) ،158)
In rendering this song Enani also uses Rajaz, but his Rajaz differs
from that of Buhairy in that it depends on the repetition of the Rajaz foot
but it does not set a limit on the number of times this foot can مستفعلن
be repeated. The first line, for instance, consists of five feet, and scans as
follows:تلخصبة عامرا جل مرو ذاتل رببة أكرم يا سيريس
مستفعل مستفعلن مستفعلن مستعالتن مستفعلن
while the second line consists of six feet, and the third consists of seven
feet, etc. The flexibility of the New-Verse metres allow Enani to preserve
the identity of the song without having to depart much from the content
of the original in translating. Enani also accentuates the musicality of the
song by employing rhyme, both external and internal, occasionally in his
version of Iris’s song. It is also noticeable that he employs the same
strategy as that used by Buhairy in handling the inversion.
Thus, the three aforementioned version of Iris’s song represent three
different attitudes to domestication and foreignisation. Abu Shadi’s
version is foreignising in as much as it succeeds in shattering the illusion
of reality by giving the target reader a prose piece where s/he expects to
find verse, as well as in attracting the target reader’s attention to the form
of the so-called song rather than to its content. Buhairy’s version of the
song reflects a domesticating tendency since it maintains the illusion of
reality by catering to the target reader’s expectations. Enani’s version of
the song is undoubtedly not as musical as Buhairy’s, but it can be said to
maintain some sort of balance between faithfulness to the content and
15
Page 26
faithfulness to the form, though the average target reader is likely to miss
the identity of Enani’s version as a song because the music of the New
Verse is not as loud as that of classical verse.
It must be noted that though such classifications as those given above
may be tempting they can sometimes be misleading as they usually
involve some sort of oversimplification. A closer look at Abu Shadi’s
version of the song shows that the translator tends to give up his
foreignising approach from time to time as parts of his translation of the
song reflect a domesticating tendency. Abu Shadi renders “the queen
o’the sky…/Bids thee leave these” as ملكة بالنزوح تأمرك هذه عن .which cannot be described as a literal translation of the original ,السماء
Abu Shadi adds هذه so as to make it easy for the target reader to عن
figure out the relationship between the phrases preceding it and the
sentence تأمرك ... following it, which can be regarded as a domesticating
move. However, هذه also has a foreignising function as it brings the عن
inversion into focus, thus attracting the target reader’s attention to the
form rather than the content. Abu Shadi’s insistence on inverting تأمركبالنزوح السماء the way he does here cannot be justified in terms of ملكة
faithfulness to the original. This insistence on inversion makes the
sentence تأمرك ... stand out when compared with the original, as, though
Abu Shadi is usually bent on foreignisation, even when the original does
not call for it, he prefers to begin the sentence with the verb. Abu Shadi
could have started with the subject, rendering “the queen o’the sky…” as
تأمرك السماء which would have been consistent with his , ملكة
commitment to the original. However, Abu Shadi decides to cater to the
expectations of the target reader this time; beginning a sentence with a
verb is more preferable in Arabic than beginning with the subject.
16
Page 27
Similarly, a broader look at Buhairy’s translation of The Tempest
may lead one to think twice before describing his approach as totally
domesticating. Though Buhairy succeeds in achieving the equivalent
effect by rendering the song as a song he does not generally adhere to the
goal of achieving the equivalent effect simply because he uses the
classical forms of the Arabic metres in rendering both songs and
dialogue. Enani’s use of the New-Verse Rajaz in rendering the song may
not be as effective as using the highly musical classical metres, but it is
undoubtedly more capable of bringing about the equivalent effect, for
Enani uses prose in rendering dialogue in The Tempest , which means
that songs are sure to stand out in his translation, unlike songs in
Buhairy’s translation, which are not distinguished from the dialogue.
Things are even further complicated when one investigates different
translations by the same translator, for it occasionally occurs that a
certain translator changes his approach in a way that makes it rather
difficult to try to define his approach precisely. It has already been
pointed out that Enani’s translation of The Tempest is written in prose
)except for the songs, of course(, yet it must be noted that most of
Enani’s translations of Shakespeare’s plays are in verse. Enani’s attitude
to songs is also not consistent. In his verse translations, where he uses the
New-Verse metres for the dialogue, Enani employs either the classical
forms of the Arabic metres or the New-Verse metres in rendering the
songs. In the following example, from The Merchant of Venice, Enani
uses a classical metre in rendering Portia’s lines following Bassanio’s
success in winning her: Portia [Aside]:
How all the other passions fleet to air:
17
Page 28
As doubtful thoughts, and rash-embraced despair,
And shudd’ring fear, and green-eyed jealousy!
O love, be moderate, allay thy ecstasy,
In measure rain thy joy, scant this excess!
I feel too much thy blessing: make it less
For fear I surfeit. )III, ii, 108:114(
) ( : ولي مشاعر من الحب ماعدا جانبا بورشياالهباء مثل الهواء في ومضيشرود يأس وبعض ظنون من
! حمقاء وغيرة كخوف أوترفق بي رحمة الحب أيها
! وانتشاء بسكرة تذبني اللكن جنبي بين الحب أمطر
! الغلواء عن وابتعد اقتصدهناء فيض منك النفس يغمر
! االمتالء تخمة أخشي وأناص 1988 ) ،130)
Shakespeare uses the heroic couplets, which imparts to these lines a
lyrical quality. This leads Enani to foreground the lines in translation by
choosing to render them as classical-Arabic verse. Enani designates the
classical metre known as Kahfif for rendering Portia’s speech. His
decision to use this classical metre is sure to result in referring the target
reader back to the culture of Archaic Arabic, where Khafif has always
been associated with such memorable poems as Al-Mutanabbi’s:عنانا ما أمره من وعناهم الزمانا ذا قبلنا الناس صحب
This identification with the culture of Archaic Arabic on the level of
metre does not necessarily mean that Enani’s decision to use Khafif
should be classified as domesticating. Enani may be motivated by a
18
Page 29
tendency to domestication but the effect of using Khafif here is not
necessarily domesticating. Portia’s lines are sure to stand out amid the
rest of the lines of Enani’s translation of The Merchant of Venice written
in the so-called New Verse, which is more than likely to be mistaken for
prose by the average reader.
Apart from this, it is also noticeable that though Enani is usually bent
on achieving the equivalent effect by distinguishing songs and like lyrical
pieces from dialogue in translation he departs significantly from his
declared approach in some cases, using the New-Verse metres in
rendering songs occasionally, such as in the following example from The
Tempest: Epilogue: Spoken by Prospero:
Now my charms are all o’erthrown,
And what strength I have is mine own,
Which is most faint: now, ‘tis true,
I must be here confined by you,
Or sent to Naples. Let me not,
Since I have my dukedom got
And pardon’d the deceiver, dwell
In this bare island by your spell;
But release me from my bands
With the help of your good hands:
Gentle breath of yours my sails
Must fill, or else my project fails,
Which was to please. Now I want
Spirits to enforce, art to enchant,
And my ending is despair,
Unless I be relieved by prayer,
Which pierces so that it assaults
19
Page 30
Mercy itself and frees all faults.
As you from crimes would pardon’d be,
Let your indulgence set me free.
)1:20(
Enani translates this epilogue as follows:جمعاء: السحرية تعويذاتي سقطت بروسبيرو
ذاتي علي اآلن تقتصر طاقاتي! طاقاتي أوهي ما ولذلك
القفر هذا في أحبس أن بأيديكم أن وصحيح الفيحاء نابولي إلي الحال في بي يبعث أو
مملكتي لي عادت قد مادامت لكنالشنعاء وحقيقته الخائن عن وعفوت
أبقي بأن بالسحر تقضوا الالجرداء جزيرتنا أرض في
قيودي كسر في وأعينونيالكرماء بأيادي تصفيقا
سوي البحر في أشرعتي تدفع لنحسناء مديح ألفاظ من ريح
اإلرضاء لكسب مسعاي أخفق وإال ذاكبأمري تأتمر عفاريت لدي يبق لم
مضاء ذات سحر رقية أوحياتي يختتم أن خليق واليأس
دعاء وبخير بصالة إالالكون أقطار من تنفذ فصالتي
الحوباء ذنوب كل تمحو كي الرحمة إليلديكم اآلثام لكل الغفران تبغون وكما ! بالطلقاء أللحق الصفح أبغي
ص 2003 ) ،189-190 ،1-20)
In these lines Enani uses the New-Verse metre known as Khabab,
which reflects a remarkable degree of flexibility most obvious in line
20
Page 31
lengths which vary greatly. Some lines consist in six feet, such as in line
)7(, which scans as follows:لكتي مم لي عادت قد مت دا ما الكن
فعلن فعلن فعلن فعلن فعلن فعلنOthers consist of more than six feet, such as line )4( which consists of
eight feet, scanning as follows:قفري هاذل في بس أح أن ديكم نبأي أن حن وصحي
فعلن فعلن فعلن فعلن فعلن فعلن فعلن فعلن
In addition, Enani does not preserve the strict rhyme pattern which the
original epilogue follows. Instead, he decides on a more flexible rhyme
pattern which seems to occur naturally. This flexibility in handling rhyme
and metre, together with the fact that Khabab rhythms are close to those
of ordinary speech, results in a version of Prospero’s epilogue noticeably
less musical than the original. It is, therefore, important to investigate
such cases as these so as to arrive at the factors which govern the
decision making process, leading translators to re-define their priorities,
or simply to give up their declared approaches temporarily, consciously
or unconsciously.
To sum up, the present study attempts to deal with Venuti’s concepts
of domestication ad foreignisation as reflected by the work of the
different translators of Shakespeare’s plays. It is meant to investigate the
different domesticating and foreignising options available to the
translators and provide insights into the decision making process in
translation by identifying their priorities as reflected by the actual
renderings of elements which impart to the Shakespearean plays a sense
of locality as well as distinguish them as literary works originally written
in English and located in sixteenth-century Britain – namely, culture-
21
Page 32
specific references, images, syntactic structures and prosody. In so doing
the present study will re-investigate the concept of faithfulness, pointing
out what kind of faithfulness comes into play when a translator makes a
decision either to adopt domestication or to follow a foreignising
approach.
22
Page 33
Chapter (1)
Domestication and Foreignisation
in the Rendering of Culture-specific Elements
Rendering culture – specific elements has always been one of the
most important translation problems – a problem strongly associated with
an awareness that translation is not a simple process of linguistic
transposition but an encounter between two cultures each of which has its
own way of viewing reality, or, more accurately, its own reality. Sapir
)1956( explains: No two languages are sufficiently similar to be
considered as representing the same social reality.
The worlds in which different societies live are
distinct worlds, not merely the same world with
different labels attached. )p. 69(
In dealing with culture-specific elements a choice has to be made
among different strategies each of which is associated with certain gains
and losses. For instance, relying on transcription, or reproducing the
sounds of the original word depending on the letters of the target
language, is a strategy that saves much of the translator’s time and effort
but which, meanwhile, overloads the target reader with terms totally new
to him/her that need to be “processed” one way or another in the light of
the context )which may not necessarily provide the needed guidance(.
Reiss and Vermeer )1984( refer to the strategy of using transcription as
“linguistically creative translation”, noting that excessive use of it results
in an inadequate target text. They also refer to religious, philosophical
and technical writings as examples of genres in which this strategy is
23
Page 34
usually used, which implicitly suggests that using it in translating literary
texts has limitations.
The strategy known as “thick translation” )Appiah, 1993, p.817(, in
which the translator preserves the culture-specific references of the
original meanwhile clarifying their significance by depending on as much
explanatory material as possible, undoubtedly requires much effort and
time on the translator’s part in the attempt to pay the culture of the
original due respect. However, the target reader is again overloaded with
excessive notes, glossaries and introductions unlikely to be of much
interest to the average, non-academic reader who is usually bent on easy
readability and immediate intelligibility. Thus, thick translation can
reduce the readers of a certain translation to an academic elite.
Cultural translation, a strategy described by Nida and Taber
)1969/1982, p.199(, avoids the consequences of using explanatory
material by adding the cultural information needed for understanding the
culture-specific references right in the text itself. Though it guarantees
easy readability and immediate intelligibility the strategy is not
recommended by Nida and Taber on the grounds that as it depends on
explicitation it means that the relationship between the target text and its
reader will not be the same as the relationship between the original and
its reader.
Awareness of the problem of cultural specificity has also led to the
emergence of strategies which seek to bridge the gap between the source
culture and the target culture in a way that blurs, if does not obliterate,
the difference which the culture-specific references represent. One of
these is the strategy of cultural substitution )Beekman and Callow, 1974(
in which the culture-specific reference is replaced with a reference that
24
Page 35
can be considered an equivalent of the original reference in the light of
the function it performs in the context of the target language. In other
words, instead of seeking an exact equivalent to the original reference a
functional equivalent is sought. Approximate translation, in which the
translator uses either a more general term or a term that covers only part
of the meaning of the original )or a more specific term( is another
alternative. Both strategies obviously guarantee easy readability and
immediate intelligibility but, as they refer the target reader to his/her own
cultural context, they cannot be described as resulting in translations that
adequately represent the cultural context of the original. A more
moderate strategy in this connexion is descriptive translation, in which
the translator describes the culture-specific reference in question instead
of seeking an equivalent of any kind to it.
These different strategies have always been described as representing
different degrees of faithfulness, and, consequently, different degrees of
domestication or foreignisation. For example, a translation that
capitalises upon transcription would be described as faithful on the
grounds that it adheres to the original as much as possible in a target-
language context creating, in so doing, a foreignising effect and
guaranteeing the target reader an opportunity to gain insight into the
source-language modes of thinking and expression, while a translation
that relies on functional equivalents is less likely to be described as
faithful on account of its domesticating effect manifest in referring the
target reader to “local” modes of thinking and expression. Translations
that make significant use of such strategies as descriptive translation and
cultural translation would always be judged as maintaining some sort of
balance between domestication and foreignisation, or between the two
25
Page 36
extremes of faithfulness to the source language and faithfulness to the
target language.
However, it seems more accurate to speak about different kinds of
faithfulness rather than different degrees of faithfulness. Needless to say,
all the strategies devised with the aim of dealing with cultural specificity
are based on the assumption that exact equivalence is an impossibility,
and that, consequently, handling culture-specific references necessarily
entails that the translator set up a hierarchy of priorities in which certain
kinds of faithfulness should take precedence over others. Abu Shadi’s
rendering of “furlongs” and “acre” in the following excerpt from The
Tempest can help to clarify this point: Antonio: Let’s all sink with the king.
Sebastiano: Let’s take leave of him.
)Exeunt Antonio and Sebastiano(
Gonzalo: Now would I give a thousand furlongs
of sea for an acre of barren ground, ling heath,
broom furze, anything.
) I, i , 65:68(
Abu Shadi translates the above excerpt as follows:الملـــك: مع جميعـــــــــا نهــــــــــوي دعونا .أنطونيو
) ( . السفينة: داخل إلي يذهبون نودعـــــــــه دعونـــــــــا سيباستيان :) فرلنج ) ألف أستبدل لو بودي اآلن السفينة بأمراس متعلقا جنزالو
بأي أو أسمر، رتم أو طويل، مرج أو قاحلة، أرض من بإيكر البحر من
.شئ
) 1930 ، 9ص (
The use of فرلنج and إيكر as renderings of “furlongs” and “acre”
respectively represents a high degree of foreignisation resultant from the
kind of faithfulness to which Abu Shadi chooses to adhere, naturally at
26
Page 37
the expense of other kinds of faithfulness. As Abu Shadi opts for
transcription in rendering the two culture-specific references he can be
described as being faithful to the source culture and its language. His
faithfulness to the source text is rather relative than absolute since the
transcribed references naturally occur in a target-language context.
However, Abu Shadi is undoubtedly more faithful to the source text than
the translators responsible for the following renderings:ألف اآلن أهب إلي فرسخإني يرشدني لمن البحر فدانمن
. األرض من عاقرص 1929جريس ) ،15 )
******************بألف أجود نظير ميلليتني البحر الجرداء فدانمن األرض .من
(12،ص1961إبراهيم )
****************** فدان مقابل البحر، من فدان ألف عن أتنازل أن لنفسي يطيب اآلن
من واحد( . بحيري البور ص 1978األرض ،28 .)
******************األرض من واحد بفدان البحر من فرسخ ألف يبادلني الذي ذا من
. الجرداء القاحلةص 2004عناني ) ،78 65،)
******************
Though ميل , فرسخ and فدان are not particularly culture-specific they
can be regarded as functional equivalents of the original references on
account of the fact that the target reader is certainly more familiar with
them than s/he is with فرلنج or إيكر , hence their domesticating effect.
Thus, the renderings herein cited reflect a high degree of faithfulness to
27
Page 38
the target culture and its language as well as a remarkable degree of
faithfulness to the target reader who is not encumbered by totally new
terms likely to distract him/her from what s/he is reading. Though these
renderings are not as faithful to the source text as Abu Shadi’s they are
undoubtedly more faithful in reproducing the relationship that has existed
between the source text and its reader. “Furlongs” and “acre” are not
foreign as far as the English-speaking reader of Shakespeare is
concerned, but فرلنج and إيكر are foreign to the Arabic-speaking reader
of the translation, whereas ميل, فرسخ and فدان are a realisation of
Nida’s principle of dynamic equivalence, according to which “the
relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the
same as that which existed between the original receptors and the
message” )1964, p.59(. Nevertheless, Abu Shadi’s rendering still can be
described as more faithful in reproducing the source text – source reader
relationship than Habib’s rendering of the reference to “posset” in the
following excerpt from The Merry Wives of Windsor : Page: Yet be cheerful, knight. Thou shalt eat a posset
tonight at my house, where I will desire thee to
laugh at my wife that now laughs at thee.
) V, v , 64:166(
Habib’s rendering of the excerpt goes as follows:فستتناول: الفارس، أيها تبتهج أن أرجو ذلك من الرغم علي و بيدج
داري في و الليلة بالنبيذ الممزوج الساخن اللبن من شرابا
، التوابل( . اآلن منك تسخر التي زوجتي من تضحك أن أرجو هناك ص 1973و ،
186)
28
Page 39
Habib shies away from transcription and using functional equivalents
all alike, preferring, instead, to preserve the culture-specific reference
meanwhile mitigating its cultural specificity by resorting to description.
Thus, the translator can be described as maintaining a balance between
domestication and foreignisation, or, in other words, between faithfulness
to the target reader and his/her linguistic and cultural background and
faithfulness to the culture of the original simply because he tries to
“explain away” the foreignness of the culture-specific reference by
describing it in terms of the target language. Though the end product of
the strategy herein employed is not as foreign to the Arabic-speaking
reader as Abu Shadi’s renderings of “furlongs” and “acre” its
relationship to the target reader is by no means the same as the
relationship between the original and its reader. The rendering involves
obvious violation of textual considerations as it is unlikely, if not
unnatural, that Page explains to his “countryman” Falstaff what he
already knows. In fact, Habib’s Page does not seem to be addressing
Falstaff; he seems to be addressing the Arabic-speaking reader, who does
not have the same background information that Shakespeare and his
audience shared and who, consequently, needs a description of some kind
so that s/he can understand what “posset” is. Thus, in this instance the
translator can be described as being faithful to the source culture, but he
is certainly not faithful to the source text. Besides, he is not faithful in
reproducing the relationship which has existed between the original and
its reader. In other words, the translator fails to re-create the illusion of
reality when he makes his Page digress into some sort of a dictionary
definition or a recipe, interrupting the flow of the dialogue and reminding
the reader that it is a play that s/he is reading. This also applies to the way
29
Page 40
Husain deals with the reference to the liver in the following excerpt from
Twelfth Night : Sir Toby: For Andrew, if he were open’d
and you
find so much blood in his liver as will clog the foot
of a flea, I’ll eat the rest of th’anatomy. )III, ii, 57:60(
Husain translates the reference as follows: : توبي كبده سير في وجدت فإن بطنه فشق أندرو هو –فأما و
الشجاعة من –مركز . كله جسمه بأكل كفيل فأنا ذبابة أرجل فيه تلزج ما الدم
(159،ص 1973 )
The reference to the liver as the seat of courage is undoubtedly
culture-specific since the liver is associated in the culture of Arabic with
love, notably passionate feelings of love – an idea not uncommon to the
culture of English and which is occasionally employed by Shakespeare
himself, such as in the following excerpt from The Merry Wives of
Windsor: Ford: Why, sir, my wife is not young…Love my wife?
Pistol: With liver burning hot. )II, i, 105:106(
As the reference to the liver conforms to the traditions of the culture of
Arabic cultural specificity is out of question here. The reference does not
present the translators of the play with the need to resort to any kind of
explanation. Enani, for instance, translates it as follows:زوجتي؟: ... يحب شابة ليست سيد يا امرأتي لكن فورد
: الكبد بيستول في لهيب من يئز ص 2008. )بما ،146 ،105-106)
However, it is the idea of the liver being the seat of courage that is
more recurring in Shakespeare, and, culture-specific as it is, it makes it
30
Page 41
necessary for the translator to decide on the kind, or kinds, of faithfulness
to which s/he should adhere. Husain is obviously bent on being faithful to
the source culture, yet he is unwilling to give up all faithfulness to the
target reader, hence the parenthetical الشجاعة مركز هو which is و
spoken to Husain’s Arabic-speaking reader rather than to Sir Toby’s
interlocutor, and which, like the awkward, lengthy definition attributed
by Habib to Page, is a violation of textual considerations as well as of the
illusion of reality. Therefore, faithfulness to the original, along with
faithfulness to the original source- text-source reader relationship, is
sacrificed for the sake of intelligibility.
Maintaining one kind of faithfulness all the time in rendering culture-
specific references is hardly the goal of any translator, or, to be more
accurate, it is a goal that most translators find difficult, if not impossible,
to maintain. Though translators set out to accomplish their tasks with
fairly clear views about translation they wind up making compromises
which reflect a high degree of flexibility. They constantly switch
allegiances which can sometimes result in radical departures from what
may be believed to be their personal views or preferences, or from their
general approaches. In other words, their behaviour can always be
explained in terms of the minimax principle, according to which the
translator “resolves for that one of the possible solutions which promises
a maximum of effect with a minimum of effort” )Levy 1967; in Venuti
2000, p.156(. This particularly applies to Abu Shadi’s translation of The
Tempest . The translation, which was published in 1930, was originally
undertaken with a view to helping secondary school students to
understand the play which was part of their English syllabus. This,
according to the translator, entailed translating the play as faithfully as
31
Page 42
possible, which, in turn, meant adhering to the original as much as
possible even at the expense of idiomaticity and immediate intelligibility.
Some of Abu Shadi’s renderings of culture-specific references are
strikingly foreignising. This applies to the aforementioned renderings of
“furlongs” and “acres”, but more to the rendering of “acres” in the
following excerpt: Ceres: Hail, many-colour’d messenger, that never
Dost disobey the wife of Jupiter;
Who, with thy saffron wings, upon my flowers
Diffusest honey-drops, refreshing showers;
And with each end of thy blue bow dost crown
My bosky acres and my unshrubb’d down.
) IV, I, 76:81(
Abu Shadi translates the excerpt as follows:زوجة: أبدا تعصي ال التي المرقشة الرسولة أيتها سالما سيريس
قطرات تنشرين المزعفرين بجناحيك التي أنت جوبيتر،
العسلقوسك طرفي من بكل و المنعش، الرشاش و أزهاري، علي
األزرق. )آكارتكللين ص 1930حراجي ،70)
Not only does Abu Shadi choose to transcribe “acres” but he also
decides to apply the rules of Arabic morphology to it. Following the rule
which generates the plural آراب from إرب Abu Shadi comes up with the
hybrid آكار, a typical instance of the linguistic experimentation which
Venuti advocates. In fact, Abu Shadi occasionally resorts to transcription
where no cultural specificity is involved, such as in the following
examples: Trinculo: A murrain on your monster, and the devil take
your fingers. )III, ii, 80:81(
32
Page 43
: انترنكيولو . )المر أصابعك الشيطان ليأخذ و هولتك، ص 1930علي ،
58 )
****************** Prospero: Fury! Fury! There Tyrant, there, hark, hark. )IV, i, 257(
! . ! تيرانت هناك فيوري هارك فيوري، المصدر،ص. ) هارك، نفس79)
In an attempt to mitigate the foreignness of ان Abu Shadi gives a مر
footnote in which he explains that the reference here is to a cattle disease,
and his keenness on going into scientific details suggests that “murrain’
is a culture-specific reference that cannot be easily understood by the
Arabic-speaking reader unless much explanation is utilised. However, he
suddenly points out that “murrain” is known in Arabic as الجائحة )P.
58(. In handling “hark” he also resorts to transcription and gives a
footnote in which he refers to “hark” as سمعا سمعا معناه صوتي توجيه)p.79(. In both examples transcription cannot be described as a strategy to
which the translator resorts with the aim of overcoming problems that
have to do with cultural specificity. However, Abu Shadi’s most striking
utilisation of transcription occurs in the following example: Gonzalo: When every grief is entertain’d that is
offered, comes to the entertainer …
Sebastiano: A dollar
Gonzalo: Dolour comes to him, indeed. )II, i, 16:19(
: ثمة يعود إليه يقدم ما فإن به يرحب حزن كل كان متي جونزالو
المرحب ... إلي : دالرا سبستيانو
: لديه يغدو حقيقة . )دالرا جنزالو (26 – 25،ص1930
33
Page 44
The way Abu Shadi deals with the pun on “dollar” is consistent with
his professed faithfulness to the original. However, the outcome can
hardly be described as a realisation of his intentions. Abu Shadi is
obviously keen on preserving one of the textual features of the original
but, instead of seeking to reproduce this textual feature so that it should
be relevant to the target reader he adheres to it, rendering both “dolour”
and “dollar” as دالر, meanwhile trying to explain away the vagueness of
these renderings by adding the following footnote:اإلنجليزي أصلها و الكرب و الضيق بمعني هنا حوار dolourالدالر و ،
( . نفس تري ما علي بالمعني اللفظي التالعب علي مبني جنزالو
(26المصدر،ص
As wordplay is rarely, if ever, handled in such a way as this the
footnote is likely to cause some confusion concerning the nature of دالر.
The way Abu Shadi simply assumes that it “means” الكرب و mayالضيق
lead the reader to think that دالر is one of the many Arabic words about
which the average reader knows nothing, and that the translator did
actually succeed in reproducing the wordplay without having to seek a
functional equivalent of “dollar” or making such sacrifices as those
which the following translators found necessary to make:يكسب: … فإنه بلية لكل المرء استسلم لو جنزالو
: يكسب !!رياال سبستيانو بل: . ) وباال جنزالو جريس صوابا نطقت لو ص 1929، ،55)
******************************العميق: للحزن اإلنسان يستسلم عندما أن جنزالو يلبث ال
األسقام .تصيبه
ص 1961إبراهيم ) ،40)
******************************
.. : علي إال يحصل فلن حزن، به نزل كلما اإلنسان استسلم إذا جنزالو
34
Page 45
: دوالرسبستيانيو : يصيبه .. دوارجنزالو . دوارحقا أتوقع كنت مما بأصدق نطقت لقد ،
ص 1978بحيري ) ،53)
******************************
: يأتيه فسوف به، ينزل ما كل علي اإلنسان حزن إن جنزالو : !دوالرسبستيانو
: . ) دوارجنزالو عناني! تقصد لم إن و (20-18، 108ص2004صدقت
Though Abu Shadi resorts to transcription with a view to
preserving an important textual feature he cannot be considered to have
succeeded in attaining his goal, not only because of the vagueness of the
note supposed to make things clear but also because of the fact that he
spells the two renderings alike which makes realising that a linguistic
game of some kind is being played difficult for the average reader who is
not much interested in footnotes. Moreover, if Abu Shadi’s translation of
The Tempest ever came to be staged the audience would naturally have
no access to the footnotes, which means that the opportunity to realise the
wordplay will be lost. However, the rendering cannot be regarded as
foreignising since, though Abu Shadi adheres to the source text in a
remarkably strange way, the rendering is not one that draws the reader’s
attention to the language rather than the content which the language is
supposed to be conveying. The outcome is not as strange as the strategy
itself . It is more than likely to lead the reader to think that Gonzalo is
sarcastically repeating what Sebastiano has just said.
A broader look at Abu Shadi’s renderings of culture-specific
references shows that transcription is not the sole strategy that he
employs. In the following example he utilises a functional equivalent in
dealing with “jerkin”, a word that means a long, tight jacket with no
sleeves:
35
Page 46
Stephano: Be you quiet, monster. Mistress line, is not
this my jerkin? Now is the jerkin under the
line; now, jerkin, you are like to lose your hair,
and prove a bald jerkin. )IV, i, 235 : 238(
. : هذه أليست الهولة أيتها صه الخط؟ جمازتيستيفانو سيدي يا ) اآلن ) الحبل فوق من . الجمازةينتزعها اآلن الخط تحت
( جمازةيا فتثبتي ) شعرك تفقدي ألن عرضة أنت يلبسها. )جمازةأنك (78،ص1930صلعاء
Instead of resorting to transcription Abu Shadi decides to replace the
culture-specific reference with a reference that is relevant to the target
reader. However, in so doing he commits the mistake referred to by
Beekman and Callow in the context of their discussion of the precautions
that should be taken when using functional equivalents. Beekman and
Callow point out that “it is important to choose the most relevant rather
than the most obvious function… [and that] there is a risk of causing a
clash between the functions of the source and target items” )1974, pp.
204, 205(. According to the ALA Dictionary الجمازة is a long jacket
with tight sleeves. Abu Shadi gives the following footnote which shows
that he misunderstands the meanings of both “jerkin” and جمازة:
القصيرة : ) الدراعة (78،ص jerkin( )1930الجمازة
Nevertheless, Abu Shadi’s designation of جمازة as a functional
equivalent of “jerkin” would not be regarded as a mistake unless the
reader of the translation was a competent bilingual who has access to the
original. Whether the effect of Abu Shadi’s choice is domesticating or
foreignising is not a simple question that can be answered
straightforwardly. The use of functional equivalents usually has a
domesticating effect, but it should not be forgotten that the translation
was written for the readers of the thirties of the twentieth century to
36
Page 47
whom such a word as جمازة did not sound as odd as it does to the
contemporary reader. There is no doubt that the translation would strike
the contemporary reader as a product of olden times and, though Steiner
explains that the use of archaisms in translation serves the function of
giving the impression that the translation is a genuine part of the target
culture that is deeply rooted in its literary tradition )1975/1992, p.365( it
cannot be claimed that جمازة has a domesticating effect since its
unfamiliarity to the contemporary reader does suspend understanding at
least for a while, drawing attention to the language itself rather than to
the content which the language is supposed to be conveying.
Thus, domestication and foreignisation cannot be regarded as clear-
cut, time-proof categories. On the contrary, they are categories constantly
re-defined in relation to such factors as time )and place( of reception and
the linguistic and cultural identity of the target reader. More important is
that even when employing a certain strategy in handling culture-specific
references is sure to bring about either a foreignising or a domesticating
effect judging a certain translation as domesticated or foreignised will by
no means be easy in the light of the continual process of switching
allegiances already referred to. However, though switching allegiances
can sometimes be unjustifiable in terms of the translator’s professed
approach ) such as in Abu Shadi’s different treatments of “acres” and
‘jerkin”( there will always be factors that lead the translators different
ways in their application of the minimax principle. Accordingly, it seems
more enlightening to consider each rendering of the culture-specific
references by the different translators as an attempt to solve a single
translation problem, focusing on the circumstances which have led a
certain translator to decide on a certain solution rather than to try to
37
Page 48
describe and classify the different translations as domesticated or
foreignised according to the strategies employed in them. A useful
starting point in this connexion is the following excerpt from The Merry
Wives of Windsor which includes culture-specific references to currency
treated by Enani in a way worth investigating: Falstaff: Pistol, did you pick Master Slender’s purse?
Slender: Ay, by these gloves, did he – or I would I might
never come in mine own great chamber again
else – of seven groats in mill-sixpences, and
two Edward shovelboards, that cost me two
shillings and two pence apiece of Yed Miller,
by these gloves. )I, i , 134:139(
! : سلندر؟ السيد كيس سرقت هل بيستول فولسطاف ! ! : إلي أعود أن وعيت ما إال و القفازين هذين بحق نعم سلندر
! الفضية القطع من عددا مني سرق اليوم بعد الكبري قاعتيستة منها كل قيمة و بنساتالجديدة ثمانية مجموعها و
عشرون ! جانب إلي الجديدة، شلناتمن شلنينبنسا الثالث إدوارد
تكلفتمنها كل علي الحصول بهذين. بنساو شلنا في قسما
القفازين! 116 – 115،ص 2008 ) 140،-145)
Enani’s renderings of “shillings” and “pence” can be said to be
foreignising since they reflect adherence to the original through
transcription. Habib also resorts to transcription, though his is a
mistranslation:: إلي سلندر أعود وعيت ما إال و فعلها، لقد القفازات هذه بحق أجل،
.. ذوات من قطع أربع سلبني لقد أخري مرة الفاخرة حجرتيو بنساتاألربعة المسكوكة الجديدة القطع من هي و شلنين،
من
38
Page 49
منهما شلنات واحد كل كلفني قد و الثالث و إدوارد شلنين
بنسين
( . القفازات هذه بحق المسكوكة، العملة (27 – 26،ص 1973من
However, names of currency receive different treatment from both
translators elsewhere, such as in the following example: Quickly: Yet there has been knights, and lords, and gentlemen, with
their coaches and I warrant you they could never get an
eye-wink of her. I had myself twenty angels given me
this morning; but I defy all angels – in any such sort,
as they say – but in the way of honesty.
) II, ii ,60:69(
Habib translates the excerpt as follows: و: ... اللوردات و بالفرسان يعج عندئذ كان القصر أن مع كويكلي
السادة هذا ... في نفسي أنا لي قدمت قد و بعرباتهم كلهم و
عشرون الصباحالنقود من لسبب قطعة ال المال، إغراء تحديت لكني و ،
يقولون، كما( . األمانة بدافع (72 – 71،ص 1973إال
whereas Enani’s translation reads as follows: : يأتونها أشراف، سادة و لوردات، و فرسان، بينهم من كان كويكلي
عرباتهم ... في ! لقد و عينها من واحدة بنظرة يفوزوا لم لك، أؤكد و لكنهم، و
وهبنيعشرين الصباح هذا منها أحدهم درهم كل علي درهما
المالك ،صورةهذه كل أتحدي لكني أسعي الدراهم و أن وأرفض بمالئكتها
أمر في( . الشرف زانه إن إال ص 2008ما ،155 ،59-70)
39
Page 50
Variation in the treatment of “angels” here is resultant from each
translator applying the minimax principle his own way, or, in other
words, it is resultant from the fact that what constitutes the desired
maximum of effect is not the same for both Habib and Enani. For both
translators literal translation is out of question since rendering “angel” as
is both ridiculous and misleading. Accordingly, Habib opts for مالك
generalisation, while Enani seeks a functional equivalent and comes up
with دراهم, but, reluctant to lose the comic effect resulting from the idea
of Quickly defying God’s angels, he resorts to description, which, to an
extent, compensates for the inevitable loss of the pun on the word
“angels”. Thus, variation in handling “angels” is the consequence of the
two translators differing concerning the importance of the pun and the
comic effect it brings about. Though both renderings are domesticating
Enani’s makes up for the departure from the image of the original by
succeeding in bringing about some sort of equivalent effect. This also
applies to the following: Falstaff: Now, the report goes she has all the rule of her
husband’s purse. He hath a legion of angels.
Pistol: As many devils entertain – and ‘To her, boy,’
say I.
Nym: The humour rises – it is good. Humour me
the angels. )I, iii, 48:51(
Habib translates this as follows:في: المتحكمة أنها إلي تشير عندي تجمعت التي األنباء إن فولستاف
مالبالدنانير خزائنه تفيض ثري وهو .زوجها،
" : يا: بها عليك لك أقول و الشياطين، مئات برديك في إن بيستول ."رجل
40
Page 51
علينا: السرور ادخلوا هيا طيبة، فكاهة هي و الفكاهة، تجئ هنا و نيم(40،ص1973بالدنانير. )
while Enani translates it as follows: ! لديها: إن و كلها، زوجها أموال في تتحكم إنها يقال اآلن و فولسطاف
جيشاالمالئكة صور عليها الدراهم .من
" ! " : إليها صاح يا فإليها المرأة، حول شياطين جيش يضارعه و بيستول
! قولي هذا ! : باختطاف إذن عليك الجميل التدبير نضج و الفكاهة تحسنت نيم
الدنانير . مالئكة
127-126،ص2008 ) 49،-54)
Again Habib treats “angels” domesticatingly, resorting to a functional
equivalent this time. In so doing he focuses on the informative aspect of
Falstaff’s words which, according to the way he applies the minimax
principle, is the most important aspect to him. Enani, on the contrary,
views the pun on “angels” and the image based on it, together with the
resultant, witty reference to devils, as elements which characterise the
style of Shakespeare and give his characters unique vividness. Though
the pun on “angels” is inevitably lost resorting to description efficiently
paves the way for Pistol’s clever answer )which has had to be modified in
Habib’s translation as a result of the omission of the reference to angels(.
To an extent, Enani’s translation retains something of the religious
connotations of “a legion of angels”, but more interesting is that the new
image produced by Enani, in which it is the coins themselves that are
regarded as an army, creates some sort of unification by relating
Falstaff’s words here to what he says in the following excerpt in reply to
Ford offering him money:
41
Page 52
Falstaff: Money is a good soldier, sir, and will on.
)II, ii , 155(
which Habib and Enani respectively translate as follows:( . : تستمر أن أرجوك سيدي، يا أمين جندي المال ،ص1973فولستاف
77)
**********************
. : الزحف عن يتوقف ال و سيدي يا صنديد محارب المال فولسطاف160،ص2008 ) 161،)
Thus, Enani preserves the richness of the original by resorting to
description, but apart from what it tells us about how the minimax
principle leads translators different ways the above argument provides
the basis for a hypothesis concerning the restrictions on using a certain
strategy in handling culture-specific references. “Shillings” and “pence”
differ from “angels” in that the former are more familiar to the Arabic-
speaking reader than the latter. بنسات has lost its novelty as it has always
been used in literary translations and film subtitles, and شلنات has even
entered Egyptian Arabic as a reference to a five-piastre coin and is
occasionally utilised as a humourous reference to a five-pound note.
“Angels”, on the contrary, is totally new to the Arabic-speaking reader.
Therefore, it can be hypothesised that the use of transcription in
rendering a culture-specific reference has to do with the familiarity of
this reference as far as the target reader is concerned; the more familiar
the reference is the more likely it is to be transcribed. The rendering of
“ducats” in the following excerpt from Twelfth Night gives strength to
the hypothesis: Maria: That quaffing and drinking will undo you; I heard
my lady talk of it yesterday, and of a foolish
knight that you brought in one night to be her
42
Page 53
wooer. …
Sir Toby: Why, he has three thousand ducats a year.
)I , iii 13:20(
Husain translates the excerpt as follows: . : سيدتي سمعت لقد يتلفاك أن جديران اإلدمان و السكر هذا إن ماريا
استصحبته الذي النبيل هذا عن و أمس، ذلك عن تتحدث... . إليها الوسيلة ليبتغي
: إن توبي آالف سير لثالثة . ) دخله ص عام كل (33في
Enani translates it as follows:سمعت: قد و عليك، يقضي سوف السكر و الشراب هذا ماريا
موالتي . أحمق فارس عن تتحدث سمعتها و باألمس ذلك إلي تشير
أحضرته... . لنفسه يخطبها حتي ليلة ذات
: دخله إن توبي دينار سير آالف . )ثالثة السنة ص 2007في ،72 ،12-
22)
The familiarity hypothesis applies here. “Ducats” is not familiar to
the Arabic-speaking reader. Both Husain and Enani shy away from using
transcription in rendering it. Husain resorts to generalisation, meanwhile
giving a footnote in which he transcribes the word as دوقة )which makes
it clear why he prefers generalisation to transcription( and explains that a
ducat is equal to six shillings and a half )p. 33(. Enani resorts to دنانيرas
a functional equivalent, a choice that he has made since he produced his
first Shakespearean translation – namely, his translation of The
Merchant of Venice, in which he defends his choice of دنانير as a
rendering of “ducats” on the grounds that the latter is irrelevant to the
Arabic-speaking reader. He even refers to the Latin origin of the word
and points out that “d”, short for “dinar”, was used in referring to دينار
the smallest currency unit in Britain – namely, the penny )1988, p.270(,
43
Page 54
most probably to mitigate the domesticating effect of his decision.
Buhayri, who also translated The Merchant of Venice , is the sole
translator who tries to preserve the reference to “ducats” by rendering it
as 1978( دوقية,p. 139(. However, his rendering cannot be described as
foreignising since Buhayri insists on imparting an Arabic flavour to the
word by rendering the /k/ sound as ق instead of ك.
In addition to generalisation and using functional equivalents,
description is often employed for overcoming the unfamiliarity of
culture-specific references. It is used fairly interchangeably with the two
strategies, but it is particularly useful in such cases as that represented by
the reference to the names of alcoholic drinks in the following excerpt
from The Merry Wives of Windsor : Mrs. Page: Why, Sir John, do you think, though we would have
thrust virtue out of our hearts by the head and shoulders,
and have given ourselves without scruple to hell, that ever
the devil could have made you our own delight?
Ford: What, a hodge-pudding? A bag of flax? …
Evans: And given to fornications, and to taverns,
and sack and wine and metheglins, and to drinkings
and swearings and starings, pribbles and prabbles?
)V, v ,142:155(
In the above excerpt sir Hugh Evans, the priest, reproaches sir John
Falstaff light-heartedly not only by enumerating his vices but also by
enumerating the alcoholic drinks to which he is addicted, and which,
except for the rather neutral “wine”, reflect a remarkable degree of
cultural specificity. As the culture of Arabic usually treats the different
kinds of alcoholic drinks as خمر attempts to find functional equivalents
for “sack” and “metheglins” will be a waste of time and effort. Opting for
44
Page 55
the collective خمر, however, is not the best solution simply because
“sack” and “metheglins” are not used only for the sake of the local colour
they impart to Evans’s words. In fact, mentioning different kinds of
alcoholic drinks is meant to stress Falstaff’s immorality. Besides, it
produces a comic effect typical of Evans, who, from the beginning, has
been a source of comedy on account of his way of putting ideas into
words. Thus, resorting to generalisation would mean more than the
cultural loss. It would result in the loss of important stylistic features.
Aware of this, Habib and Enani respectively render the excerpt as
follows: ! : انتزعنا كنا لو أننا تظن أو جون سير يا ويك بيدج السيدة
وازع بال أنفسنا أسلمنا و انتزاعا ، قلوبنا من الفضيلةلنا ملهاة نتخذك أن من لنا يمكن الشيطان أفكان للجحيم،
بحال؟: من فـــــــــورد كغرارة بل الضخم، كالسجق إنه هذا؟ خليط أي
التيل! ... : و الحانات، مدمن و الزنا، و الفحشاء، في وغارق إيفانـــــــــز
النبيذشرب الخمر الرخيص،و النبيذ و و المحروق، اللعن كثير ،
الغطرسة( . حد أقصي إلي (186 – 185،ص 1973متعب
*******************************
! : الفضيلة اقتلعنا كنا لو أننا تتصور هل جون سير يا عجبا بيدج زوجة
من من أنت نتخذك كنا أنا النار دخول و التقوي نبذ قبلنا و قلبينا
عشيقا ؟ الرجال دون... " " : الكتان؟ من شواال عصيدة؟ قصعة تختاران فــــــــــــــورد
: شارب للحانات مرتاد للفحشاء، ممارس للنبيذإيفانـــــــــــــز
والنبيذ األسباني
45
Page 56
الويلزي؟ النبيذ و العربدة الرخيص و للسكر مدمنالترهات؟ و الهذر و عجبا و تيها البحلقة و الناس سب و
)2008، -145، 261- 260ص
158( Obviously both translators are keen on producing an
equivalent effect by adhering to the image of the original ) as much as
description allows(. Interesting is that Habib resorts to generalisation
“within” his use of description. Unwilling to bother much about
“metheglins” or perhaps not knowing for sure what “metheglins” is,
Habib decides to treat the reference depending on generalisation, hence
المحروق His rendering of “sack” as .الخمر is a mistranslation النبيذ
resulting from having “burnt sack”, or mulled, spiced sack, in mind
while translating. Resorting to description in rendering ‘metheglins”
makes it necessary for Enani to avoid the ridiculousness of و النبيذ والويلزي hence his distinguishing “wine” in translation by using the ,النبيذ
epithet الرخيص, which establishes it as the opposite of the expensive
“sack”.
It has been previously pointed out that description guarantees the
translator more faithfulness to the source culture than either
generalisation or using functional equivalents. Practically, however,
description will always involve cultural losses since translators usually
tend to be selective in deciding which features of the culture-specific
reference should be used in its description, which makes faithfulness to
the source culture more relative than absolute. In fact “selective” is a
keyword here, for though the main goal maintained by most translators is
to be brief so as not to disturb the flow of the translation the preference of
certain features to others will always have significance. Careful
employment of description helps the translator to “manipulate” the text
46
Page 57
so that it should conform, to an extent, to his/her viewpoint. The
rendering of “posset” in the following excerpt from The Merry Wives of
Windsor by Habib and Enani respectively helps to clarify this point: Quickly: What, John Rugby. – I pray thee, go to the casement
and see if you can see my master, Master Doctor
Caius, coming. … Go, and we’ll have a posset for’t
soon at night, in faith, at the latter end of a sea-coal fire.
)I, iv ,1:8(
: ترقب و النافذة إلي تذهب أن أرجوك رجبي، جون يا إيه كويكلي
سيدياذهب، ... البيت إلي مقبل هو هل تري و كايوس دكتور
الليلة سنحتسي دافئا و طرف شرابا علي نتدفأ أن بعد وقوفك علي لك تعويضا نيوكاسل فحم بنيران المدفأة
( . البرد (44،ص1973في
****************************
) ( ! النافذة: إلي اذهب رجبي يدخل أنت؟ أين رجبي جون كويكلي
أرجوكفي قادما كايوس الدكتور األستاذ سيدي، كان إن انظر و
الطريق... . . أكافئك سوف و هيا اآلن ساخن اذهب في بمشروب
نحن و المساء،( . الحجري الفحم ذات المدفأة أمام – 129،ص 2008نجلس
130 ،1-9)
The translators’ decision to avoid referring to “posset” as an alcoholic
drink can be said to be at odds with their treatment of references to
alcoholic drinks in general. However, it can be justified in the light of the
translators’ view of the context in which the reference occurs, a view that
has to do with the translators’ cultural background. Drinking alcoholic
drinks will be acceptable as long as it is associated with such a pleasure
47
Page 58
seeker as Falstaff, while it will sound odd if it occurs in the “innocent”
domestic scene herein depicted. Being thus selective helps the translator
to conform to the expectations of the target reader, and the effect is
undoubtedly domesticating, especially when selectivity reflects a
systematic tendency, such as in Enani’s case. Enani translates the first
reference to posset as follows: ! لتستمع: الليلة أدعوك فأنا الفارس أيها ابتهج ذلك مع و بيدج
الليل بشراب!الساخن عليك اآلن تضحك التي زوجتي من لتضحك و ،
(169-168، 261،ص2008 )
Restrictions on the use of description also occur when the culture-
specific reference in question is part of an image. As the cultural
specificity of references constituting parts of images is of secondary
importance faithfulness to the source culture will not be a primary
requirement when rendering such references. Translators will usually
seek to create an equivalent effect, such as in the following example from
The Tempest : Gonzalo: Beseech you, sir, be merry; you have cause,
So have we all, of joy; for our escape
Is much beyond our loss. …
Alonso: Prithee, peace
Sebastiano: He receives comfort like cold porridge.
)II, i , 1:10(
) ( ! : أيضا لنا كما األسباب فأمامك سيدي يا صدرك اشرح جونزالو ... كل من لنا ربحا أكثر الغرق من نجاتنا إن للجذل يدعو ما
... ! خسرناه ما! : الجلبة هذه عن تكف أن أرجو ألونزو
: إلي ينظر كمن العزاء إلي ينظر إنه بارد سباستيانو ! ثريد
ص 1929جريس ) ،54)
48
Page 59
********************************
: فلديك قريرا ، تكون أن سيدي يا إليك أتضرع كما –جونزالوجميعا كثيرا –لدينا أبعد نجاتنا إن إذ للحبور، سبب
خسارتنا ... عن. : سالم في تدعني أن أرجوك ألونسو
: تلقي مثل العزاء يتلقي إنه البارد سباستيانو شادي. ) الثريد أبوص 1930 ،25)
*********************************
: من لديك و لدينا ألن مرحا تكون أن سيدي يا أرجوك جونزالو
األسباب... . فقدناه ما بكثير قيمة أكثر نجاتنا فإن ذلك إلي يدعو ما
. : تكف أن أرجوك ألونزو : إلي المرء ينظر كما إال له مواساتنا إلي ينظر ال جاللته إن سباستيانو
طعامالطعم ص 1961إبراهيم. ) كريه ،39)
**********************************
: الرضي أسباب فلديك األسي عنك دع موالي جونزالوالردي و الخسارة فوق فكسبنا نحن، كذاك و
...
! ... : كفي كفي ألونزو : يتذوق كمن العزاء منه يتقبل إنه باردة سباستيانو !عصيدة
ص 1978بحيري ) ،52)
*************************************
! : بل يدعوك، ما فهناك األحزان تطرح أن سيدي أرجوك جونزالو
يدعونا... ! كثيرا تفوقه بل منا ضاع مما أهم نجاتنا للفرح جميعا
! : أرجوك اسكت ألونزو : مثل التسرية يتلقي البارد سباستيانو ص 2004عناني! ) الحساء ،
107 1،-11)
The cultural specificity of the reference to porridge is obvious,
especially when one bears in mind that the characters herein depicted are
49
Page 60
Italian and that the Shakespearean reference to porridge is in itself
domesticating. In order to bring home the idea that Alonso, the bereaved
father, would not be consoled Shakespeare compares consolation to cold
porridge )which calls up to mind the idiomatic expression “cold
comfort”(. Shakespeare could have depended in so doing on a reference
to an Italian dish, but, aware that this would be meaningless to the British
audience, he uses the name of a British dish so that the idea should be
efficiently conveyed. The translators similarly take their readers into
consideration. Greis, Abu Shadi, Buhayri and Enani refer the Arabic-
speaking reader to his/her own culture, though it can be said that Enani’s
rendering is the least domesticating since, compared to Greis’s, Abu
Shadi’s and Buhayri’s, it is the least culturally marked, “soup” being
common to the two cultures involved. Besides, the functional equivalents
designated by Greis, Abu Shadi and Buhayri as renderings of “porridge”
belong to the culture of Archaic Arabic, which accentuates the
domesticating effect they bring about. Resorting to generalisation in
Ibrahim’s rendering leads to further changes; since coldness is desirable
as far as some dishes are concerned insistence upon “cold” would not
convey the intended meaning, hence the use of الطعم .كريه
Using culture-specific references as parts of images, rather than as
elements which add a local colour to the text, presents the translator with
further difficulties. Sometimes it is not easy for the translator, usually a
non-native speaker of the source language, to arrive at the significance of
a certain culture-specific reference which has made the writer of the
original use this reference in the first place, especially when the context
is not helpful enough, such as in the following example from The Merry
50
Page 61
Wives of Windsor in which the reference to porridge leads Habib and
Enani different ways: Shallow: I have lived fourscore years and upward; I never
heard a man of his place, gravity, and learning
so wide of his own respect.
Evans: What is he?
Page: I think you know him. Master Doctor Caius, the
renowned French physician.
Evans: Got’s will, and his passion of my heart! I had as lief
you would tell me of a mess of porridge.
)III, i ,52:59(
Habib translates this excerpt as follows:
: في رجال أن فيها سمعت ما تزيد أو حوال ثمانين عشت لقد شالو
مكانه مثلالذي حده عن خرج قد علمه و ووقاره
. سمعته له تفرضه : الرجل؟ هذا هوية ما إيفانز
: الطبيب كايوس الدكتور الطبيب السيد إنه تعرفه، أنك أعتقد بيدج
الفرنسي. الشهرة الواسع
! ! : عن حدثتموني لكأنما قلباه واحر الله مشيئة فلتكن خبيصإيفانز
الطعام .من
(95،ص 1973)
Enani translates it as follows:عن: حياتي في أسمع لم و أكثر أو عاما ثمانين عشت لقد شالو
رجلهذا إلي طوره عن يخرج و علمه و ووقاره مكانته بمثل يتمتع
الحد. : الرجل؟ هذا ما و إيفانز
! : الفرنسي الطبيب كايوس الدكتور األستاذ إنه تعرفه أنك أعتقد بيدج
الشهير!
51
Page 62
! : لي ذكرتم كأنكم قلبي عن الهم ليفرج و الله مشيئة فلتكن إيفانز
" عدس" !طبيخ
(59-51، 178،ص 2008 )
Though it is obvious that Evans speaks disapprovingly of Dr Caius it
is not very clear why or in what way the latter is similar to a mess of
porridge. Therefore, the translators resort to interpretation in handling
this reference. Enani interprets the reference as denoting worthlessness,
and, consequently, opts for a functional equivalent which not only
conveys the intended meaning efficiently but also enriches the text by
making Evans, the priest, unable to forget the holy Bible even in such an
unholy moment. In the endnotes Enani comments on his rendering of this
reference as follows: The expression comes from the Holy Bible
where Esau sells his birthright to his
brother Jacob for a mess of porridge )Genesis,
25/33:34(. The meaning intended here is
“a worthless thing”. )2008, p.315( )1(
In his interpretation of the reference Habib focuses on “a mess of”
rather than on “porridge” itself. Consequently, he resorts to
generalisation coming up with خبيص, which cannot be considered an
equivalent of the original expression as the entry ص ب in the ALA خ
Dictionary reads as follows:
(:–خبصه( ) ( . . اختبص : خبيص و مخبوص، فهو خلطه خبصا . :) ( . السمن و التمر من المخبوصة الحلواء الخبيص خبيصا اتخذ
: . : . ) يقلب ) ما المخبصة الخبيص من القطعة الخبيصة أخبصة ج. ) ( . مخابص ج كالملعقة الخبيص به
52
Page 63
Noteworthy is that the use of functional equivalents in rendering
culture-specific references that are parts of images will not be desirable if
such culture-specific references are stereotypical ideas that reflect the
Elizabethan view of, or attitude to, a certain people or nation. For
instance, in The Merry Wives of Windsor Falstaff declares that he “will
learn the humor of
the age: / French thrift” )I, iii(. In the endnotes of his translation Enani
explains that it is believed that Shakespeare refers to the French here
where he means the Scots, as making fun of the famous Scottish
miserliness was forbidden by law .
Preserving the reference to the French )or the Scots( in translation
will undoubtedly be irrelevant to the Arabic-speaking reader, but seeking
a functional equivalent ) by replacing the reference herein mentioned
with a reference to Upper Egyptians, for example( will have
consequences more serious than irrelevance. Actually, relevance will not
be a quality to be sought if it means insulting part of the target readers.
Therefore, preserving the original reference outweighs using a functional
equivalent here; though political incorrectness will be there in both cases
preserving the original reference makes it clear that it is Shakespeare, not
the translator, that is to blame. However, preserving the original
reference is rarely undertaken without modifications )mostly additions(
guaranteeing intelligibility, a domesticating tendency that undoubtedly
means that faithfulness to the source text will be violated. In the
following example from The Merry Wives of Windsor no such
modifications are needed: Host: What woulds thou have, boor? What, thick-skin, speak,
breathe, discuss; brief, short, quick, snap.
53
Page 64
Simple: Marry, sir, I come to speak with Sir John Falstaff from
Master Slender. … There is an old woman, a fat
woman, gone up into his chamber. I’ll be so bold as
stay, sir, till she come down – I come to speak with
her, indeed.
Host: Ha, a fat woman? The knight may be robbed: I’ll
call. Bully knight, bully Sir John… Here’s a
Bohemian- Tartar tarries the coming down of thy fat
woman. Let her descend, bully, let her descend. My
chambers are honourable. Fie, privacy, fie!
)IV, v,:18(
Habib translates the excerpt as follows:
: صفيق يا تكلم بغيتك؟ ما و القروي؟ أيها تريد ماذا الفندق صاحب
الجلد،. اختصر أوجز، أسرع، قل، تحدث، ابــن، انطق،
" : السير إلي ألتحدث جئت لقد سيدي يا الحق في ونچسمبـــــــــــــل ..." " " رأيت لقد سلندر السيد من موفدا فولستاف
سأجرؤ و غرفته، إلي تصعد بدينة امرأة عجوزا، امرأةحقا جئت فقد تنزل، ريثما سيدي يا هنا االنتظار علي
. إليها ألتحدث ! : إذن للسرقة، الفارس يتعرض قد بدينة؟ امرأة هاها، الفندق صاحب
فألنادهالسير " عزيزي يا العزيز، فارسي يا هنا"... چأنا، إن ون
من البوهيميين رجال نزول التتر انتظار في يتلكأ
المرأةفندقي إن عزيزي، يا تنزل فدعها عندك، التي البدينة
تبا الخلوة لهذه تبا الخلوة، هذه مثل يقر ال شريف فندق
تبا . (160 – 159ص )
And Enani’s translation is the following:
54
Page 65
: تكلم الجلد؟ سميك يا ماذا جلف؟ يا تريد ماذا الفندق صاحب
تحدث –انطق
! صرح أسرع اختصر أوجزالسير : لمخاطبة جئت سيدي يا الله و ونچسمبــــــــــــــل
من موفدا فولسطافبدينة، ... امرأة عجوز، امرأة صعدت لقد سلندر السيد
. . تهبط حتي باالنتظار لي تسمح أن أرجوك غرفته فدخلت
إنني إذ. لمحادثتها أتيت
. : للسرقة الفارس يتعرض قد بدينة؟ امرأة ماذا؟ الفندق صاحب
... هنا من سأناديههنا بوهيميا إن من .تتريا البدينة امرأتك نزول ينتظر
تهبط أن مرها
. الخلوة . لهذه تبا شريف فندقي إن تهبط دعها المرح، أيها
المسترقة.(20-1، 236-235ص )
Both translators keep the original reference to Bohemians and Tartars
without adding any information to explain in what way Simple is similar
to the peoples in question. This is simply because the relationship
intended is easy to arrive at depending on pragmatic information. Tartars
are universally associated with lawlessness and barbarism; “Bohemian”
has even ceased to denote a nationality to most people and is more
commonly used in referring to people )usually artists( who adopt a life
style free of traditions and social obligations. Habib’s rendering blurs the
fact that it is the older meaning of “Bohemian” that is intended as the
translator renders the word as an adjective, while Enani is more decisive,
aware as he is of the significance of the reference, which he explains in
the endnotes pointing out that Shakespeare concocts this “impossible
55
Page 66
nationality” simply because this is the kind of jokes which the host of the
Garter is fond of.
Unlike the aforementioned reference, the word “Cataian” in the
following excerpts, from The Merry Wives of Windsor and Twelfth
Night respectively, is problematic: Nym [ to Page]: And this is true… He loves your wife – there’s the
short and the long. My name is Corporal Nym; I speak,
and I avouch ’tis true. My name is Nym, and Falstaff loves
your wife. Adieu. I love not the humour of bread and
cheese – [ and there’s the humour of it.] Adieu. [Exit]
Page : ‘The humour of it,’ quoth’a! Here’s a fellow frights
English out of his wits. … I will not believe such
a Cataian, though the priest o’the town commended
him for a true man.
) II, i ,117:130(
************************************
Maria: What a caterwauling do you keep here! If my lady
have not call’d up her steward Malvolio and bid him
turn you out of doors, never trust me.
Sir Toby: My lady’s a cataian, we are politicians, Malvolio
is a peg-a-Ramsey. ) II, iii , 67:71(
“Cataian”, which means “Chinese”, cannot be treated the same way
“Bohemian-Tartar” has been treated simply because its significance is
not common to both the source reader and the target reader. In other
words, the target reader should be provided with the information
necessary for understanding the point of similarity on which the
comparison between the Chinese people on the one hand and Nym and
the lady on the other hand is based. Habib and Enani follow different
56
Page 67
strategies in providing the necessary information in their renderings of
the first excerpt. Habib renders it as follows: ... القصة: هذه و زوجك، يحب إنه كله صدق لك أقوله الذي هذا نيم
و األمر عليك قصصت وقد نيم األنباشي اسمي إن بحذافيرها،
أقسمزوجك، يحب فولستاف إن أقول و نيم، اسمي إن صحيح، إنه
وداعا ،لنفسك، فاحترس الجبن، و بالخبز يتعلق فيما الفكاهة أقر ال فأنا
وقد . فوداعا هواه لك شرحت و األمر لك أوضحت
) ... بيستول ) يتبعصوابها : ... عن اإلنجليزية يخرج رجل هذا تقول؟ هكذا أو هواه؟ بيدج
هذا مثل أصدق لن األشر إنني أن المدعي من الرغم علي ،
قسيس( . فاضل رجل إنه قال و امتدحه قد ص 1973المدينة ،61 – 62)
Enani translates it as follows: ... العريف : اسمي الكذب عادة أحب ال فأنا حق، هذا و نيم
فولسطاف و نيم فاسمي الصدق، أنه أشهد بما أبلغك أنا و نيم، . " " . الجبن و الخبز مزاج أحب ال أنا و وداعا ، زوجتك يحب
نيم ) ( يخرج ! : في الرعب يلقي شخص إنه المزاج ذلك يحب ال إنه يقول بيدج
قلب " " ...! كان إن و العجيب، الصيني هذا أصدق لن اإلنجليزية اللغة
. صادق رجل إنه قال و لي زكاه قد البلدة كاهنص 2008 ) ،147 ،116-131)
Habib resorts to replacing the culture-specific reference with what he
believes to be the significance of it. Consequently, political incorrectness
and cultural specificity are out of question. Enani preserves the reference
meanwhile making sure its significance should be understood by adding
57
Page 68
the epithet العجيب which explains in what way Nym is similar to the
Chinese. Therefore, his rendering preserves the cultural specificity of the
reference. Interesting is that the political incorrectness of the reference is
mitigated in translation as Enani gives the point of similarity between
Nym and the Chinese in the form of an adjective. الصيني and العجيب are not necessarily related to each other in a cause-effect relationship;
Nym may, or may not, be strange because he is like the Chinese )while a
translation such as غرابته في الصينيين يشبه الذي ,for example ,هذا
would have ruled out any other possibility(. As such, الصيني may be
“processed’ by the target reader apart from العجيب, which means that
the overall effect of the rendering will not be totally domesticating. In
rendering the second excerpt Enani is undoubtedly more decisive, since
the use of مثل leaves one in no doubt about the point of similarity
intended:تكن: لم إن الشبقة؟ القطط مواء يشبه الذي العواء هذا ما ماريا
المنزل من بطردكم أمرته و مالفوليو حاجبها دعت قد موالتي. اآلن بعد في تثقوا فال
! .. : أنت و نحن فإننا الصينيين مثل تقول ما تعني ال موالتك توبي سير .. .. فناطور مالفوليو أما و معا دبرناه ما لدينا و سياسة أهل
( . مرحا يقبل ص 2007ال ،107 ،68-74)
In deciding what the points of similarity intended in such references
as these are translators usually depend on the opinions of the editors of
Shakespeare’s plays, who, in turn, depend on historical research in
arriving at the significance of the references. For instance, in the
endnotes Enani comments on the above reference pointing out that
according to a book written in 1555 the Chinese people were notorious
58
Page 69
for empty threats )2007,p. 239(.However, Husain’s rendering of this
reference seems to be the translator’s personal interpretation: : قد سيدتي تكن لم إن تصنعونه؟ الذي هذا السنانير مواء ما ماريا
دعتتصدقوا فال الدار خارج يلقيكم بأن لتأمره مالفوليو مها قيــ
. قوال لي . . : فلعبة مالفوليو أما و فساسة نحن أما لثرثارة السيدة إن توبي سير
(69ص )
Husain’s rendering involves cultural losses balanced by gains in
political correctness. It is a misinterpretation, unless one thinks of it as a
rendering that blurs the lines separating the different levels of Arabic
from one another. Husain might have had in mind the Egyptian-Arabic
expression كتير on the literal level ثرثارة which is an equivalent toكالمها
and has much to do with the significance of the reference used by
Shakespeare.
Depending on the interpretations provided by the editors of
Shakespeare means that rendering such culture-specific reference does
not require much effort on the translator’s part. Nevertheless, problems
occur when the editor’s historical interpretations are not ideologically
acceptable as far as the translator and his/her readers are concerned. This
applies to the reference to “Turks” in the following excerpt from The
Merchant of Venice, where insistence on conveying the historical
significance of the reference would mean violating the most sacred
Muslim taboo: Duke: Shylock, the world thinks, and I think so too,
That thou but lead’st this fashion of thy malice
To the last hour of act, and then ’tis thought
Thou’lt show thy mercy and remorse more strange
59
Page 70
Than is thy strange apparent cruelty.
And where thou now exacts the penalty,
Which is a pound of this poor merchant’s flesh,
Thou wilt not only lose the forfeiture
But, touched with human gentleness and love;
Forgive a moiety of the principal,
Glancing an eye of pity on his losses
That have of late so huddled on his back,
Enow to press a royal merchant down
and pluck commiseration of his state
From brassy bosoms and rough hearts of flint,
From stubborn Turks, and Tartars never trained
To offices of tender courtesy.
) IV, i, 17: 33(
From an Elizabethan perspective “Turks” means “Muslims”, but,
unlike the neutral “Muslims”, “Turks” is a politically incorrect word as it
is associated with the classical tendency to regard all those who do not
believe in Christianity as infidels. Mahood comments on the reference
herein cited pointing out that Turks and Tartars were: )c(lassed with Jews as infidels, as in the Good
Friday collect quoted by Merchant, which prays
for the conversion of ‘all Jews, Turks, Infidels,
and Heretics’ )1987, p.136(
Translating the reference to “Turks” would not constitute a problem if
the translator decided to replace the actual reference with the general
meaning of it, rendering it, for instance, as الكفار. However, this would
mean excessive domestication to such a translator as Enani who is always
keen on preserving the author’s viewpoint by keeping the culture-specific
reference meanwhile adding the information necessary for understanding
60
Page 71
it. Therefore, Enani reaches a compromise whereby the reference to
Turks is “redirected”: .. .. ! أنا: كذاك و هنا الخلق يعتقد شيلوك الدوق
فحسب الحقد هذا تظهر أنكلحظة آخر إلي فيه تتمادي بل
الرحمة إلي تنقلب بك إذا ثمالشفقة آيات من تبدي بل
! القسوة من أبديت مما أغربهنا الناس يحكي إذ
التاجر هذا عقوبة بإلغاء تكتفي لن أنكالمنشود اللحم رطل في تطمع لن أي
المنكود الرجل جسد منالبشرية حب يهزك سوف بل
اإلنسانية رحمتك مشاعر والدين أصل من جزء عن تتنازل كيما
العطف بعيون به حل ما تبصر بأنك يقولون وكاهله تثقل فخسائره
ألفلس التجار شيخ بها مني لو خسائر هي وعليه العطف و الشفقة أثار و
بارد كنحاس صدور و صخر من قلب فيله رق األتراك بل جند جند . و الرقة معني تعرف ال تتار
ص 1988 ) ،160-161)
Enani overcomes the problem likely to occur as a result of rendering
the reference faithfully by adhering to the literal meaning of “Turks” and
then redirecting the reference so that it is the Turkish soldiers, not the
Turkish people in general, that are accused of being cruel and merciless.
Similarly, Buhayri adheres to the literal meaning of “Turks”. However,
his rendering is less politically correct than Enani’s since it is offensive to
Turks in general:
61
Page 72
نحن: شيلوك أمامنا، ليقف و مكانا ، له فلتفسحوا الدوق
نفتكربعفو تتلوه سوف و المزدري حقد اليوم تبدي أنك
المقتدرما لقاء تعفيه فسوف لحمه رطل تطلب مثلما و
خسرتاجر أغني تصيب نوازل بساحه نزلت إذ
فينحدربه الرفق و الحنو تنزع غلظة و من
التتر الترك، وقسوةص 1978 ) ،198)
Both translators preserve the culture-specific reference one way or
another mainly because of the change of attitude that permits of using
the word “Turk” without any offensive meanings concerning Islam being
suggested. This does not apply to the culture-specific reference in the
following excerpt, also from The Merchant of Venice, where
faithfulness to the original’s cultural specificity cannot be maintained
without offending the Muslim target readers: Shylock: What? Are there masques? Hear you me, Jessica,
Lock up my doors, and when you hear the drum
And the vile squealing of the wry-necked fife,
Clamber you not up to the casements then
Not thrust your head into the public street
To gaze on Christian fools with varnished faces;
But stop my house’s ears – I mean my casements –
Let not the sound of shallow foppery enter
My sober house. By Jacob’s staff I swear
I have no mind of feasting forth tonight:
But I will go. Go you before me, sirrah;
Say I will come.
62
Page 73
Lancelot: I will go before, sir.
[aside to Jessica] Mistress, look out at window for all this:
There will come a Christian by
will be worth a jewès eye. [Exit]
Shylock: What say that fool of Hagar’s offspring, ha?
Jessica: His words were ‘farewell, mistress’, nothing else.
)II, vi, 27:46(
Mahood )1987, p.94( explains that Shylock’s reference to his former
servant Lancelot as Hagar’s offspring has “a triple relevance”, since,
according to the Old Testament, Hagar escaped from Abraham’s house
complaining of harsh treatment, and her son Ishmael was a mocker;
“consequently”, adds Mahood, “Hagar and Ishmael became outcasts, as
Shylock considers all Gentiles to be.” )ibid(. The image is undoubtedly
original as it says much about Lancelot in a few words. Lancelot has
always complained of Shylock’s harsh treatment and finally resolved to
join a more liberal, generous master – namely, Bassanio. Besides,
Lancelot has been depicted as a mocker, which is an important source of
comedy in the play. The image also reflects Shylock’s view of Christians
represented here by Lancelot; by abandoning his Jewish master for a
Christian master Lancelot symbolically goes astray according to Shylock,
and is consequently similar to Hagar and Ishmael, who, having left
Abraham’s house, vanished without a trace according to the Old
Testament.
Needless to say, rendering the image so that it should be clear why
Shylock believes Lancelot to be similar to Hagar’s offspring would not
only constitute an offence to Muslims; it would involve denial of the
foundation on which the Muslim faith is based, for it is well known that
Ishmael lived and prospered to become the great ancestor of Mohammed,
63
Page 74
peace be upon him. Accordingly, Enani resorts to a strategy which is
rarely, if ever, utilised by him in handling such culture-specific
references. He omits the reference altogether, rendering the above excerpt
as follows:.. : جسيكا إلي أصغي تنكرية؟ حفلة قلت هل شيلوك
! الطبول دقات سمعت إذا و األبواب فلتغلقيالرقبة يشد زمار نشاز و
النوافذ إلي تثبي أن فحذارتشاهدي كي تطلي أن أو
! الزائفة بالوجوه الطريق في النصاري حمقي .. نوافذي أعني داري آذان اقفلي بل
التافه المجون أصوات تنفذ أن حذار و! العاقل الوقور لمنزلي
راغب إني يعقوب بها طاف التي بالعصا أحلف ! سأذهب لكنني الوليمة هذه عن
! سآتي إني لهم قل و غالم يا إليهم اذهب (.. .. : ب ينفرد و للخروج يتجه سأسبقك سيدي يا سيكا(چلونسلوت
إلي ) الشباك(: چهمسا تتركي أال أرجوك سيكانصراني ببابك يمر سوف إذ
) ( ! لونسلوت يخرج العبراني بنت لهوي أهل.. : أكول النوايا طيب أبله شيلــــــــــــــوك
كسول و شغله في بطئ و... ! البراري قطاط من كقط النهار طول نؤوم و
ص 1988 ) ،129 – 130)
Buhayri chooses to render the reference more foreignisingly. He
preserves the reference but adds no information with which to clarify its
significance. Thus, he keeps the offensive reference but mitigates its
effect by making it as vague as possible. The target reader would be able
to view the reference as an offence to both Lancelot and Muslims, but
64
Page 75
s/he would not be able to find out the relationship on which the image is
based:تنكر ؟: حفل أهناك تظهري چشيلوك ال ادخلي سيكا
احذري و بالعشية نك دو األبواب لتغلقي ومـــــزمر و مطبل ت صو لسماع تخرجي ال
تنظري و للطريق لي تــــط ال النوافذ من وأحــــمر أو أبيض من زينــــة في تخرجي ال
األغبــــــر مسحوقهن فــــــي المسيحيات فعليجتري من يجتري كيـــــــــــــــــال األبواب أغلقي و
أمتري ال باسمها سم أقـــ يعقوب عصا هذييخطر لم بخاطري ء العشـــا إلي الخروج إنتأخــــــر دون سأجئ لهــــــــم قل سر فألذهبن،
: ذلك كل برغم سيدتي يا و سيدي، يا أمامك سأذهب النسيلوت
فلتطلي ) مسيحي ) يمر فهناك منخفض بصوت النافذة من برأسك
) ( ! النسلوت يخرج يهودية عين في يحلو : هاجر؟ نسل ويحه، د، الوغــ لك يقول ماذا شيلوك
! " " : هاجر و ي عن سار و وداعـــــــا إال قال ما جسيكا(161 – 160،ص 1978 )
It may seem strange that Buhayri insists on preserving such a
reference, but, bearing in mind that he is mainly concerned with formal
aspects likely to win him a reputation as a capable traditional poet, the
translator can be justified. Generally, however, culture-specific
references which would be in direct contradiction to the religious beliefs
of the target reader are domesticated one way or another. Noteworthy is
that domesticating such references is not always sure to bring about the
desired effect. Sometimes it can have an effect opposite to the one sought
by the translator. For example, in his translation of Twelfth Night Husain
resorts to domestication consistently in dealing with references to Greek
65
Page 76
and Roman mythology, referring the target reader to his/her own
religious beliefs, while Enani usually chooses to adopt the perspective of
the source culture, a decision that has more to it than cultural gains: Malvolio:Daylight and champain discovers not more. This is open…
I do not now fool myself to let imagination jade me; for
every reason excites this, that my lady loves me. … Jove
and my stars be praised! Here is yet a postscript. [Reads]
‘thou canst not choose but know who I am. If thou
entertain’st my love, let it appear in thy smiling;
thy smiles become thee well. …’ Jove, I thank
thee. I will smile; I will do everything that thou
wilt have me. ) II, v ,143:160(
Husain translates this as follows: . السهل: علي يفيض حين النهار ضوء من أوضح هذا إن مالفوليو
البداهة إنها . ... خيالي أترك لن و اليوم منذ نفسي أخدع لن نفسها
فكل. يخدعني... . تحبني سيدتي بان يقنعني يا شئ أنت و السماء أيتها
لكما شكرا .نجمي
. " ) أنا ) من تعرف أال الممكن من ليس يقرأ أيضا حاشية هذه و
استجبت إن " ... . شكرا ليزينك ابتسامك إن ابتسامك في ذلك فأظهر لحبي
للسماء،( . . ص عليه تريدني ما كل سأفعل (92-91سأبتسم
Enani translates it as follows:الفسيح: الخالء في و الشمس ضوء في المرء يري ال مالفوليو
بوضوح ... ! ! يلقيني حتي نفسي اآلن أخادع ال صريح كالم هذا أكبر
حصان
66
Page 77
! ! بأن أي بذلك، تقطع الدالئل فكل ال ظهره عن الخيال
موالتي ... . الرب أشكر ! چتحبني طوالعي و .–وف تذييل للخطاب
. ) قبلت ) فإذا أنا من تعرف أن في لك خيرة ال يقرأ يقول؟ ماذا.... تماما تناسبك فالبسمات بابتسامك، ذلك عن فعبر غرامي
لك طلبت. . چشكرا ما كل أفعل سوف و أبتسم سوف وف. أفعله أن مني
ص 2007 ) ،129-130 ،160 -179)
************************ Viola: I left no ring with her; what means this lady?
Fortune forbid my outside have not charm’d her!
) II , ii , 14:15(
Again Habib translates this as follows: : السيدة؟ هذه تعني ماذا ما، خاتما لها أترك لم أن فيوال الله معاذ
يكونخلبها قد (17-16، 63 – 62ص. ) مظهري
while Enani’s translation reads as follows:مقصدها؟ : ما لليدي، خواتم أي أترك لم فيوال
المتنكر مظهري تعشق بأن الحظ رب قدر . )ال
(17-16، 102،ص 2007
In the first example Husain shies away from rendering the reference
to Jove faithfully, seeking, instead, to cater to the target reader’s
expectations. He tries to mitigate the domesticating effect of his decision
by opting for السماء on the grounds that while اللهdirectly refers the
reader to the Muslim faith السماء is rather neutral. Enani is obviously
keen on preserving the culture-specific reference. In لك وفچشكرا he
adheres to the source-language modes of thinking and expression, but in
الرب طوالعي چأشكر و وف he chooses to violate the original mode of
expression. By adding الرب Enani makes the implicit information
67
Page 78
explicit so that the target readers who do not have the same background
information as that shared by the writer of the original and his readers
should know who Jove is. Thus, in Enani’s rendering faithfulness to the
culture of the original takes precedence over ideological considerations,
whereas in Husain’s rendering getting rid of “heathen” terminology is the
translator’s prime concern.
In the second example Husain decides to do away with السماءas
opting for it would have resulted in awkwardness. “Fortune forbid”,
which echoes the idiomatic “God forbid”, makes الله a possibility معاذ
) though the equally idiomatic الله قدر would have been closer to theال
original(. However, while resorting to السماء in the first example
provides the translator with some sort of a functional equivalent الله معاذ
cannot be described as an adequate rendering of “Fortune forbid” as it
involves more than cultural losses. Viola could have simply said “God
forbid” or even “Jove forbid”, which is more in accordance with the other
mythological references in the play, but she chooses to evoke Fortune, a
Greek goddess that used to be represented as a blind girl moving a wheel
and deciding people’s fates according to the wheel’s movement. The
reference to Fortune is meant to stress the sense of arbitrariness which
Viola believes to characterise the situation in which she finds herself ; it
is ironical that Lady Olivia rejects the love of Orsino, with all his manly
qualities, for the love of a disguised girl. As the idea of the arbitrariness
of fortune is common to the source culture and the target culture Husain
could have rendered “Fortune” as الحظ instead of الحظ but again ,ربة
this would have meant assigning godlike qualities to fortune, which is
also unacceptable from a religious point of view )Many singers nowadays
replace الحظ with الله in Nagi’s شاء الحظ فإن شئنا تقل while.)ال
68
Page 79
Husain’s priority is faithfulness to the target reader’s ideology Enani is
more bent on being faithful to the source culture, though the foreignising
effect of his rendering is mitigated by his resorting to description rather
than transcription. He also changes الحظ الحظ into ربة for metrical رب
considerations.
Thus, it can be said that Husain primarily approaches such culture-
specific references in the text with a domesticating attitude based on a
sense of religious obligation. The translator opts for decisions which
involve both cultural and textual losses as long as this would enable him
to live up to the target reader’s expectations. Nevertheless, consistency in
domesticating mythological references for religious considerations does
not always bring about the desired effect, such as in the following
example: Viola: Nay, on thou pass upon me, I’ll no more
With thee. Hold, there’s expenses for thee.
[Giving a coin]
Clown: Now Jove, in his next commodity of hair, send thee
a beard! ) III , i , 41:42(
Husain translates the excerpt as follows:
. . النفقة : بعض إليك عنك أنصرف إني ذكائك سهم تصوب إن فيوال : لحية المهرج الشعر، يوزع يوم الله، (96ص. ) فليمنحك
while Enani translates it as follows: . ! : خذ معك الحديث أواصل فلن إلي بهجومك تحولت إذا ال فيوال
.) نقود ) قطعة تعطيه نفقاتك لتغطية هذه : الرب المهرج القادمة ـچأدعو المرة في يرسل عندما وف،
شحنة! لحية يمنحك أن الشعر، (46 – 45، 137ص ،2007 ) من
69
Page 80
The clown thanks Viola for her liberality by asking God to grant her
maturity, ironically alluding to her effete appearance. In so doing he uses
an image typical of a clown in which the solemn idea of God providing
for his creatures is expressed in shockingly down-to-earth, commercial
terms. Original as it is, the image would have been considered
blasphemous had Shakespeare used “God” instead of “Jove”. In fact,
Enani explains that some editors believe that Shakespeare intentionally
avoided the mention of God here so as not to sound blasphemous )2007,
p.25(. Thus, in such circumstances as these preserving the original
mythological reference would be desirable for the same reasons which
may motivate such a translator as Husain to get rid of these references in
other circumstances. Enani adheres to his general approach to
mythological references and, consequently, succeeds in avoiding the
problem which Husain faces as a result of his adherence to his general
approach where more flexibility would have helped him to achieve his
goal.
In the light of the foregoing it is obvious that opting for one strategy
or another in rendering culture-specific references has mainly to do with
the single problem that a certain culture-specific reference represents.
Though the translator’s beliefs and ideas about translation may play a
role in deciding the way s/he handles culture-specific references most
translators show a great deal of flexibility, constantly re-defining their
priorities with each reference so that a maximum of effect should be
achieved with a minimum of effort. Besides, though certain strategies are
usually associated with certain kinds of faithfulness and, consequently,
with either domestication or foreignisation the employment of a certain
strategy will not always be sure to bring about the kind of faithfulness
70
Page 81
sought by the translator, and a domesticating tendency can lead to
foreignisation and vice versa. Though Habib’s rendering of posset is
meant to be reader-friendly it creates a sense of awkwardness that
encumbers the flow of the drama and forces the target reader to focus on
the language, rather than the content, for a while. Thus, a domesticating
tendency eventually leads to foreignisation. similarly, Husain’s
renderings of the mythological references are attempts to cater to the
target reader’s ideological expectations, but maintaining the same
strategy in rendering all the references brings about an effect which is the
last to be desired by the translator as it results in such a rendering as
لحية الشعر يوزع يوم الله which is more than likely to offend فليمنحك
the target reader. This does not only mean that the a single translation
will combine different kinds of faithfulness and that attempts to describe
a certain translation in terms of one kind of faithfulness will not be very
rewarding; it also means that the prescriptive approach is not the best
approach with which to study domestication and foreignisation in
handling culture-specific references.
71
Page 82
Chapter (1) Notes
)1( The original words of Enani are the following:
عيسو ) يبيع حيث المقدس الكتاب من امتيازات ( Esauالتعبير" ) بكوريته سفر " عدس طبيخ و خبزا كانت بوجبة ليعقوب
" )34 – 25/33التكوين تافه(. " شئ هو المعني (315،ص 2008و
72
Page 83
Chapter (2)
Domestication vs. Foreignisation
in the Rendering of Shakespearean Imagery
The question of how to render images used in a play seems to involve
more complication than that of rendering images in poetry, notably as far
as images displaying a remarkable degree of originality are concerned. In
poetry the originality of images is often preserved in translation not only
because of aesthetic considerations but also because originality has
always to do with the individuality of the experience on which the poem
is based. In lyrical poetry the poet can totally rely on metaphor in
conveying a certain theme or summing up his view of a certain situation
or relationship, such as in the following famous poem by William Blake,
which is mainly based on one unifying metaphor: O Rose! Thou art sick!
The invisible worm,
That flies in the night,
In the howling storm,
Has found out thy bed
Of crimson joy,
And his dark secret love
Does thy life destroy!
This poem is generally believed to be an investigation of love as a
destructive, rather than a productive, power, but whatever one’s
interpretation of it may be it will always be “realised” through the image
of the sick rose being attacked by the pernicious worm, hence the
classical comparison of lyrical poetry to visual arts. The poem can be
said to be capturing a certain moment and stressing its immediacy
73
Page 84
through highlighting the visual elements constituting the metaphor which
embodies Blake’s view of the destructive power of love.
Poetic drama naturally uses images, but the way it uses them
essentially differs from the way lyrical poetry makes use of them. In
drama images are subordinate to action, and are mainly important in as
much that they play a role in the development of the dramatic action,
which certainly has primacy. In poetic drama the power of poetry
combines with that of dramatic action to produce a unique fabric woven
out of multiple threads, where the role of language cannot be minimised,
but it is the dramatic action that is most important. In King Lear, for
instance, the images have particular importance. Clemen )1972( refers to
a relationship of interdependence between the action and the images in
this play. Enani )1995, p.209( explains this, pointing out that in this play
images are used in marking the stages of the catastrophic development in
King Lear’s character; the more King Lear loses touch with the world the
more he uses images. Images, Enani goes on, are an important element
that contributes to the peculiarity of King Lear’s monologues, which
reflect, in turn, a bizarre view of the world resultant from King Lear
looking inwardly. Enani also explains that Clemen believes that the use
of images in King Lear is also related with the creativity of certain
characters as opposed to the down-to-earth nature of the other characters
associated with spiritual poverty. To the second group of characters
belong Lear’s wicked daughters – namely, Goneril and Regan, who are
always bent on achieving certain well-defined goals and consequently
their use of language has to be precise and well-calculated. Enani agrees
with Clemen that this relationship between imagery and action is first to
be found in King Lear, as before this play Shakespeare’s characters used
74
Page 85
to use images only to clarify certain ideas . In other words, in plays
before King Lear ideas came first, while in King Lear action and images
are interdependent.
Handling images in translating Shakespearean drama has always had
to do with certain factors such as the translator’s view of the image in
hand. Images which have a role to play in the development of the action,
as well as recurrent images, are expected to receive more attention from
the translator than images that play the traditional role of supporting an
argument, or images that can be regarded as a one-time occurrence
respectively. Still, however, the translator’s personal view of a certain
image has an important role to play in defining the translator’s attitude to
a certain image. In this connexion originality is a keyword, since original
images in the play complicate the process of decision making in
translation since the translator has to take into consideration the
requirements of the genre as well as the expectations of the target
reader/audience about this genre. Not only does the translator have to
take into consideration the primacy of action but s/he also has to keep in
mind the expectations of the target reader concerning drama. Drama is all
about action, and so the target reader/audience will always expect action
to be the main focus of a play. Preserving original images (or too far-
fetched ones( when translating drama may make it difficult for the
translator to conform to these expectations since an image, if too original,
is more than likely to shift the target reader/audience’s attention from
action to itself. Accordingly, such images usually tend to be domesticated
in translation. In the following excerpt from Twelfth Night, Fabian uses
an original image which both Husain and Enani choose to render
domesticatingly:
75
Page 86
Malvolio: And then to have the humour of state; and after a demure
travel of regard, telling them I know my place as I would
they should do theirs, to ask for my kinsman Toby –
Sir Toby: Bolts and shackles! …
Malvolio: Saying ‘Cousin Toby, my fortunes having cast me on your
niece give me this prerogative of speech’ –
Sir Toby: What, what?
Malvolio: ‘You must amend your drunkenness' –
Sir Toby: Out, scab!
Fabian: Nay, patience, or we break the sinews of our
plot. ) II, v, 47:69(
The image in “or we break the sinews of our plot” is a remarkably
original image. In fact, its originality is at odds with the situation herein
depicted. One cannot help wondering how Fabian can come up with such
an image when he, Sir Toby and Sir Andrew are giving their undivided
attention to Malvolio, and, keen not to attract attention to themselves
least their conspiracy should be found out, know how important it is to
bite their tongues, or, at least, to be as brief as possible.
This has implications for translation. Preserving the image would
have brought about the effect described by Venuti in the context of
explaining the meaning of Lewis’s “abusive fidelity”. It would have
directed attention “away from the conceptual signified to the play of
signifiers on which it depends” )1995, p.24(, an effect which both Husain
and Enani seem keen to avoid. Husain translates the excerpt as follows: . : بينهم أدير أن وبعد لمكانتي مالئما سمتا التخذت إذن مالفوليو
نظرة يعرفوا أن عليهم وأن قدري أعرف أني ألفهمهم معني ذات
أقدارهم.
76
Page 87
توبي بقريبي يدي بين يؤتي أن آمر ذلك بعد... العذاب : ياألدوات توبي سير
: : علي ألقاني قد و الحظ إن توبي، العم ابن يا له فأقول مالفوليو
أخيك ابنة. النحو هذا علي أحدثك أن الحق لي يتيح
! ! ماذا : ماذا توبي سير. : سكرك عن تقلع أن يجب مالفوليو
. الوقح : أيها عني اغرب توبي سير : خطتنا فابيان تفسد أو الصبر من شيئا (87ص. ) مهال
And Enani translates it as follows:
! : وبعد المكانة هذه في مزاجي علي يمليه ما أفعل وعندها مالفوليو
أتفحص أنوإنني مكانتي أعرف إنني لهم قائال حولي من وجوه متعاليا
أرجو... ! توبي قريبي استدعاء أطلب مكانتهم، يعرفوا أن
! ) له : ) األغالل و األصفاد جانبا توبي سير ... ! ! ) ( : اآلن أرجوك اسكت اسكت اسكت جانبا فابيان
" : من زوجتني قد األقدار دامت ما توبي، العم ابن يا وأقول مالفوليو
أخيك، بنت " الحديث في مصارحتك حق تمنحني –فإنها
) ماذا؟ : ) ماذا؟ جانبا توبي سير "! " : سكرك عن تكف أن البد مالفوليو
! ) حقير : ) يا اخرس جانبا توبي سير ) ( : جانبا خطتنا فابيان تفسد ال حتي اصبر . أرجوك
ص 2007 ) ،124 -125 ،53-75)
In the endnotes Enani justifies his domesticating decision as follows: Since this image has no poetic significance
I opted for the general meaning rather than
the literal meaning of it so that I could
77
Page 88
preserve the quick pace of the dialogue.
)ibid, p.247()1(
Thus, the traditional faithfulness to the original gives place to another
kind of faithfulness – namely, faithfulness to the illusion of reality which
the dramatist is supposed to be creating. Though Enani refers to the
aforementioned image lacking poetic significance as a reason why it
should not be preserved in translation, faithfulness to the illusion of
reality remains the ultimate goal even when the image does have poetic
significance, such as in the following example from The Merry Wives of
Windsor: Caius: By gar, me vill kill de priest, for he speak a jakanape
to Anne Page.
Host: Let him die. Sheathe thy impatience; throw cold
water on thy choler. ) II, iii , 72:75(
The image “sheathe thy impatience” is an original image whose
originality does serve a dramatic end. Comparing impatience to an
unsheathed sword is one of many images typical of the host, a merry man
fond of displaying his wit in bizarre images and expressions. Besides, the
image helps to reinforce the host’s cynical attitude towards the show of
bravery Dr Caius puts on, an attitude most obvious in the ridiculously
bombastic language and the reference to the oak tree )the symbol of
cowardice( he uses in reply to Caius’s question in the following excerpt: Caius: Vat be all you, one, two, tree, four, come for?
Host: To see thee fight, to see thee foin, to see thee traverse;
to see thee here, to see thee there; to see thee pass
thy punto, thy stock, thy reverse thy distance,
thy montant. Is he dead, my Ethiopian? Is he dead,
78
Page 89
my Francisco? Ha, bully? What says my Aesculapius?
my Galen? my heart of elder? Ha, is he dead, bully
stale? is he dead?
)II, ii , 20:26(
Despite the significance of the image Enani prefers to render it
domesticatingly, giving its general meaning instead of preserving it: : التوسط حاول فقد الكاهن، أقتل سوف إني أقسم كايوس
للقرد. بيدج آن اآلنسة عند
! : فأريدك اآلن أما فليمت الفندق تجزع صاحب تصب ألا أن بل ،( . غضبك علي البارد ص 2008الماء ،170 ،76-79)
and justifies his decision in the endnotes as follows: The original image is foreign to Arabic…
The Host always uses strange expressions
which are likely to lose their original quaintness
if translated literally. The implied comparison
of impatience to a sword is strange and therefore
likely to slow down the pace of the conversation
in translation, so I opted for the simple verb.
)2007, p.312( )2(
Enani is undoubtedly aware of the fact that the image tells us
something about the character of the host, but he is also aware that
rendering it in a way that preserves its originality would direct the target
reader/audience’s attention to the deviation from reality which the image
involves. Habib renders the image in a way that shows that his hierarchy
of priorities is different from Enani’s. In his rendering he gives
precedence to the originality of the image:أن: علي تجرأ فقد القس، هذا ألقتلن السيف هذا بحق كايوس
يتوسط
79
Page 90
." بيدج " آن السيدة عند لقرد : ذلك قبل لكن و فليمت، الفندق قرابك صاحب في أخفه و قلقك، ،أغمد
( . غضبك علي باردا ماء ص 1973وصب ،90)
Habib's rendering is sure to attract attention to itself and slow down
the pace of the conversation, especially that he insists on making sure
that the target reader/audience will understand what is meant here and so
adds the interpretive قرابك في which makes his rendering more وأخفه
reader-friendly but also more awkward and less natural. Enani succeeds
in avoiding awkwardness and maintaining faithfulness to the illusion of
reality by sacrificing the original image. Only does he give up his
domesticating approach when the likelihood that preserving the
originality of a certain image would have serious consequences )as far as
creating the illusion of reality is concerned( is minimal. A case in point is
his rendering of the image used by Rosalind in reply to Touchstone in the
following excerpt from As You Like It: Rosalind: Where learned you that oath, fool?
Touchstone: Of a certain knight that swore by his honour they were good
pancakes, and swore by his honour that the mustard was
naught. . Now I'll stand to it, the pancakes were naught,
and the mustard was good, and yet was not the knight
foresworn.
Celia: How prove you that, in the great heap of your knowledge?
Rosalind: Ay, marry, now unmuzzle your wisdom. )I, ii , 51:57(
The situation herein depicted is static, or, at least, it is not as dynamic
as the two situations from Twelfth Night and The Merry Wives of
Windsor. It is more of a display of wit on Touchstone's part which tempts
80
Page 91
Rosalind to join in. The originality of the image does not interrupt
anything here. Accordingly, Enani translates the excerpt as follows:مهرج؟: يا القسم ذاك تعلمت أين روزالند
: الفطائر إن بشرفه أقسم قد وكان معين، فارس من تتشستون
وحلف جيدة، . رديئة كانت الفطائر ولكن رديئة المسطردة إن بشرفه
والمسطردة. بيمينه يحنث لم الفارس إن أقول ذلك ومع جيدة،
: معارف؟ من لديك تراكم بما ذلك تثبت كيف سيليـــــا : ! روزالند حكمتك فم يكمم ما انزع بالله ص 2009(. نعم ،107،
61 – 68)
He comments on his decision to preserve the image in the endnotes,
pointing out that he chose to render this image as closely as possible
simply because of its originality consistent in comparing wisdom and
speech to dogs and barking respectively )2009, p.269(
The above argument establishes faithfulness to the illusion of reality
as the main motive behind domesticating original images in translation.
Images will usually be domesticated when they are likely to attract
attention to themselves if preserved. Still, however, exceptions
occasionally occur, highlighting the role of personal preferences in the
process of decision making. Personal preferences account for Abu Shadi's
exceptions, or his occasional domestication of images, such as in: Prospero: … )n(ow he was
The ivy which had hid my princely trunk,
And sucked my verdure out on't. ) I, i (
... : غطي بروسبيرو الذي اللبالب ذلك اآلن صار بحيث
جذع. نضرتي منه وامتص ص ) إمارتي المصدر، نفس
11)
81
Page 92
Abu Sahdi's decision to render "my princely trunk" as إمارتي not as( جذع
األميري cannot be justified in terms of his general approach to )جذعي
images. Abu Shadi generally adheres to the original even if awkwardness
is the result. The structure he chooses for his rendering of "our sea
sorrow" in the following example is the same as that which he avoids in
rendering "my princely trunk": Miranda: How came we ashore?
Prospero: By Providence divine
Some food we had and some fresh water that
A noble Neapolitan, Gonzalo
Out of his charity, who, being then appointed
Master of this design, did give us …
Miranda: …would I might
But ever see that man!
Prospero: Now I arise [resumes his mantle]
Sit still, and hear the last
Of our sea sorrow. (I, ii, 158:170)
: الشاطئ؟ بلغنا وكيف ميراندا : العذب الماء وبعض الغذاء بعض لدينا كان اإللهية بالقدرة بروسبيرو
اختير حينما علينا منه عطفا جنزالو، يدعي نابولي نبيل منالفعلة ... هذه لتنفيذ رئيسا
! : مرة الرجل ذلك رأيت لو بودي كم ميراندا ( : ظانة ميراندا تقوم حينما السحرية حلته يلبس انهض واآلن بروسبيرو
) انتهي أنه منهواسمعي هادئة .اجلسي البحرية أحزاننا ص 1930 )آخر ،
13)
Abu Shadi's utilisation of this noun-modifier structure in rendering
"our sea sorrow" makes it difficult to see why he shies away from
82
Page 93
rendering "my princely trunk" as األميري which is not more ,جذعي
awkward than البحرية In fact, awkwardness is not an obstacle to .أحزاننا
foreignisation as far as Abu Shadi is concerned. Abu Shadi usually opts
for foreignisation, even if unintelligibility is the consequence, such as in
the following example: Caliban: I say, by sorcery he got this isle;
From me he got it. If thy greatness will
Revenge it on him – for I know thou darest,
Thou shalt be lord of it, and I'll serve thee.
Stephano: How now shalt this be compassed? )III, ii , 52:58(
: أخذها إنه الجزيرة، هذه علي استولي بالسحر إنه أقول كليبان
مني.منه عظمتك ثأرت تجرؤون ...–فإذا أنكم أعلم فإني
ستكونون. . سأخدمكم و سيدها
ذلك؟: استيفانو يبيكر اآلن ص 1930 )وكيف ،56)
Abu Shadi's foreignisation is most obvious in the way he treats
"compassed", in which he insists on seeing an image instead of opting for
the simple meaning of the verb. He explains the meaning of the image
supposedly used here in a footnote in which he also implicitly justifies
his foreignising decision: “To be compassed” means “to encircle using
a compass”, which, in turn, means “ to be
accomplished”. Perhaps this ridiculously
bombastic expression being uttered by the
drunken Stephano, who fancies himself
a man of consequence, is the closest to
Shakespeare’s purpose, even if the addressee
is such a monster as Caliban, who is not likely
83
Page 94
to know what a compass is. )1930, p.56(
Abu Shadi comes up with يبيكرas a translation of "to be compassed", his
reason being that the magnification characterising the expression is closer
to Shakespeare's purpose since the pie-eyed Stephano is picturing himself
as a king. However, Abu Shadi's foreignising decisions are not always
justified by stylistic considerations. It is close adherence to the original
that is his ultimate goal, which makes إمارتي unjustifiable except in جذع
terms of personal preferences. Though it can mean "the trunk of my
princely state" it more strongly suggests another meaning – namely, "the
trunk of my principality", in which it is Milan, not its governor, that is
compared to a tree. The rendering is at odds with most of Abu Shadi's
decisions concerning images, where awkwardness is often tolerated as
long as faithfulness to the wording of the original is guaranteed.
In addition to faithfulness to the illusion of reality, conforming to the
ethical and religious expectations of the target reader/audience is an
important motive behind domesticating Shakespearean imagery in
translation. In the following example, from The Merry Wives of
Windsor, Enani opts for domestication in rendering the image used by
Mrs. Page, though his decision cannot be justified in the light of his
systematic tendency to avoid awkwardness:
Mrs. Ford: I would my husband would meet him in this shape.
He cannot abide the old woman of Brainford; He swears
she's a witch, forbade her my house and hath threatened
to beat her.
Mrs Page: Heaven guide him to thy husband's cudgel, and the
devil guide his cudgel afterward.
)IV, ii, 72: 77( ! : تقيم التي العجوز يطيق ال فهو الزي هذا في يراه زوجي ليت فورد زوجة
84
Page 95
! دخول من منعها كما ساحرة إنها يقسم وهو برنتفورد في. رآها لو بضربها وهدد منزلي
: بيدج ! زوجة الشيطان ليساعده و هراوته إلي يهديه أن الله أدعو
فيما . ذلك بعد بها ص 2008 )يفعل ،223 ،80-85)
Mrs. Page's reply to Mrs. Ford here owes much of its comic effect to the
idea that two traditional foes are invited to join hands in punishing the
lecherous Falstaff – namely, heaven and the devil. The parallel structures
and the repetition of "guide" are therefore significant in reinforcing the
idea and have to be preserved in translation if the aim is to preserve the
comic effect of Mrs. Page's reply. Enani's rendering obviously lacks the
compactness of the original. The addition of the interpretive بها يفعل فيما
slows down the pace of the conversation and renders Mrs. Page's reply a
little bit awkward, an effect which Enani is usually bent on avoiding.
However, the addition seems necessary because the ambiguity of the
pronoun in يساعده and the preference ofيساعد to يهدي as a translation
of "guide" would have had consequences more serious than awkwardness
had not بها يفعل بعد been added. The sentence فيما الشيطان وليساعده is likely to be understood as a reference to Falstaff rather than to ذلك
Ford, hence the addition of the interpretive phrase which rules out any
such likelihood.
Enani could have avoided both the ambiguity and the awkwardness
and conveyed the comic effect of the image to the full had he adhered to
the original. After all, بعد الهراوة الشيطان وليهد هراوته، إلي الله فليهده is less lengthy than the rendering he opts for. His decision to avoid ذلك
in rendering "and the devil guide his cudgel" is unlikely to be يهدي
motivated by a belief that يهدي can only have positive meanings. An
85
Page 96
expert in the Arabic tongue, Enani is undoubtedly aware that يهدي is not
necessarily associated with the righteous path but can also be used
negatively, the typical example being the following holy verses:مريد ) شيطان كل ويتبع علم بغير الله في يجادل من الناس ومن
3 )
السعير ) عذاب إلي ويهديه يضله فأنه تواله من أنه عليه (4كتب
) الحج ) Perhaps it is these verses that lead Enani to shy away from using
in this context. Devilish guidance can never be regarded as a good يهدي
thing, unlike punishing Falstaff for his lecherousness, which is actually a
form of resistance to the guidance of the devil. Consequently, Enani
sacrifices faithfulness to the original for the sake of faithfulness to the
target reader's ethical beliefs. He retains the reference to the devil, but the
preference of the verb يساعد shifts attention to the violence involved in
punishing Falstaff, helping the translator to avoid being judgemental as
much as possible. Habib is similarly keen on avoiding يهدي but he is also
keen on preserving the form of the original, hence his use of the verb
:يقود : ال فهو الزي، هذا في وهو زوجي يلقاه أن وددت فورد السيدة
يطيقعليها حرم وقد ساحرة، إنها ويقسم هذه برانفود عجوز
. ليضربنها رآها إن بأنه بيتي،وهدد دخول : بيدج وليقد السيدة زوجك، هراوة إلي السماء فلتقده
الهراوة الشيطان. ذلك (144،ص1973 )بعد
Thus, though fluency usually takes precedence it occasionally gives
way to accommodating the target reader/audience’s ethical and religious
86
Page 97
beliefs, a requirement which does not necessarily involve alterations and
additions that can encumber the flow of the dialogue. In the following
example, from The Merchant of Venice, the image permits of
interpretations that can help the translator to avoid any clashes with the
target reader/audience’s theological beliefs: Solanio: now by two-headed Janus,
Nature hath framed strange fellows in her time:
Some that will evermore peep through their eyes,
And laugh like parrots at a bagpiper;
And other of such vinegar aspèct,
That they'll not show their teeth in way of smile
Though Nestor swear the jest be laughable. )I, i, 50-56(
Buhayri translates these lines as follows:
ألوان : سوالنيو أصحاب وهم الناس بيانوس،أريسكران ميل تمايل أبدا ضاحك فبعض
هم وأحزان أخو الوجه عابس وبعضجذالن غير تراه نكت أطلقت ومهما
ص 1978 ) ،131)
Enani translates them as follows:الوجهين سوالنيو: ذي يانوس المسرح بإله أقسم
! الناس طباع بعض أغرب مادواما العينين مزموم ضحوك البعض
! الجهمة .. القرب موسيقي من الببغاوات مثل يضحكالطلعة مر عبوس والبعضنواجذ منه تبدو أو يبسم ال
( ! ) تضحك ) النكتة بأن نسطور أقسم لو ص 1988حتي ،46)
87
Page 98
In both renderings the reference to nature as a deity, or as a creative
force, is avoided while the reference to Janus, the Roman god of
beginnings, is preserved and even explained in notes. A possible
explanation of this would be that Jauns is a proper noun which makes it
easy for the reader to conceive it as a culture-specific reference and
consequently tolerate it. The reference to nature sounds more neutral in
terms of culture specificity and temporality. Therefore, it will always
constitute a violation of the target reader's theological beliefs and
expectations. Besides, the reference to Janus is undoubtedly more
significant here than the reference to nature as a creator. Janus is not
evoked here as the god of beginnings but as the god of the theatre whose
two masks represent the main dramatic genres – namely, tragedy and
comedy. Thus, the reference to Janus echoes, or rather underlines, the
idea of the different dispositions which Solanio discusses here. Aware of
this, as well as of the fact that Solanio’s speech is some sort of a
monologue and that explicitation will not be encumbering or interrupting
anything, Enani sees to it that the significance of choosing Janus in
particular be conveyed in translation. He adds the interpretive phrase إله and changes "two-headed" into "two-faced". These المسرح
domesticating procedures are sure to make the image more familiar to the
Arabic-speaking reader, who most probably has an idea about this
representation of the theatre though s/he may not necessarily be aware of
its Roman origin.
Though both translators tend to domesticate the reference to nature
Enani's rendering is closer to the original since, unlike Buhayri who is
mainly concerned with metrical considerations often at the expense of
faithfulness to the meaning of the original, Enani decides not to omit the
88
Page 99
reference altogether, resorting, instead, to an interpretation in which he
makes use of a modern sense of the word "nature"- namely, طباع. He
rids the reference of its theological connotations but also of its figurative
identity. This also applies to Enani’s treatment of the reference to nature
in the following example from King Richard III: Richard: Hath she forgot already that brave prince,
Edward, her lord, whom I, some three months since,
Stabb'd in my angry mood at Tewkesbury?
A sweeter and a lovelier gentleman,
Fram'd in the prodigality of Nature. )I, ii, 244-248(
The originality of the image in the last line stems from its accuracy in
depicting the way Richard thinks and feels. Though meant as a tribute to
the deceased Edward the image still reflects Richard's cynicism towards
nature, which is not strange, given that Richard blames nature for his
physical deformities which he strongly relates to his evil tendencies: Richard: But I, that am not shaped for sportive tricks,
Nor made to court an amorous looking- glass;
I, that am rudely stamp'd and want love's majesty
To strut before a wanton ambling nymph;
I, that am curtail'd of this fair proportion,
Cheated of feature by dissembling nature,
Deformed, unfinished, sent before my time
Into this breathing world, scarce half made up,
And that so lamely and unfashionable
That dogs bark at me as I halt by them;
Why, I, in this weak piping time of peace,
Have no delight to pass away the time,
Unless to spy my shadow in the sun
89
Page 100
And descant on mine own deformity:
And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover,
To entertain these fair well-spoken days,
I am determinéd to prove a villain
And hate the idle pleasures of these days.
)I, i, 14-31( )4(
In fact, there is more than cynicism towards nature in these lines.
There is a view of evil as a raison d’être paralleled by a disdain for “the
idle pleasures” of peaceful times, mainly flirting. This makes it unlikely
for Richard to admire the “work of nature” represented by the noble
Edward. Richard’s evil tendencies are often regarded as some sort of
artistic creation used by Richard not only in retaliation for nature’s
hostile attitude to him but also as a means of a rebirth that makes up for
his deformities. In the preface to his translation of the play Enani
expounds the psychoanalytical view of the character of Richard as
discussed in Day )2002, pp.93:152( and Jowett )2000, p.35(. According
to this view, Richard regards his own birth as a failure since it does not
furnish him with what would qualify him to love and be loved in return –
namely, physical beauty, hence his unhealthy relationship with women
)whether as a son or as a lover(. Therefore, Richard seeks to be reborn by
creating his own legend, a legend in which evil becomes an art, and
Richard himself a genius and a mastermind who pursues his devilish ends
with artistic mastery)Enani, 2007, pp. 44:45(. This accounts for the
bizarre attractiveness which has always given the character of Richard its
long-lived popularity on stage )ibid, p.39(. Richard's responsibility for
what he is and his adeptness in the aesthetics of evil makes it unlikely
that he may truly admire virtue as represented by Edward, hence the
90
Page 101
sarcastic touch in the image he uses in paying tribute to his foe. Despite
its significance, the image is domesticated in Enani’s translation, not only
because of the reference to nature as a creator but also because of the
sarcasm improper when referring to creation:: إدوارد؟! ريتشارد نسيت أتراها عجبا
مقداما سمحا وأميرا زوجا نسيته أتراهاأشهر ثالثة منذ غضب نوبة في حشاه طعنت كنتالرحبة الدنيا هذي تشهد لن تيوكسبري؟ موقعة في
خصاال وأرق طبعا أعذب رجال . ثرة شمائل الخلق في ص 2007 )أوتي ،105 ،243-
249)
In handling the reference to nature as a creative force Enani strikes a
compromise by using a passive structure instead of openly referring to
God, thus avoiding the reference to nature without ruling out that
possibility altogether. The reference to prodigality is replaced by a
reference to generosity so that no negative undertones should be sensed.
Again Enani avoids the offence by sacrificing the figurative identity
of the image. In the following example from The Merchant of Venice
Enani succeeds in avoiding the offence and preserving the identity of the
image at the same time. Enani seeks to create an equivalent effect in his
attempt to make the image "fit into" the target reader’s expectations: Morocco: The watery kingdom, whose ambitious head
Spits in the face of heaven, is no bar
To stop the foreign spirits, but they come
As o'er a brook to see fair Portia. )II, vii, 44:47(
91
Page 102
The image herein used in describing the watery kingdom reinforces
the bombast characteristic of the Prince of Morocco. It is particularly
consistent with his general rhetoric as it changes an ordinary natural
phenomenon into a battle between gods. Mahood comments that the
watery kingdom is "Neptune’s realm of the sea" )1989, p.100(. However,
it is not the reference to Greek mythology that makes the image too
offensive to preserve in translation without risks. After all, preserving the
reference to the watery kingdom does not necessarily suggest that it is
gods that are involved in the battle described. What is actually offensive
is the reference to "heaven", with its religious connotations common to
both English and Arabic. Spitting in the face of heaven is a kind of
blasphemy that would undoubtedly constitute a shock to the expectations
of the target reader were it preserved in translation. Both Buhayri and
Enani treat the image domesticatingly, but Enani obviously exerts some
effort to create an equivalent effect. Buhayri’s translation generally gives
precedence to metrical considerations at the expense of accuracy, the
result being omissions such as the following:: المغرب كثب أمير عن إليها جاءوا بورشيا الجميلة هذي
منتهب ) منها فالحسن نظـــــــرة منها ص 1978يبغون ،166)
The regularity of the metre cannot be said to be making up for the
loss of the artificiality that should have characterised Morocco’s style
since metrical regularity characterises the play as a whole. Enani is more
aware of the importance of the image. He translates the excerpt as
follows:المغرب : األمواج أمير مملكة وانظر
92
Page 103
! المزن وجه لتلطم األنواء في تعلو إذالدنيا بلدان من زوارك سفائن لكن
األنهار مثل تمخرها( ) بورشا ) لرؤية يأتون ص 1988إذ ،101)
Since “the watery kingdom” does not mean to the Arabic-speaking
reader what it may mean to the reader of the original Enani preserves it.
Doing away with “head”, together with the addition of the interpretive إذ األنواء في brings into focus the natural phenomenon rather than the ,تعلو
battle. However, the idea of the battle is not completely abandoned.
Translating “spit” as تلطم detracts from the power of the original since
is so commonly used to describe the movement of the waves that it تلطم
is no longer recognized as a live metaphor. However, rendering “heaven”
as " المزن brings this dead metaphor back to" "المزنrather than "وجه
life through the personification of the clouds. Thus, Enani succeeds in
avoiding the offensive reference, meanwhile making up for the loss of the
original image by rendering it as an image that may not be original but is
also not offensive. In the following example, also from The Merchant of
Venice, Enani mitigates the offence rather than avoids it: Portia: … I could teach you
How to choose right, but then I am foresworn,
So will I never be. So may you miss me;
But if you do, you will make me wish a sin,
That I had been foresworn. Beshrew your eyes!
They have oe'rlooked me and divided me:
One half of me is yours, the other half yours,
And so all yours. O these naughty times
Puts bar between the owners and their rights!
And so though yours, not yours. Prove it so,
Let Fortune go to hell for it, not I. )III, ii, 10:20(
93
Page 104
Mahood )1989, p.113( points out that “)b(eside meaning ‘lot,
destiny’, ‘Fortune’ is often conceived as the power that bestows that
destiny”. Enani )1988( comments on the image referring to the different
meanings of “Fortune” and agreeing with Mahood that it is the power
bestowing destiny that is meant here. However, his way of handling this
image can be considered an exception to his general approach in dealing
with images that constitute an offence to the target reader’s religious
beliefs. He translates the lines as follows:: القرعة بورشيا سر علمتك لو أتمني
الصائب الصندوق تختار حتىبقسمي ذاك إذ أحنث لكني
بالقسم أحنث أن ومحالأود فسوف أخطأت إن أما
! حنثت كنت أني لو! عينيك علي العار
علي السهم أطلقتشطرين كياني فشطرت
لك األول الشطرلك الثاني والشطر
حقك من أنا دمت ما لكن حقي من هو! لك أيضا الثاني فالشطر
! وحقوقه المالك بين الحائل الزمن هذا أقسي ما! بأيديك لست لكني لك فأنا
! .. لي فاغفر المحظور وقع إن أما ! العاتي القدر هذا ص 1988(والعن ،124)
Enani's insistence on accuracy also entails subjecting the image to
modifications that make it more in accordance with the idiom of Arabic.
His decision to render "go to hell" as فالعن well conveys the intended
94
Page 105
meaning since condemnation is no other than being doomed to burn in
hell for ever. Doing away with the image of going to hell seems
necessary as it results in the depersonification of fortune since القدر العنis a common idiomatic expression that is no longer regarded as a live
metaphor, and الجحيم إلي القدر gives another meaning which is فليذهب
originally specific to English but has come to be common to Arabic as
well through film subtitles. Thus, Enani’s rendering caters to the
linguistic expectations of the target reader rather than to his/her religious
expectations. The offence is only mitigated. Buhayri chooses to avoid the
offence at the expense of accuracy by interpreting "fortune" as الحظ: : لست لكنني سري، ت أفشيــ إذا يميني في اليوم أحنث بورشيا
أقبل! تعطل فاليميـــــــن م، اإلثـ لي حببت اآلن دفعتني ما وإذا
شطر شطرا،وأنت بت حدجتـانـي حيـن عيـنـيـك ويـح
مكملمستحب اليوم عندك عندي،وشطري المستحب شطرك
مفضليتدخل أمورنا في قائما سدا ينشئ الزمان أن غير
الحظ عمدا ،ليصبح خسئ القول أطيل أني غير ،
أطول الوقتص 1978 ) ،178-179)
********************
Apart from being an attempt to investigate the different motives
behind domesticating images the above argument can also help us to gain
insight into the strategies employed by the translators in domesticating
these images. In the light of it the domestication of imagery can be seen
as a decision concerning the way the figurativeness of a certain image
should be handled. Giving the general meaning of an image )such as in
95
Page 106
Enani’s rendering of "sheathe thy impatience", “nature hath framed
strange fellows in her time”, etc. ( involves doing away with the
figurativeness of the image in translation. Other strategies involve
handling the figurativeness of the image in a way that makes the outcome
more natural, or more in accordance with the idiom of the target
language, whether the figurativeness of the original be preserved or not.
Among the commonest of these is a strategy that has much to do with
Vinay and Darbelnet’s transposition )in Venuti, 2000, p.88(. It capitalises
on changing the parts of speech of words so that the outcome of the
translation process should retain a shade of figurativeness that is not
likely to attract the target reader’s/audience’s attention to itself, a strategy
that guarantees more conformity to the target language’s modes of
thinking and expression. A case in point is Enani’s treatment of the
description of money in the following lines from As You Like it : Adam: But do not so, I have five hundred crowns,
The thrifty hire I saved under your father,
Which I did store to be my foster-nurse
When service should in my old limbs lie lame.
)I, iii, 38:41(
Enani translates these lines as follows:- آدم : ! دينارات من مئات خمس ماال معي إن ذلك تفعل ال بل
الراحل والدك خدمة في أجري من أوفرها كنتالمال أدخر بذا .ليرعانيكنت بجسمي األطراف تكل حين
ص 2009 ) ،136-137 ،38-40)
While the meaning herein intended is universal the phrasing of it is
original. The personification of money imparts to the universal meaning a
flavour specific to Shakespeare. However, the image has no special
significance and is more than likely to result in an awkwardness that
96
Page 107
would slow down the pace of the conversation and shift the target
reader/audience’s attention from action to language. Accordingly, Enani
preserves the figurativeness of the image only conditionally. He seeks a
rendering that reflects a degree of figurativeness but which is not likely
to attract attention to itself. He translates “my foster-nurse”, a noun
phrase, as ليرعاني. Rendering the noun phrase as a whole sentence does
not completely obliterate the figurative identity of the image, but it can
be said to “dim” this identity, for while “foster-nurse” strongly suggests a
human agent the expression يرعاني permits of other possibilities. As an
image يرعاني is not as “salient” as “foster-nurse”. There is no doubt that
rendering foster nurse as, say, شيخوختي would have attracted راعي
more attention than Enani’s rendering. Similarly, Abu Shadi’s rendering
of Sebastiano’s description of sleep in the following example from The
Tempest is undoubtedly more salient than Ibrahim’s and Enani’s: Alonso: What, all so soon asleep! I wish mine eyes
Would with themselves shut my thoughts: I find
They are inclined to do so.
Sebastiano: Please you, sir
Do not omit the heavy offer of it:
It seldom visits sorrow; when it doth,
It is a comforter. )II, i, 191:196(
Abu Shadi seeks ultimate faithfulness to the wording of the original
in rendering the image, translating "comforter" as معز: ) ( : مدهوشا ! –ألونسو لو بودي نائمون هكذا سريعا جميعهم ماذا؟
بذاتيهما عيني أن ) ( . نازعتين أجدهما إني لحظة بعد أفكاري تغمضان
فعل إلي
97
Page 108
. ذلك ) ألونسو ) الملك أخيه إلي متقدما ال –سيباستيان سيدي، يا بإذنك
الثقيلة دعوته تغفليفعل وحينما الحزن، يزور معز فقلما ص 1930. ) فهو ،
33)
Rendering “comforter” as a noun retains for sleep the human identity
Shakespeare imparts to it. In the following renderings )by Ibrahim and
Enani respectively( the personification of sleep is not as strong as it is in
Abu Shadi’s version: ! ! ! افكاري: معها وتغمض تغمض عيني ليت ينام ألكل واعجبا ألنسو
. لذلك ميال بها أجد إني : قل إنه النعاس، إلي الميل هذا تقاوم أال سيدي يا أرجوك سبستيان
أنبه يحل وعندما الحزين، الرجل .يصيب لوعته من يخفف
ص 1961 ) ،84)
********************************
! : تتوليان، عيني ليت السرعة؟ بهذه الجميع نام عجبا يا ألونزو
وحدهما،. ذلك تريدان أنهما أحس الجفون،بل تحت أفكاري حبس
! أن : يندر إذ الجفون، تثاقل تتجاهل ال سيدي يا أرجوك سباسيتيان
يزورزاره فإن الحزين، أجفان وواساه النوم . أراحه
ص 2004 ) ،115 ،186 – 191)
Both لوعته من وواساه and يخفف are figurative in nature, but their أراحه
figurativeness does not prevent them from sounding linguistically
familiar to the Arabic-speaking reader, and, consequently, the likelihood
that the image may distract the target reader/audience is reduced to a
minimum through transposition, which allows the translators to strike a
98
Page 109
compromise between figurativeness and idiomaticity, or, in other words,
between faithfulness to the original author’s individuality and
faithfulness to the linguistic expectations of the target reader/audience.
Sometimes translators tend to “redirect” images so that human
actions attributed to the inanimate in the original should be re-attributed
to humans in translation. Here the translator is not seeking conformity to
the idiom of the target language; s/he is attempting to bring the image a
step closer to naturalness. This applies to the way Enani treats the
personification of “loss” and “envy” in the following example from
Twelfth Night: Duke: A baubling vessel was he captain of,
For shallow draught and bulk unprizable,
With which such scathful grapple did he make
With the most noble bottom of our fleet
That very envy and the tongue of loss
Cried fame and honour on him. )V, i, 50:55(
: القاع ذات المحتقرة سفينته ظهر علي الربان كان إذ أورسينو
الضحللدينا كالقزم تبدو وكانت
يده علي الفادحة خسارتنا رغم إنا حتيلجسارته حسد من ساورنا ما أو
. والشرف بالشهرة أجدره ما ص 2007 )قلنا ،193-194 52،-
57)
Enani reduces loss and envy to what they really are by attributing the act
of shouting to the duke and his men. Enani’s preference for “naturalness”
eliminates the figurative identity of the image, unlike Husain’s insistence
on the personification in his rendering of the same excerpt:
ضئيلة :أورسينو العمق قليلة بال، ذات غير لسفينة قبطانا كان
الحجم،
99
Page 110
شدة وأعظمها السفن أقوي علي شد البائسة السفينة وبهذهالثناء دامية إال الهزيمة ولسان نفسه الحسد يستطع لم
(148ص )عليها.
Redirecting the image enables Enani to create some sort of
unification by keeping the fighting parties in focus from the beginning of
Orsino’s speech to the end of it. His way of handling the description of
repentance in the following example from Much Ado about Nothing is
to the same effect: Beatrice: For hear me, Hero: wooing, wedding and repenting is
a Scotch jig, a measure and a cinquepace. The first
suit is hot and hasty like a scotch jig )and full as
fantastical(; the wedding, mannerly modest, as a
measure, full of state and ancientry; and then
comes Repentance and with his bad legs falls
into the cinquepace faster and faster, till he
sinks into his grave. )II, i, 63:69(
Though wooing, wedding and repentance are all personified in this
excerpt it is the personification of repentance that is most salient. “Hot”
“hasty” and “modest” )used for describing wooing and wedding
respectively( are adjectives that can be used with humans and non-
human entities all alike. Besides, “repentance” receives a special
treatment manifest not only in the capitaliastion but also in the fact that,
unlike “wooing” and “wedding”, it is not compared to a dance, but to a
dancer. Beatrice, who enjoys playing the role of the marriage hater,
depends for the comic effect of her remark on the foregrounding of
repentance, which is undesirable in a translation that seeks to satisfy the
100
Page 111
target reader/audience’s expectations about drama by keeping the action,
rather than the way the dramatist plays with language, in focus.
Therefore, Enani renders the excerpt as follows:
والزواج :بياتريس الخطبة مراحل أن هيرو يا تفهمي أن أريدك كما
والندم : الدوارة الرقصة هي مختلفة رقصات ثالث تشبه
األسكتلندية،الخطبة أما الخماسية، والرقصة العاقلة، المعتدلة والرقصة
فهيتدير مثلها ودوارة االسكتلندية، كالرقصة متعجلة، حارة
الرؤوس ! حافلة مهذبة معتدلة رقصة فهو الزواج وأما باألوهام
بالفخامةوبعدها التقاليد، تتخاذل ومراعاة حين الندم، يأتي
تقدر وال السيقانسرعتها تزداد التي الخماسية الرقصة علي إال
! القبر في السقوط حتيص 2009 ) ،102 ،63 – 71)
Hafez similarly redirects the image, translating Beatrice’s remark as
follows;أشبه بياتريس: الندامة، ثم القران، ثم الغزل أن هيرو يا واعلمي
ثالث، برقصاتالمتئدة والرقصة الدوامة، السريعة االسكتلندية الرقصة وهي
المتزنة، " عجلي " فحارة الخطبة وهي األولي فأما الخمس، والخطوات
كالرقصةوإن ةاالسكتلندي الثانية كالرقصة فمعتدلة القران خطوة وأما ،
بكل حفلتقديم، وحفاظ وحشمة فخفخة من شئت خطوة ما تأتي ثم
فتتخاذل الندامة
101
Page 112
الثالثة فيها الرقصة إلي وتمضيان الساقان، الرجل من
وتتحوالن، وشيكا . قبره في الرجل يتردي (80،ص1969 )حتي
In both translations repentance is reduced to a feeling attributed to the
partners or the dancers. However, Hafez seems more decisive in his
depersonification of repentance; قبره في الرجل يتردي makes it حتي
obvious that the dancers described are humans. Enani strikes a
compromise by choosing not to render the pronouns in “his bad legs” and
“his grave”. This omission of the pronouns makes it possible to regard
the legs and the grave as belonging either to the actual human dancers or
to repentance. Enani adds an endnote in which he explains the original
image as follows: In the original repentance is personified. It
is referred to as a human whose legs fail him
but he goes on speeding up so he falls eventually.)5(
)2009, p.234(
Again Enani’s decision to attribute the act of dancing to a human
agent allows the target reader/audience to focus on the partners by
keeping them in the spotlight till the end instead of shifting attention to
repentance.
Images based on comparing a human to an object or a non-human
entity are also occasionally changed in translation so that it is not the
human, but something belonging to him/her, that is compared to a non-
human entity. For example, in the following excerpt from The Merry
Wives of Windsor Pistol uses an original image to describe Slender: Falstaff: Pistol, did you pick Master Slender’s purse?
Slender: Ay, by these gloves, did he – or I would I might
never come in mine own great chamber again else…
102
Page 113
by these gloves.
Falstaff: Is this true, Pistol?
…
Pistol: Ha, thou mountain-foreigner! – Sir John and master mine,
I combat challenge of this latten bilbo.
Word of denial in thy labras here! )I, i, 134: 144(
The originality of “this latten bilbo” stems from the fact that while Pistol
could have insulted Slender by describing his sword as latten he goes
further describing Slender himself as a latten bilbo. What Pistol does here
is that he makes use of the context of dueling in making fun of Slender’s
thinness, meanwhile casting doubts on the possibility of his being the
winner of the proposed duel. The image is likely to attract attention to
itself if preserved in translation not only because of its originality but also
because describing a human as a sword is usually a tribute to this
human’s bravery in the battlefield as far as the culture of Arabic is
concerned )e.g. الوليد بن خالد المسلول الله The image departs .)سيف
from the linguistic and cultural expectations of the target reader/audience.
Accordingly, Enani prefers to remould the image so that it is Slender’s
sword that is latten: ! سلندر؟: السيد كيس سرقت هل بيستول فولسطاف
! ! : قاعتي إلي أعود أن وعيت ما وإال القفازين هذين بحق نعم سلندر! ...! القفازين بهذين قسما اليوم بعد الكبري
: بيستول؟ يا الحق هو هذا هل فولسطاف...
! : الجبال ابن يا أجنبي يا –بيستول
! جون سير سيدي ياالنزال في تحد الخشب هذا السيف لصاحب
103
Page 114
شفتيك ) من بكلمة قلته ما إذن ص 2008أنكر ،115 – 116، 140-151)
Enani’s rendering depends on a level of figurativeness lower than that on
which the original image depends, a level that permits of more
naturalness. After all, comparing an inanimate object to another is not as
strange as comparing a human to an inanimate object; having discussed
humanising metaphors, Leech )1969( explains that “)m(etaphors in the
reverse direction are less common, and have a flavour of singularity. ... It
is the difference between tenor and vehicle, rather than their similarity,
that comes to attention in these cases” )pp. 158:159(. However, Habib
adheres to the original level of figurativeness, rendering the excerpt as
follows:بيستول؟: يا سلندر السيد كيس نشلت هل فولستاف
: وعيت ما إال و فعلها، لقد القفازات هذه بحق أجل، بيستول! ... القفازات هذه بحق أخري مرة الفاخرة حجرتي إلي أعود
: بيستول؟ يا صدق أهذا فولستاف...
! : أحتكم أن أريد إني وموالي، جون سير الجبلي أيها لك واها بيستولالمبارزة الصفيح إلي من الكهام السيف هذا .ألتحدي
قلت ما أنكر( . شفتيك من بتمتمة (27 – 26،ص 1973ولو
Translating “latten” as الصفيح can only be justified in terms ofمن
personal preferences. In Habib’s rendering the image is more likely to
attract attention to itself not only because of the translator’s preservation
of the originality of the image but also because of the use of الكهام , a
word that can hardly be intelligible to the average reader/audience.
According to the ALA Dictionary: : كهام فهو كل، كهامة السيف كهم
104
Page 115
Enani’s decision to change the above image can be regarded as an
attempt to create an equivalent effect since the image is replaced by
another with a view to giving the target reader/audience “some sort” of
access to the original author’s modes of thinking and expression. This
also can be said about the strategy applied by Enani in handling the
image used by Beatrice for describing Don Pedro in the following
example from Much Ado about Nothing: Beatrice: God Lord, for alliance! Thus goes everyone to the
world but I, and I am sunburnt. I may sit in a corner
and cry “Heigh-ho for a husband!”
Don Pedro: Lady Beatrice, I will get you one. … Will you have
me, lady?
Beatrice: No, my lord, unless I might have another for working
days: your grace is too costly to wear everyday. )II, i, 289:299(
Enani renders this as follows: ! الدنيا: هذه في من كل تزوج لقد القرابة رابطة أروع ما بياتريس
! ركن في أقبع أن لي الشمس لوحتها التي أنا أنا، عداي ما" يأتيني؟ " زوج من أما وأهتف
... ! : يا تقبلينني هل بزوج آتيك سوف بياتريس ليدي يا بيدرو دون
آنسة؟! ! : األحد يوم لغير آخر زوج لدي كان إذا إال موالي يا ال بياتريس
فمعاليك . يوم كل يلبس أن من أغلي ص 2009)ثوب ،113 – 114،
292-302)
Enani makes explicit what Shakespeare prefers to keep implicit.
Beatrice implicitly compares Don Pedro to an expensive dress, and the
comic effect of her remark depends on the shock value of “too costly to
wear” being encountered all of a sudden. Enani’s decision to add ثوب
105
Page 116
cannot be regarded as explicitation since the context makes it clear that
Beatrice is comparing Don Pedro to a dress here. It may be justified in
terms of the translator’s own concept of propriety. The addition of ثوب mitigates the shock value of the image and makes the image less in
contrast with the remarkably polite “your grace”. In Hafez’s version what
is implicit remains implicit. His rendering obviously preserves the shock
value of the original: ... ! خالي: ما الدنيا يدخل إنسان أفكل زوج من أال رب، بياتريس
ركن في أجلس أن إال لي فليس الشمس لوحتني لقد
واها، أغني! زوج من أال
... ! : يا ترتضينني هل زوجا عندي لك إن بياتريس سيدتي يا بيدرو دون
سيدتي؟ : العمل، أليام آخر بعل لي يكن لم ما سيدي يا كال ألنبياتريس
أن من أغلي قداستك. يوم كل في (97،ص 1969 )تلبس
In fact, making the implicit explicit is one of the commonest
strategies in rendering images, and though making things clearer can be
regarded as one of the most important motives behind it sometimes it
only has to do with personal preferences, or with the translator’s own
application of the minimax principle, such as in the following example
from King Henry VIII in which Enani chooses to domesticate the image
used by Wolsey in describing his wild, dangerous adventure in the sea of
glory: Wolsey: … I have ventured
Like little wanton boys that swim on bladders,
This many summers in a sea of glory,
But far beyond my depth; my high blown pride
At length broke under me and now has left me,
106
Page 117
Weary and old with service, to the mercy
Of a rude stream, that must for ever hide me. )III, ii,421:427(
: من بعوامات الالهين الصبية مثل سابحا البحر نزلت لقد وولزي
القربابتعدت حتي صيف بعد من صيفا المجد بحر في وظللت المنفوخة
! طاقتي من أعمق لمنطقة ووصلت األمان شاطئ وهناعن
انفجرتالمنتفخة كبريائي طول عوامة من منهكا القوي، خائر وتركتني
رحم وتحت األمر ةالخدمة، آخر يبتلعني أن البد متالطم هائج بحر( . األبد 191،ص1997إلي 358،- 364)
In the original Wolsey implicitly compares his pride to a bladder. In the
translation Enani chooses to make the implicit explicit by translating “my
high blown pride” as المنتفخة كبريائي كبريائي instead of as عوامة Again his decision cannot be considered as an attempt to clarify .المنتفخ
the image which is already clear, but it is rather an attempt to bring the
image into line with the target reader/audience’s linguistic expectations.
In Arabic, notably Egyptian Arabic, it is the proud person, not his/her
pride, that is usually described as “blown” and as “being about to
explode”. Thus, though the idea herein expressed by Wolsey is not totally
unfamiliar to the Arabic-speaking reader the wording of it is likely to
attract too much attention to itself if preserved in translation.
Accordingly, Enani decides to make the implicit reference explicit so as
to bring about more unification. His rendering makes it more easy for the
target reader/audience to conceive the image as part of the extended
metaphor on which the monologue is based without shifting his/her
attention to what makes this image different from the way s/he usually
expresses his/her ideas.
107
Page 118
In the above examples making the implicit explicit is an option. In the
following example, also from King Henry VIII, Enani’s resorting to this
strategy seems obligatory: Norfolk: He is discontented.
Suffolk: May be he hears the king
Does whet his anger to him. )III, ii, 121:123(
. : ساخط مستاء إنه نورفوك ! : عليه غضبه سكين يشحذ الملك أن سمع ربما سافوك
(92-91، 174،ص1997 )
Enani decides to make the reference to the knife explicit. He seems
obliged to resort to this strategy here since يشحذ الملك أن سمع ربماعليه is likely to cause misunderstanding. In addition to meaning غضبه
“to whet”,شحذ has another meaning – namely, “to beg for money”
**************************
An interesting strategy that has only been detected once in the data
examined is that followed by Enani in rendering the image used by Iago
for describing jealousy in the following example from Othello: Iago: O beware, my lord, of jealousy!
It is the green-eyed monster, which doth mock
The meat it feeds on. )III, iii, 166-168(
! : الغيرة من حذار موالي شائه ياجو مخلوق ذلك! كبده ينهش ممن يسخر لكن خضر بعيون يتحلي
ص 2005 ) ،181 ،169 – 170)
Associating jealousy with greenness totally belongs to the idiom of
English, which, like the idiom of any other language, can hardly be
interpreted in the light of our knowledge of the world. It may not have
constituted a translation problem had not Shakespeare decided to
108
Page 119
compare jealousy to a monster whose eyes are green. Green-eyedness is
usually associated with beauty, especially in our culture. Accordingly, the
target reader would not be able to understand why it should be associated
with such an abominable trait as jealousy, and the image would attract
much attention to itself had it been rendered as it is. Enani does not try to
assign a logical justification to the arbitrary relation between jealousy and
greenness. He rather seems to be trying to attain a minimum of
domestication by making sure that the rendering will not contradict the
target reader’s cultural expectations. Enani adds ولكن which preserves
for green-eyedness its desirability and for jealousy its undesirability. His
rendering presents green-eyedness as being in stark contrast with the
ugliness, both physical and spiritual, of the creature herein described.
Enani cannot be said to be completely successful in imparting sense to
the arbitrary; he does not account for associating jealousy with green-
eyedness but, at least, he does succeed in mitigating the arbitrariness on
which the image is based by shifting the attention to the contrast between
a desirable physical quality and a horrid nature. While he rarely attempts
mitigating the arbitrariness of the idiomatic Enani tends to mitigate the
originality of certain images by following a strategy that seems specific
to him –namely, the use of the interpretive أي ) or “that is”( to connect
the tenor and the vehicle with each other, such as in the following
examples: Buckingham: Now this follows, …
Which, as I take it, is a kind of puppy
To the old dam, treason.
)King Henry VIII, I, i, 238:240(
: أنجبته جروا أعتبره حادث وقع ذلك وبعد العجوز بكنجهام –الكلبة
109
Page 120
الخيانة ص 1997. )أي ،91 ،174-175)
********************************
Second Gentleman: After all this, how did he bear himself?
First Gentleman: When he was brought again to the bar; to hear
His knell rung, his judgement, he was stirr’d
With such an agony, he sweat extremely.
)King Henry VIII, II, i, 39:42(
: كله؟ ذاك بعد حاله كانت وماذا الثاني : ليسمع المحكمة إلي به الحراس عاد عندما نعيه، األول ناقوس
عليه الصادر الحكم المبرح أي األلم آثار عليه بدت ،( . العرق منه تصبب لقد (32-30، 120،ص 1997حتي
********************************
Ford: If I have horns to make one mad, let the proverb
go with me – I’ll be horn mad.
)The Merry Wives of Windsor, III, v,134;136(
: بالجنون، المرء لوصف يكفيان قرنين اكتسبت فإذا فسوف فورد
علي ينطبقالسائر، القرون المثل أصحاب هياج سأهيج أنني ،2008! )أي
( 142-140، 211ص
This strategy enables Enani to preserve the image without sounding
unnatural. The use of أي accentuates the “make-believe” nature of the
image, reminding the reader/audience that it is merely an image.
Though the strategy is most probably utilised with domesticating
intentions the effect of utilising it cannot be described as domestication.
The use of أي makes it rather difficult to regard the quotations as parts of
ordinary conversations; rarely do speakers bother to make the
relationship between the tenor and the vehicle that clear, and, actually,
they do not have to, or the image should not have been used in the first
110
Page 121
place. In each of these cases the speaker seems to be directly addressing
the target reader/audience.
Maintaining fluency in rendering the above images would have
required more alterations than the addition of أي. For instance, the first
image could have been rendered as جروا أعتبره حادث وقع ذلك وبعدالعجوز الكلبة تلك الخيانة، where inverting the vehicle and the tenor أنجبته
makes the image more natural, and the addition of تلكmakes it easy to
avoid the awkwardness of الخيانة العجوز، A more domesticated .الكلبة
version of the second image would have depended on the preservation of
either the tenor or the vehicle, and a more domesticated version of the
third image is Habib’s:
فلينطبق : فورد وداعتي، يهيج ما القرون من رأسي فوق نبت وإذا
علي : التيس المثل قرون تهيج كما قرونه هاجت ص 1973. )لقد ،
134)
Enani’s utilisation of أيis attempted with a view to avoiding
ambiguity. In other words, it is meant as part of his domesticating
approach. Nevertheless, the effect of using it cannot be described as
domestication, for the use of أي in such a context is a departure from
what is customary and what is natural, a departure that brings the
translator, as an individual with a distinct style, into focus, or, to use
Venuti’s words, that makes the translator visible. Therefore, a distinction
has always to be made between the process and the product. A
domesticating strategy does not necessarily have a domesticating effect.
The effect of Enani’s domesticating decision in the following example
from As You Like It is similar to that of his utilisation of أي: Orlando: Thus must I from the smoke into the smother,
111
Page 122
From tyrant Duke unto a tyrant brother. )I, ii, 234:244(
: أمضي أن البد أهكذا للنار أورالندو الرمضاء ؟من ! جبار أخا طالبا دوق جبروت من أفر
ص 2009 ) ،119 ،276-277)
Replacing the English idiomatic expression by an Arabic idiomatic
expression to the same effect is undoubtedly a time-saving strategy )and
a space-saving strategy, since trying to explain what smother is would
have resulted in a lengthy rendering(. However, the effect of this
domesticating decision is not all domestication simply because the
Arabic expression still evokes, at least to some extent, the culture which
generated it – namely, the culture of Archaic Arabic, which no longer
exists to the contemporary speaker of Arabic and could have never
occured to Orlando, an Englishman. Putting such a highly culture-
specific image in Orlando’s mouth temporarily shatters the illusion of
reality, reminding one of experimental productions of Shakespearean
plays where the universality of the experience is stressed. This also
applies to Enani’s treatment of the image used by the queen in the
following example from King Henry VIII: The Queen: ... If your business
Seek me out, and that way I am wife in
Out with it boldly; truth loves open dealing.
)III, i, 43:45(
: فأفصحا وشرفي بأخالقي يتعلق أجله من جئتما ما كان فإذا الملكةخوف دون الصراحة. عنه تحب ،ص 1997. )فالحقيقة
159 ،38-39)
Enani’s adherence to the original in rendering “truth loves open dealing”
is not supposed to shift attention from content to form since it does not
result in an expression that the target reader/audience would regard as
112
Page 123
unintelligible or unfamiliar, but it also has a foreignising effect. Though
it belongs to the linguistic level Enani designates for his translations –
namely, MSA, the rendering echoes such Egyptian-Arabic expressions as
الخفية يحب اللمة , الرزق يحب رمضان , etc., so commonly used that they
ceased to be regarded as live metaphors. The Egyptian-Arabic undertones
makes the rendering at odds with the context in which it occurs shattering
the illusion of reality at least for a while. Hearing such an expression
from a queen at the climax of her plight is a violation of the Aristotelian
concept of tragedy. Even if one managed to completely separate
himself/herself from Egyptian Arabic in “processing” the rendering s/he
would have to deal with an image original enough to attract attention to
itself after all.
Thus, domestication and foreignisation should not be exclusively
associated with certain procedures and strategies but with the effects of
using these procedures and strategies on the target reader/ audience. It is
not always easy to be sure about the consequences of opting for this
strategy or that in handling an original image since neither the translator
nor the target reader can totally separate himself/herself from the
influences of the different levels of his/her native language, which are
constantly interacting with one another. This interaction, together with
the translator’s own views and preferences, complicates the process of
decision making, which again makes it impossible to judge a certain
translation, as a whole, as either domesticating or foreignising.
113
Page 124
Chapter (2) Notes
)1( Enani’s actual words are:
... " " : فضلت قد و خطتنا عضالت أوتار تقطع الحرفي المعنيليست الصورة ألن بالمقصود فجئت للحوار السريع اإليقاع هنا
( . المصدر،ص نفس شعرية داللة (247ذات
)2( Enani’s words are the following:
وهي العربية علي غريبة صورة األصل sheathe thy impatienceفي
" بتعابير " يأتي الفندق وصاحب ، غمده في المسلول جزعك ضع أيالطرافة هذه تفقد ولكنها اإلنجليزية في طريفة تكون قد عجيبة
إيقاع ويثقل غريب بالسيف للجزع المضمر فالتشبيه الترجمة، في ( . المصدر،ص نفس البسيط بالفعل جئت مبرر،ولذلك دون بالعربية (312الحديث
)3( What Abu Shadi actually says is the following:
ويحقق يحدد أي بالبيكار يحاط to be بمعني
accomplished سكر يمليه الذي الفخم الهزلي التعبير هذا ولعل ،كان شكسبير،وإن غرض إلي أقرب والعظمة الملك المتوهم استيفانو. البيكار هو ما يفهم ال كليبان مثل متوحش إلي موجها الخطاب
) المصدر )نفس)4( Following are the translation of the English lines by Enani:
: الحب، ألالعيب يصلح من صورة في أخلق لم لكني ريتشاردحبيبة، مرآة في بصورته عينيه يمتع أن يقدر أو
الحب، جالل مسحات إلي أفتقر دميما الله خلقني بل
114
Page 125
! تتهادي فاتنة لعوب عين في أتباهي حتيالفطرة الخادعة –حرمتني الوجه –تلك جمال
الخالبة، البدن أعضاء وتناسقشائه، بوجه األحياء دنيا إلي فخرجت
! أواني قبل الخلقة منقوصتنبحني أن خلقي ودمامة بعرجي بلغ بل
! عرجي لمحت إذا الطرقات كالب بعضالسلم زمن في مسرات أجد ال –ولذلك
المزمار وألحان الضعف زمن –في
الشمس في ظلي أتأمل أن إال! اآلن الشائهة خلقتي وأبكي
الحب علي الموهبة حرمت دمت ما وإذنالعذبة األلفاظ ذي الحالي العصر بمسرات أتمتع كيما
الشر علي النفس وطنت فلقد! األيام لهذي العاطلة المتع ومعاداة
ص 2007 ) ،82 ،14-30)
)5( The original reads as follows:
هو فكأنما األشخاص، معاملة األصل في الندم يعامل. فيسقط يسرع ذلك ومع ساقاه تتخاذل شخص
ص 2009 ) ،234)
115
Page 127
Chapter (3)
Domestication Vs. Foreignisation in Handling Syntax
Handling the syntax of Shakespeare’s plays would undoubtedly lead
the translators in different ways according to the approaches they adopt.
A translator who adopts a domesticating approach would see to it that the
syntactic oddities be ironed out in translation so that the end product of
the translation process is concordant with other literary texts genuinely
written in the target language. A translator who adopts a foreignising
approach would employ whatever strategies likely to guarantee a reading
experience which would challenge the target reader’s expectations about
how texts should be written. Therefore, in a domestication translation the
translator would opt for the syntactic choices likely to help the target
reader to recognize the target text as part of his/her own language and
culture, while a foreignising translation would display a utilisation of the
syntactic possibilities likely to produce more marked modes of
expression as far as the target language is concerned.
Domestication and Foreignisation in handling Shakespeare’s syntax
are best represented by the translations of Enani and Jabra respectively.
Not only does Enani usually try to refer the target reader back to the
structures commonly used in Arabic but he is also keen on resolving
syntactic complexities so that the target reader’s attention should always
be focused on the content rather than on the form. Jabra, on the contrary,
adheres to the syntactic oddities and complexities of the original, and
even goes further by creating his own syntactic oddities and complexities
which can be regarded as part of his foreignising style. A useful starting
point would be the following speech from Hamlet: King: And, England, if my love thou hold’st at aught –
117
Page 128
As my great power thereof may give thee sense,
Since yet thy cicatrice looks raw and red
After the Danish sword, and thy free awe
Pays homage to us – thou mayst not coldly set
Our sovereign process, which imports at full,
By letters conjuring to that effect,
The present death of Hamlet. Do it, England.
)IV, iii, 57:64(
In this speech Shakespeare postpones the second part of the
conditional. The speech primarily consists of the conditional “if my love
thou hold’st at aught, thou mayst not coldly set/ Our sovereign process”
but the two parts of the conditional are separated by means of three
subordinate clauses giving details of the relationship between the king of
Denmark and that of England. As this structure would require more effort
from the target reader to be processed and make it more difficult for
him/her to follow “what” is being said rather than “how” it is being said
Enani decides to reunite the two parts of the conditional. Enani postpones
the three subordinate clauses, translating the speech as follows: ! لودي: حافظا تزال ال كنت إن انجلترا مليك ويا الملك
! قوتي تكون بأن أرجو برسائلي أوضحته الذي األمر تهمل ال! للصواب يهديك الذي دليلك
دامية تزال ال الدانمرك سيف ندوب ! طائعا تزال وال قدمتها التي والجزية جسدك في تندمل لم
كما ! العليا بأوامري تستهن ال بقلبك رهبتنا دليل! : يصل حالما هاملت بقتل بادر برسائلي أوضحتها
( . ص أوامري نفذ انجلترا مليك (68 : 61، ٢٦٠- ٢٥٩فيا
118
Page 129
This entails that the three subordinate clauses be changed into
independent sentences. Accordingly, Enani translates “as” in “)A(s my
great power thereof may give thee sense,” as أرجوand overlooks “since”
with which the second )and the third( subordinate clause begins
altogether. Jabra expectedly adheres to the original structure of the
speech which he renders as follows:محبتي: تقدر كنت إن إنكلترا، سيد يا وأنت –الملك
بها أعلمتك قد الساحقة قوتي –ولعل
أليمة حمراء بعد جروحك ندب كانت ولماالحر وخوفك الدانمركية، سيوفنا ضربات من
تقلل أال فعليك بالوالء، لنا يديناآلن تنص التي وهي اآلمرة، سلطتنا شأن من
بذلك، توصيك بكتب ( . . ص اقتله الحال في هاملت مقتل (155علي
It is noticeable that Jabra changes the first subordinate clause into a
sentence by interpreting “as” as لعل. Generally, however, his rendering
reflects strict adherence to the structure of the original which makes it
rather difficult for the reader to devote his/her undivided attention to the
content of the speech.
In the above example Enani reproduces the speech as such so that it
should be as reader-friendly as possible. In the following example, also
from Hamlet, he resorts to a similar strategy with a view to maintaining
the illusion of reality: Gentleman: Save yourself, my lord!
The ocean, overpeering of his list,
Eats not the flats with more impetuous haste
Than young Laertes, in a riotous head,
O’erbears your officers.
)IV, v, 94: 98(
119
Page 130
The speech is obviously informative, and the information which is
supposed to be delivered by the gentleman is of an urgent nature.
However, Shakespeare chooses to give it in a way which makes it
difficult for the reader/audience to think of the situation he depicts as a
real-life situation. Shakespeare postpones the important piece of
information, beginning the speech with an image in which he compares
the rage of Laertes to that of the sea. This gives one the impression that
the speaker is at ease, which is undoubtedly at odds with the nature of the
information delivered, accentuated by “ )S(ave yourself, my lord!”. It is
unlikely that Shakespeare has chosen to structure the speech as such so as
to draw attention to the make-believe nature of the text; as a dramatist,
Shakespeare is generally keen on maintaining the illusion of reality.
Rather, it seems that this is one of the instances where Shakespeare the
dramatist momentarily gives way to Shakespeare the poet. Aware of this,
Enani decides to render the speech so that the illusion of reality should be
maintained in translation though not maintained in the original: ! موالي: يا بنفسك انج الرسول
ثائر مندفع فريق رأس علي الشاب اليرتيس هذامما بأسرع موالي يا رجالك يكتسح
. المنبسطة اليابسة شطآن الهائج البحر يلتهم(100- 98، 270ص )
Enani postpones the image so that the important piece of news should
be delivered first, while Jabra commits himself to the original structure of
the speech as follows: ! موالي: يا بنفسك انج الرسول
حدوده يتجاوز إذ المتالطم البحر إنالتي الجامحة بالسرعة الخفيضة الشطآن يلتهم ال
120
Page 131
. لرتيس الفتي ضباطك علي بها سيطر(164ص )
Jabra follows Shakespeare in beginning with the image and
postponing the information of Laertes’s arrival. He even goes further,
choosing to invert the last sentence of the speech in a way that is more
than likely to accentuate the impression that the speech is part of a
literary work.
It is noteworthy that the translator who adopts a domesticating
approach is likely to change his/her strategy according to the nature of
the speech s/he is translating. In the following example, from Othello,
Enani adheres to the original structure of the speech in handling it: Iago: ‘ She that was ever fair, and never proud,
Had tongue at will, and yet was never loud;
Never lacked gold, and yet went never gay;
Fled from her wish, and yet said “Now I may”;
She that being angered, her revenge being nigh,
Bade her wrong stay, and her displeasure fly;
She that in wisdom never was so frail
To change the cod’s head for the salmon’s tail;
She that could think, and never disclose her mind;
See suitors following and not look behind:
She was a wight, if ever such wights were –”
…
“To suckle fools and chronicle small beer.”
)II, I, 144: 156(
The structure of Iago’s speech has significance. Iago depends for the
humourous effect of his speech on shocking the reader/audience by
121
Page 132
classifying the woman whose merits he deliberates upon as a woman
after all in a bathos which is in line with his cynical attitude towards
women. Accordingly, Enani decides to preserve the structure of the
original in translation so that the shock value of the speech is conveyed in
the translation. In other words, Enani re-defines his priorities so that
achieving the equivalent effect takes precedence over guaranteeing a
smooth reading experience. He translates the speech as follows:تعال : أو كبر دون جماال تزهو التي إن ياجو
بانفعال اصطخاب دون لقولها الزمام ترخيوبالدمقس بالحرير تفاخر وال الوفير الذهب تعدم ال
نفسي حق من يكن إن حتي وتقول رغباتها من تفر والثائرة ثأر آن و المسيء وأدركت غضبت إذا أما
المقدرة عند بالعفو وبادرت الزوال لغضبتها قدرتبالسفاسف تبالي وال األمور كل في الحكمة تظهر من
الزعانف أو الساقطات بالذيول شيء رأس تبدل ال بلفكرها مالمح تبدي وال شاءت إن األفكار تتكتم التي تلك
طرفها إليهم تلقي أن دون خطاها يقفو من الخطاب من تري وسوي تكون فلن المحال وهو مثلها رأينا أن تصادف –فإذا
...
! المنزل دفاتر ومشرفات األغبياء مرضعات من(160 – 146، 134ص )
Enani follows Shakespeare in postponing the shocking declaration till
the end of the speech. He even follows the original in avoiding using the
conjunction “و” which could have made the relationship between the first
line on the one hand and the rest of the speech on the other hand clearer
had Enani used it. The result is that in both the original and the
translation the first and the second lines are likely to be regarded as one
sentence for a while. Enai’s decision not to use و here can be justified in
the light of “the minimax principle” in which the translator opts for the
122
Page 133
solution which guarantees a maximum of effect with a minimum of time
and effort )Lévy 1967(. Deciding to avoid using و here may have a
negative effect on the illusion of reality since it is a departure from the
way people speak in the target language, but it helps Enani to maintain
the regularity of the metre he chooses for his rendering of the speech,
which is important since the original speech is regular.
Jabra renders the speech as follows:الخيالء: ترفض لكنها دوما حسناء كانت من ياغو
صوتها ترفع ال لكنها إرادتها طوع لسانهاتتبهرج، ال لكنها يوما الذهب يعوزها ال
أردت، لو بوسعي تقول لكنها رغبتها عن تحجمانتقامها من دنت و غضبت إذا التي تلك
سخطها عنها صرفت و لنفسها أذاها أبقتيوما حكمتها وهنت ما التي تلك
العفن بالرأس الطازج الذيل لتستبدلذهنها، في عما تكشف ال و التفكير تستطيع التي تلك
خلفها، تنظر ال و أثرها في الخطاب تريمثلها امرأة ثمة كان إن امرأة، –فإنها
...
! البلهاء إال تـرضع وال بالتوافه تنهمك(160 – 149، 497ص )
Jabra obviously preserves the original structure which is expected in the
light of his foreignising approach. Again in the following example, from
Othello, both he and Enani adhere to the structure of the original despite
their different motives and approaches: Cassio: Tempests themselves, high seas and howling winds,
The guttered rocks and congregated sands,
Traitors ensteeped to enclog the guiltless keel,
As having sense of beauty, do omit
123
Page 134
Their mortal natures, letting go safely by
The divine Desdemona. )II, I, 68: 73(
In this speech Cassio deliberates on the mercilessness of the forces of
nature only to stress the heavenly nature of Desdemona’s beauty which,
according to him, has the ability to tame the fierce. The structure of
Cassio’s speech is significant; the speech depends for its effect on
stressing the fierceness of the natural forces herein described so that
Desdemona’s triumph over them should be both unexpected and decisive.
The speech establishes Desdemona’s angelic beauty as having
extraordinary power far greater than that of the dangers of the sea. Enani
and Jabra respectively translate the speech as follows:الثائرة: والبحار بل نفسها العواصف إن كاسيو
المسننة صخوره في الريح تلك عواء والبريئة للمراكب الخائنات الخافيات الرمال كثبان وكذاك
) دزدمونة ) طلعة جمال بأن شعرت فكأنما طبعها جميعا تركت ( ! ص عناني، تمضي فتركنها علوية قوة (72-67، 129ذو
**************************
: العاوية والرياح المتالطمة، البحار بل نفسها، فالعواصف كاسيوالمتجمعة والرمال المتآكلة الصخور
البريء المركب تغل خائنات من البحر في ما كل وتتخلي بالجمال، لحسها
اإللهية دزديمونة وتدع القاتلة، طبائعها عن ( . ص جبرا، بأمان بها (73-67، 493تمر
Jabra obviously commits himself to the structure of the original. He
even translates the second line as literally as possible, shying away from
beginning with the conjunction “و” which would have been more
acceptable as far as Arabic is concerned. Enani also commits himself to
124
Page 135
the original structure of Cassio’s speech, beginning by enumerating the
dangers of the sea only to move to describing the soothing effect of
Desdemona’s beauty on them. By so doing he succeeds in achieving the
equivalent effect since in both the original and the translation
Desdemona’s triumph is denoted by the speech being concluded by her
arrival, safe and sound, despite all the dangers described by Cassio.
Thus, the process of re-defining priorities in the light of the nature of
the speech in hand, a process in which translators are engaged all the
time, can lead the translators in similar ways though their declared
approaches may be different. Generally, however, the two approaches
would be distinguished from each other on the basis of their attitude to
the illusion of reality, notably in the work of Enani and Jabra. This can be
noticed in their different attitudes to the inversion to which Shakespeare
occasionally resorts. Inversion imparts to the style an elevation which a
translator such as Enani would regard as undesirable, while a translator
such as Jabra would treat as a feature of the original which should be
preserved and conveyed in translation. Following are examples of Jabra’s
inversion, each of which being followed by the renderings of Enani and
Jabra respectively:)1( Queen: [scattering flowers] Sweets to the sweet. Farewell!
I hoped thou should’st have been my Hamlet’s wife;
I thought thy bride-bed to have decked, sweet maid,
)Hamlet, V, i, 24:226(
! ! :) ووداعا ) الحلوة إلي الحلو الزهر الزهور تنثر وهي الملكةهاملت ولدي زوجة تمسي أن أمنيتي كانت
أجمل يا بزهري العرس فراش سأزين بأني أظن كنت
عذراء
125
Page 136
( ! ص عناني، القبر فوق أنثره أن (239- 236، 306-305ال
:) أوفيليا ) نعش علي الزهور تنثر وهي الملكة. . وداعا للشذي الشذا
هاملت، البني زوجة تصبحي أن أملتسأزين عرسك فراش أني أحلي وظننت يا ،
العذاري ( . ص جبرا، الزهور أنثر قبرك علي (192ال
************************ )2( Hamlet: But I can very sorry good Horatio,
That to Laertes I forgot myself.
)Hamlet, V, ii, 76:77(
: الصديق أيها الشديد باألسى أحس لكنني هاملتطوري عن خرجت ألنني
( ! ص عناني، اليرتيس لقاء (77-75، 314يوم
: هوراشيو، عزيزي يا األسف، شديد أنني بيد هاملتنفسي نسيت لرتيس مع أنني ص. ) علي (199جبرا،
************************)3( Iago: We cannot all be masters, nor all masters
Cannot be truly followed.
)Othello, I, I, 42: 43(
: سادة يكونوا أن الناس كل يستطيع ال ياجو! أتباعه في الوالء يضمن أن سيد كل يستطيع أو
ص ) (43- 42، 85عناني،
: جميعا األسياد وال أسيادا ، نكون أن جميعا لنا ليس ياغويتبعون ص... ) بإخالص (44-43، 463-462جبرا،
************************)4( Montano: Methinks the wind hath spoke aloud at land;
A fuller blast ne’er shook our battlements.
)Othello, II, I, 5:6(
126
Page 137
: عاليا تصرخ الريح أن أظن مونتانو ! ما شهدنا ما و البسيطة وجه علي
! نري ما كمثل عواصف من القالع أسوار يهزص ) (6-4، 125عناني،
: البر: في عاليا صاحت الريح أن أحسب مونتانو . قالعنا شرفات يوما تهز لم منها أشد زعزع
ص ) (6-5، 490جبرا،
************************)5( Othello: If thou dost slander her and torture me,
Never pray more; abandon all remorse;
On horror’s head horrors accumulate;
)Othello, III, iii, 367:372(
أكثر: ال لتعذبني عليها تقولت كنت إن عطيل! اآلن بعد تنفع أو تشفع لن صالتك أن فتأكد
! الرعب رأس علي الرعب أصب فلسوف التوبة أو الندم يجدي لن بل
بقلبك!ص ) (376-374، 190عناني،
تعذبني،: و فيها تطعن كنت إن عطيلضمير، تقريع كل عن تخل أبدا ، الصالة عن كف
أكداسا الرعب أقم الرعب رأس ص. ) وعلي جبرا، 539 ،374-
376)
************************)6( Desdemona: a guiltless death I die. )Othello, V, ii, 122(
( ! ص: عناني، جنيته ذنب بال ميتة أموت (123، 271دزدمونة
أموت دزديمونة: جريرة بال ص. ) موتا (123، 593جبرا،
************************)7( Macbeth: O! Full of scorpions is my mind, dear wife!
)Macbeth, III, ii, 36(
! ! : بالعقارب يموج ذهني الحبيبة زوجتي يا مكبثص ) (36، 170عناني،
127
Page 138
: !مكبث العزيزة زوجتي ذهني، بالعقارب مليء آه،ص ) (36، 724جبرا،
************************)8( Hecate: Great business must be wrought ere noon.
)Macbeth, III, vi, 22(
( . ص: عناني، جالئل أمضي الظهيرة وقبل (22، 184هيكات
.هكاته: الظهيرة قبل تـقضي أن البد كبري ص ) فعلة (22، 736جبرا،
************************)9( Macbeth: But swords I smile at, weapons laugh to scorn,
Brandished by man that’s of a woman born.
)Macbeth, V, vii, 12:13(
سالح : أي محتقرا وأضحك بالسيف أهزأ فأنا مكبث ( ! ص عناني، امرأة ولدته رجل يد (14-13، 240في
هزءا ، مكبث: منه أضحك والسالح لها، أبسم السيوف أن إذا غير ( . ص جبرا، امرأة وليد هو رجل (13-12، 786أشهرها
************************
In these examples Enani follows whatever strategies likely to
help create a transparent text where the structures are as close
as possible to those used by the target reader when using
Modern Standard Arabic. In )1(, )7(, )8(, )9( and )10( Enani re-
arranges each sentence in accordance with the target- language
sentence structure. In the rest of the examples, where this
strategy would not solve the problem, Enani resorts to
interpretation. Jabra, on the contrary, preserves the inversion in
translation thus imparting to his style an assumed elevation
which questions the illusion of reality, or, at least, temporarily
awakens the reader/audience to the fact that s/he is
reading/watching a different work of art. In fact, Jabra even
seems to be committed to the broad concept of foreignisation as
128
Page 139
introduced by Venuti, where the translator resorts to any
strategy that is likely to attract the reader’s attention to the form
and make him/her aware that the literary work s/he is reading is
a translation. In the following examples he resorts to inversion
though nothing in the original justifies his decision to do so: )1( Player Queen: In second husband let me be accurst!
None wed the second but who killed the first!
)Hamlet, III, ii, 167:168(
: بي اللعنات فلتنزل الملكة ممثلة. لرجل ثانية زففت أنا إن
التي إال ثانيا تتزوج ال ( . ص قتلت األول زوجها (122بيديها
************************
)2( Barabantio: Look to her, Moor, if thou hast eyes to see:
She has deceived her father, and may thee.
)Othello, I, iii, 289:290(
. تبصران: عينان لك كانت إن مغربي، يا لها، انتبه برابنتيو. خدعتك أيضا لربما و خدعته، أبوها
(293-292، 486ص )
************************
)3( Iago: … That cuckold lives in bliss
When certain of his fate, loves not his wronger.
)Othello, III, iii, 168: 169(
المخدوع: الزوج يعيش سعيدا ياغو ( . ص ظالمته يحب ولم حاله، من تحقق (171-170، 530إذا
************************
)4( Emilia: My wayward husband hath a hundred times
wooed me to steal it; …
)Othello, III, iii, 292:293(
العنيد: زوجي حثني مرة مئة إميليا
129
Page 140
( ... ص اختالسه (297-296، 535علي
************************
)5( Emilia: Is not this man jealous?
)Othello, III, iv, 94(
( : ص الرجل؟ هذا غيرانا أليس (96، 548إميليا
************************
)6( Othello: If that the earth could teem with women’s tears,
Each drop she falls would prove a crocodile.
)Othello, IV, I, 238:239(
المرأة،: بدموع تـخضب األرض أن لو عطيلتسقطها ! دمعة كل تمساحا لكان
(241-240، 562ص )
************************
)7( Othello: She was as false as water. )Othello, V, ii, 134(
( . ص: كانت كالماء خائنة (137، 593عطيل
************************
)8( 1st witch: I’ll drain him dry as hay;
)Macbeth, I, iii, 18(
. ) 1ساحرة ص: سأجففه القش (18، 669جفاف
By utilising inversion in these examples where the original
speeches do not suggest it be utilised Jabra seems to be
continually challenging the illusion of reality as presented in
these plays. Inversion is usually associated with literature,
notably poetry; using it in everyday talk would seem odd, if not
affected. Utilising inversion here cannot be justified in terms of
faithfulness to the original; it rather reflects a faithfulness to
foreignisation in general. Jabra seems to be devising a
translation style which would attract the target reader to itself,
one of whose features is this inversion which imparts to Jabra’s
130
Page 141
versions of Shakespeare’s plays a sense of artificiality. Another
feature of this style can be noticed in the following examples:
)1( Captain: Truly to speak, sir , and with no addition,
We go to gain a little patch of ground
That hath in it no profit but the name.
)Hamlet, IV, iv, 17:19(
إضافة،: دونما الصدق أردت إذا الرئيس. ضيقة األرض من رقعة لكسب ذاهبون فإننا
( . ص اسمها سوي منها نفع (156ال
************************
)2( Hamlet: Give me your pardon, sir. I’ve done you wrong;
But pardon’t, as you are a gentleman.
This presence knows,
And you must needs have heard, how I am punished
With sore distraction… ) Hamlet, V, ii, 209:211(
! إليك،: أسأت لقد سيدي يا صفحك هاملت. النبيل الرجل إنك فاصفح
يعلم الحفل هذاابتليت أنني كيف سمعت، شك ال وأنت
( ... ص أليمة العقل في (206-205بخالطة
************************
In Arabic adjectives are post modifiers which follow the
nouns they modify immediately. Separating the adjectives from
the nouns they modify the way Jabra does here is not
grammatically incorrect, but it refers the target reader back to a
rhetoric other than that of Modern Standard Arabic. By
separating the adjectives from the nouns they modify as such
Jabra seems to be aspiring to achieve the effect of classical
writers, conjuring up a literary era much earlier than the one he
131
Page 142
has lived and written his translations in. This archaising is sure to
attract attention to itself, especially that it seems at odds with the
foreignness of Jabra’s style resultant from insistence on
following the original as closely as possible as well as from other
personal preferences which do not conform to the rules of
Standard Arabic )whether classical or modern(, and even if the
target reader is not well-read in the classical literature of Arabic
s/he is more than likely to stop to examine this unusual structure.
Another important syntactic feature of Jabra’s foreignising style is his
keenness on avoiding interpretation most of the time, the consequence
being that his sentences are usually brief, abrupt and even difficult to
understand. A case in point is the following example from Hamlet: Hamlet: Let me be cruel, not unnatural;
I will speak daggers to her, but use none;
)III, ii, 369:370(
: الطبيعة شاذ ال قاسيا ، فألكن هاملت. أمس فلن خنجرا أما خناجر، سأكلمها
(132ص )
Jabra decides to translate “I will speak daggers to her” as سأكلمها which is literal enough but sounds odd, even vague. The oddness ofخناجر
this rendering does not have to do with the nature of the image itself; in
fact, the idea of words being as sharp as daggers is by no means original.
The oddness here is caused by the structure itself, which would be clear if
we compared خناجر خناجر with سأكلمها كلماتي The latter is .ستكون
undoubtedly more common and consequently more acceptable. It is less
likely to attract the reader’s attention to itself as the structure is
commonly used in figurative contexts )and in non-figurative contexts of
132
Page 143
course(. خناجر is less likely to be acceptable simply because سأكلمها
the verb كلم is originally a monotransitive verb; rarely is it used as a
ditransitive verb. When used as a ditransitive verb it usually has كالما
as the direct object )e.g. ق كالما اسياكلمها ( . The use of such a structure
as this with such an object for the verb كلم seems to invite the target
reader to investigate the different possibilities of Arabic. Meanwhile, the
image requires more effort from the target reader to be processed and
understood, especially when compared with Enani’s rendering: . قلبي: فطرة عن خروج دون لفظي في القسوة ولتكن هاملت
! خناجر دون خناجر باأللفاظ وكفي(387-386، 228ص )
Enani resorts to interpretation so that the image used by
Shakespeare should be both understandable and acceptable as
far as the target reader is concerned. As a translator who adopts
a domesticating approach Enani processes the Shakespearean
image for the target reader, then decides on the structure which
would help him to maintain the transparency of his text.
Another odd structure used by Jabra occurs in the following
example from Hamlet: King: … What if this cursed hand
Were thicker than itself with brother’s blood,
Is there not rain enough in the sweet heavens
To wash it white as snow? )III, iii, 43:46(
Jabra tries to translate the last line as literally as possible: ... : اللعينة اليد هذه غدت لئن الملك
أخي، بدم نفسها من أثخنمطر من يكفي ما السماء عذب في فليس
133
Page 144
ص ) كالثلج؟ بيضاء (134لغسلها
Jabra chooses to translate “ )t(o wash it white as snow”
literally and the result is an expression sure to sound odd to the
target reader since the verb غسل is never modified by such an
adverbial as بيضاء in Arabic. The rendering is not difficult to
understand, yet it is more than likely to draw the reader’s
attention to the second-hand nature of the text s/he is reading.
In other words, the target reader would be aware of the presence
of a language other than Arabic here. Enani resorts to
interpretation which entails that certain additions be utilised so
that the content of the image, common to both English and
Arabic, rather than its foreign form, should be conveyed in
translation:الملعونة: اليد هذه بأن فلنقل اآلن الملك
الشقيق، األخ دم من عراها بما فاستفحلت تخضبتيكفي الذي الغيث الرحيمة سمائنا في أليس
لغسلهاص ) الثلج؟ بياض في تعود (46-43، 231حتي
Again, however, not all the syntactically odd renderings can
be justified in terms of the original. For instance, the way Jabra
renders the vocative sentence in the following example seems
to overlook the original altogether : Macbeth : Tell me, thou unknown power –
1st Witch: He knows thy thought:
Hear his speech, but say thou nought.
)Macbeth, IV, I, 69:70(
. : مجهولة قوة لي، قل مكبث
134
Page 145
:1ساحرة بفكرك: ما يعلم . تقل ال أنت وشيئا يقول، ما اسمع
(70-68، 745ص )
In English one can resort to the vocative “O” to indicate the
vocative mode )e.g. O rose, thou art sick, etc.(, but the use of
“O” is rather archaic or limited to certain registers, such as the
religious for instance. Generally, no markers are used in
modern English to indicate vocation. Arabic differs from
English in this respect. Not only does it use a variety of markers
to indicate vocation )e.g. أ أيها، etc.( but it also regards ,يا،
omitting the vocation marker as an exception to which the
speakers of Arabic occasionally resort for rhetorical purposes.
In Arabic vocation markers can be omitted if they precede a
proper noun, especially when the proper noun comes at the
beginning of the sentence. It can also be omitted when it
precedes nouns in general, provided that the noun it precedes is
not modified by an adjective. For example, you can say:الدرس: ذاكري ة بني(O little girl: Study the lesson)
but you cannot say: : الدرس ذاكري مجتهدة ة بـني
( O hard-working little girl: Study the lesson)
In rendering the vocative in this example Jabra decides to
omit the vocation marker though the noun “power” is modified
by “unknown”, and it is interesting that his decision to do so
does not reflect the usual strict faithfulness to the original since
he overlooks “thou” in “thou unknown power”, which can be
135
Page 146
regarded as a vocation marker. Thus, Jabra departs from both the
rules of Arabic and the original in this example. In the following
example he departs from both the rules of Arabic and the rules of
English:Roderigo: Your daughter, if you have not given her leave,
I say again, hath made a gross revolt,
Tying her duty, beauty, wit, and fortunes
In an extravagant and wheeling stranger
Of here and everywhere. …
)Othello, I, i, 131: 135(
In this speech Roderigo enumerates the things which, in his
opinion, should have made Desdemona shun Othello. In so
doing he follows the typical method of enumeration so that the
conjunction “and” should only precede the last item in
Roderigo’s list. In the light of our knowledge of Jabra’s
approach we may predict that Jabra would follow the original,
using "و" only before the last item in the list. However, Jabra
translates Roderigo’s speech as follows:لها: ) أذنت قد تكن لم إن ابنتك إن رودريغو ) فاحشا ، عصيانا أتت قد ثانية أقولها
مقدراتها، ذكاءها، جمالها، واجبها، ربطت إذوجهه علي هائم جوال بغريب
( ... . ص مكان كل وفي (137-133، 466هنا
Jabra shies away from reproducing the speech so that the
enumeration method he uses should be the standard method as
far as Arabic is concerned, which is in line with his foreignising
approach. Meanwhile, Jabra departs from the rules of English,
136
Page 147
doing away with “and” altogether, and again calling up to mind
Venuti’s concept of foreignisation, in which linguistic
possibilities other than those of the standard level of the target
language should be employed. Jabra’s rendering of the above
excerpt makes use of a marked method of enumeration more
likely to occur in literature, and consequently more likely to
attract the reader’s attention to the second-hand identity of the
text s/he is reading, unlike Enani’s rendering which makes use
of the standard method of enumeration as far as Arabic is
concerned. Enani uses the conjunction و before every item in
the list as follows:فظا : عصيانا تعصيكم كريمتكم إن –رودريجو
منكم بإذن تحظ لم كانت بواجبها –إن تجود حينلها األقدار كتبته وبما وبفطنتها ومحاسنها
! ! وجهه علي يهيم فتئ ما الترحال أهل من لغريب ( ! ص مكان كل في و وهناك هنا (137-133، 91- 90فهو
It is noteworthy that such departures can sometimes result
in mistakes in Jabra’s translations, such as in the following
example from Othello: Desdemona: I will not stay to offend you.
) IV, I, 240(
Jabra translates this line by Desdemona as follows: ( . ص: لك إساءة أمكث لن (243، 62دزديمونة
In this example Jabra decides to render “to offend you” in a
way that changes the intended meaning altogether. أمكث لنلك can mean either “I will not stay and by not staying I إساءة
137
Page 148
mean to offend you” or “ I will stay, but I do not mean to
offend you by staying”, neither of which is the meaning
intended by Shakespeare in the original. Translating “to offend
you” literally is not the optimal solution either, as أمكث لنإليك ,is also ambiguous. Interpretation is necessary here ألسيء
a fact of which Enani is aware. Accordingly, Enani translates
Desdemona’s sentence as follows: ( ! : ص سأمضي يزعجك وجودي دام ما (242، 229دزدمونة
Thus, opting for domestication or foreignisation in
rendering the syntactic structures of the original has much to do
with the translator’s declared approach but, meanwhile, it is
sometimes governed by such factors as personal preferences.
Furthermore, many of the translator’s decisions cannot be
justified, except in the light of the aforementioned “minimax
principle”. This has important implication for Translation
Studies, for though it is possible to make predictions in the light
of the translator’s declared approach there will always be
decisions made by the translator that can never be predicted.
138
Page 149
Chapter (4)
Domestication Vs. Foreignisation
In Handling Verse
Investigating the issue of handling the verse of Shakespeare’s plays in
the light of the Venutian concepts of domestication and foreignisation is
an approach different from those on which traditional discussions of
translating verse are based. The domestication- Vs.- foreignisation
approach allows us to tackle the issue in hand without having to
concentrate on the gains and losses of translating verse either as verse or
as prose. Within the Venutian framework verse and prose are not
mutually exclusive options, and neither of them is favoured, simply
because the suitability of either is relative and conditional. For instance, a
foreignising translator would opt for either prose or verse in handling
verse depending on the ability of either to resist the smoothness expected
to characterise the reading experience.
A useful starting point here would be Venuti’s discussion of the
approach of Francis Newman, the nineteenth-century translator, to the
classics. Applauded by Venuti as an important representation of the
foreignising ideal, Newman’s approach depends in the first place on
archaising, manifest not only in the diction of his translations but also in
the verse forms he chooses for these translations. Venuti )1995, p.125(
explains that Newman’s decision to use unrhymed verse with different
accentual metres in his translations of Horace: ignored what the London Quarterly Review called
“the dignity and the music of the Latin” …. As a
139
Page 150
result, Newman’s version appeared “somewhat quaint
and harsh,” whereas “the rhymed versions of Lord
Ravensworth and of Mr. Theodore Martin” possessed
“the qualities of easy elegance, of sweetness of cadence”
)Venuti,1995, p.125; italics mine(
Venuti points out that Newman’s translations of the classics failed to
win critical acclaim; they were particularly attacked by Matthew Arnold,
mainly because their forms and discourse deviated from the “plainness”
and “simplicity” of the styles of the original works )Venuti, 1995,
pp.129:131(. In other words, Newman’s translations deviated from the
target reader’s expectations partly by utilising verse forms other than
those “established” as the standard as far as the target culture is
concerned. They depended for their effect on accentuating the temporal
gap separating Homer’s Iliad, for instance, from the English nineteenth-
century reader.
To a great extent, this applies to Buhairy’s translations of
Shakespeare, though, unlike Newman’s, Buhairy’s intentions are
anything but foreignising. Buhairy produced his translations of
Shakespeare’s plays in the late 1970s, by which time the so-called free
verse had already been established as the standard poetic medium in
Egypt. However, Buhairy’s approach to Shakespeare involved shying
away from the standard and favouring an ideal more in line with
Buhairy’s makeup as a poet--namely, the classical ideal. Buhairy faults
both the prose and the free-verse translations of Shakespeare and
describes them as falling short of doing justice to the greatness of the
original)1978(. According to him, Shakespeare’s plays should be
translated as verse, hence the inadequacy of the prose translations )ibid,
140
Page 151
p.15(. Meanwhile, he dismisses as inadequate any verse translation that
displays a degree of metrical flexibility. He is particularly critical of Ali
Ahmed Bakathir’s use of blank verse in translating Shakespeare’s Romeo
and Juliet which, according to him, has the consequence that the “spirit”
of the original is lost in translation. Buhairy tries to prove Shakespeare a
poet more bent on metrical regularity than his translators “may” think,
depending in so doing on the sonnets and heroic couplets which
occasionally occur in Shakespeare’s plays, notably Romeo and Juliet
)ibid(.
Therefore, Buhairy regards the classical forms of Arabic metres as
the medium which can guarantee utmost faithfulness in translating
Shakespeare. However, most of the time it seems that Buhairy does not
seek faithfulness to Shakespeare, but to Shawqi. Buhairy points out that
Shakespeare and Shawqi have always had parallel influences on him
)ibid,p.5(. He describes Shawqi’s verse plays as the greatest of Shawqi’s
works, and refers to his own “juvenilia” which include a historical verse
play modelled on Shawqi’s famous historical verse plays )ibid, pp.5:6(.
Buhairy’s later works actually include many historical verse plays in
which Shawqi’s influence is manifest, such as Khaled ibnul Waleed
)1945( and Al-Amin wal Ma’moun )1957(.
Buhairy’s attitude to Shawqi is one of oedipal rivalry, to borrow an
expression used by Venuti )in describing the relationship between Paul
Blackburn and Ezra Pound( )1995,p.237(. Throughout his literary career
Buhairy sought to identify with the Neoclassicists, notably Shawqi. The
following excerpts from his preface to his translations of The Tempest
and The Merchant of Venice )1978( reflect the Neo-classical influence
on his prose style:
141
Page 152
أقدمه... قيمة ذي شئ تحقيق إلي الوصول في مني رغبة اللغة وهي الجميلة، لغتي إلي و مصر، وطني،وهو إلي
! الشعر وهو الوفي، عمري صديق إلي و العربية،
(٨ص) ٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭
" ثم " ترجمتها، إلكمال مكبث إلي أخري مرة عدتالشواغل بي وأحاطت الصوارف، عنها .صرفتني
(٩ص) ٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭
قد مما الجديد الثوب هذا في الشعرية وترجمتهأراده ما حقيقة لنا وحواره يفسر الرائع، بفنه ! المانع الجامع وأسلوبه (١٨ص) البارع،
٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭٭ األولي، اللحظة منذ الشاعر عايشت وهكذا
برغم بترجمته، وتعلقت الرفيع، فنه وأحببت . العراقيل وقيام الشقة، وبعد الطريق، وعورة
(١٤ص )
Obviously, these excerpts embody some of the main features of the
formal rhetoric typical of the Neoclassicists’ prose, such as tautology,
parallelism and like features which guarantee musicality. Buhairy’s
poetry also embodies the Neoclassical ideal on the levels of content and
form alike. Buhairy is mainly interested in nationalistic topics, with an
emphasis on history, and religious topics. His verse collections include
“ Under the Banner of Arabism”, “With the Peace Initiative” and
“African Poems”. He wrote some “epic” poems, such as “ The Prince of
Prophets”, “Isis and Osiris”, “Beirut” and “Triumphant Egypt”.
Buhairy’s allegiance to the Neoclassical ideal on the formal level is
manifest in his commitment to the classical forms of Arabic metres;
142
Page 153
metrical innovations are very limited in his poetry, the main being the use
of more than one “traditional” metre in the same poem, such as in the
following poem, called “On the Stanley Rock”:هادر اللج و الماء في صخرة آخر علي للبحر واتاك فهل رنوت
ظله واألرض الصخاب العالم المقابر هو وهي األحياء ومجتمع
الحياة معني البحر في الشقــــــاء تعلمت بعد السعادة وسرالعنان للمبهجات أشــــــاء وأطلقت ما مفاتنها من فلي
الهوي طير الماء علي الفضاء أنادي في تغريده يرفرفالهموم حطمته جسد !ولي بالعـــــــــــراء أنبذه أنا فها
خاطرتي الماء في أشعلت التي األحد إن فرصة تقضت منذ تأت لم
سباحتها في علمتني التي والجسد هي الروح بين الفن عبادةسابحة اإللهام و الفن من والغيد دنيا الدل ذوات عن معروفة
ألقت البحر شاطئ فوق ومــــــــالل غادة تهالك في جسمهافنا كف فأبدعت ـــــــــــــــال صورتها ـ مث بفنه عليم ن
...
The poem obviously combines four Arabic metres--namely, Taweel,
Motaqarab, Baseet and Khafif respectively. It seems that Buhairy is
trying to maintain some sort of balance between conservatism and
innovation. The innovation to which he resorts here still guarantees that
Buhairy be not classified as one of the New-Verse poets.
Buhairy’s translations of Shakespeare are imitations of Shawqi’s
plays. The aforementioned oedipal rivalry is obvious in certain parts of
the preface to his versions of The Tempest and The Merchant of Venice.
Buhairy explains:
143
Page 154
I got back to Shakespeare’s plays long after I
had abandoned translation. In so doing I
followed the wonderful method developed by
Shawqi in his plays, whose emergence co-
incided with the beginning of my relationship
with Shakespeare as I said before. However, to
Shawqi’s method I added important elements
never to be found in Shawqi’s work. )1978,p.16( )1(
These words are particularly significant since they sum up Buhairy’s
“rationale” and outline his approach to Shakespeare’s plays. Buhairy
simply seeks to identify with Shawqi, the canonical writer, not only by
admitting his debt to him but also by alluding to the possibility that the
apprentice can outdo the master in some respects. Though his intentions
are obviously not foreignising Buhairy has produced versions of
Shakespeare’s plays whose overall effect is similar to that of Newman’s
translations of the classics as described by Venuti. This is simply because
while the canonicity of Shawqi is unarguable his plays have often been
criticised on the grounds that in them Shawqi the lyrical poet always
overshadows Shawqi the dramatist. Buhairy has had to face a similar
situation, worsened by the fact that New Verse had already taken over
from traditional poetry by the time he set out to write his translations.
The result is that the contemporary reader would certainly feel estranged
from Buuhairy’s translations with their extremely high-sounding
speeches. Buhairy’s rendering of the following speech from The Tempest
, in which Ferdinand is contemplating his situation on the island and his
feelings for Miranda, can clarify this point: Ferdinand: There be some sports are painful, and their labour
144
Page 155
Delight in them sets off: some kinds of baseness
Are nobly undergone, and most poor matters
Point to rich ends. This my mean task
Would be as heavy to me as odious, but
This mistress which I serve quickens what’s dead
And makes my labours pleasures: O, she is
Ten times more gentle than her father’s crabbed,
And he’s composed of harshness. I must remove
Some thousands of these logs, and pile them up,
Upon a sore injunction: my sweet mistress
Weeps when she sees me work, and, says, such baseness
Had never like executor. I forget:
But these sweet thoughts do even refresh my labours
Most busy lest, when I do it. )III, i, 1:15(
Buhairy translates this speech as follows:
أداؤها :فردناند عسير أعمال من هنالك يخفف
الفعل لذة آالمهاالفتي به قام الفعل دنئ والنبل ورب الشهامة طبع من فيه لما
بداية األمور في حقير إلي ورب يؤدي
والفضل النهاية وهو أغلي أديته الذي وهذا
حملي مرهقي علي عسير نفسي علي خدمة ثقيل أدائي ولكن
ثقلي لحبيبتي من ويضعف أعبائي بلي، يخفف
طبيعة علي أحني الفصل إنها حكمه في الجبار الوالد منأمره أنفذ أن من لي الجزل والبد الحطب من آالفا وأحمل
رأت كلما بكت كم حياتي ولكنمثلي به يقوم أال تري جهادا
خواطري أن غير أنسي، كدت نبهت لقد وإن روحي أنعشت وإن
تكاسلي عقلي عند تزداد وتذهبولكنها
. شغلي إلي أمضي حين عنيص 1978 ) ،76)
145
Page 156
By using Taweel in translating Ferdinand’s lines Buhairy seems to be
evoking a defunct literary tradition in which the metre herein used played
a particularly important role. Taweel is always associated with the culture
of Archaic Arabic, being the metre of some of the loftiest poems of this
cultural epoch, such as “the Mo’allaqat” of Imrou’l Quais, Tarafah and
Zuhair. Besides, due to its metrical composition Taweel has a slow pace
which makes it naturally solemn and stately. Enani )1998, p.94( discusses
this in the context of investigating the possibility that metres have
meanings per se. He concludes that Taweel has always been used in
tackling serious and elevated topics, including love.
The lines herein quoted are not all about love, let alone the fact that
the way they deal with love is less formal than the way Archaic-Arabic
poems do . The tone is generally personal. Though the opening lines can
be described as general pieces of wisdom the rest of the speech
establishes some sort of bond between Ferdinand and the
audience/reader, while the use of Taweel in the translation makes it
difficult for such a bond to be established since we feel that Buhairy’s
Ferdinand is not addressing the contemporary audience, but an audience
that belongs to an earlier era.
In addition, these lines are of vital importance to the development of the
dramatic action since it is through them that we learn that Prospero’s plan
is beginning to bear fruit. The details which Ferdinand recounts here
totally belong to drama, not to lyrical poetry. Buhairy’s use of Taweel
imparts to the speech a musicality that is more than likely to distract the
reader from following the action. In other words, Buhairy’s rendering of
this speech, because based on Taweel, is too lyrical to be convincing as
part of a drama, and this aspect of Buhairy’s translations makes them
146
Page 157
stand out as departures from the target reader’s established notions about
drama.
This, however, is not the sole foreignising effect described by Venuti
that Buhairy’s translations display. Venuti)1995,p.131( points out that
Francis Newman’s translations of Homer were fiercely attacked by
Matthew Arnold because, through the use of a mixed diction based to a
great extent on colloquialisms and dependence on the popular ballad
form, they presented readings of Homer radically different from the
“standard” readings, supported and popularised by such academics as
Arnold himself . The dominant academic reading of Homer )and the
classics in general( accentuated “the nobility” of the Greek poet, hence
Venuti’s description of it as “elitist” )ibid(, as opposed to Newman’s
“populist” translations )ibid, p.128(. Buhairy’s translations of
Shakespeare occasionally highlight “off-beat” readings of the plays,
though, again, Buhairy’s intentions cannot be described as foreignising,
and the foreignising effect they have is not the outcome of “consciously”
foreignising efforts. Paradoxically, it is Buhairy’s keenness on metrical
regularity that brings about the off-beat readings. The formal rigour to
which Buhairy commits himself necessitates certain additions which
unwittingly question the traditional readings of the texts, or the readings
believed by the Arabic-speaking reader to be “the standard” readings. A
case in point is Buhairy’s rendering of Portia’s following speech from
the famous courtroom scene in The Merchant of Venice: Portia: If it be proved against an alien
That by direct or indirect attempts
He seeks the life of any citizen,
The party ’gainst the which he doth contrive
147
Page 158
Shall seize one half his goods, the other half
Comes to the privy coffer of the state,
And the offender’s life lies in the mercy
Of the Duke only, ’gainst all other voice
In which predicament I say thou stand’st;
For it appears by manifest proceeding
That indirectly, and directly too,
Thou hast contrived against the very life
Of the defendant, and thou hast incurred
The damage formerly by me rehearsed.
)IV, i, 334:358(
Following is Buhairy’s rendering of the speech, where the translator’s
additions, written in boldface, help to maintain the regularity of the metre
and rhyme pattern, meanwhile resulting in a different view of the whole
courtroom scene:: البندقية بورشيا في القوانين تجريفإن
األجنب علي القضاءاألجنبي عمد مواطنها الغريبإذا الطيب لقتل
أمالكه نصف لذا إلي يؤول األغلب ونصف الحاكمالقصاص حق للدوق المذنب ويصبح ذلك عن العفو أوالمدين لقتل عمدت من وأنت بان األخيب كما سعيكسعيت وعمدا قصدا المدين، ألنك تحسب لقتل ولم
البيان إليك سقت قبل المسهب ومن شرحي في جاء كما
ص 1978 ) ،209)
Shakespeare’s Portia owes much of her success in playing the role of
a supposedly unbiased lawyer to the neutrality of her language in the
courtroom scene. There is nothing suspicious about a lawyer expounding
a certain law to point out that it has to do with the lawsuit in hand.
148
Page 159
Portia’s neutral discourse is honest to the requirements of realism; it
corresponds to the audience’s knowledge of, and expectations about,
“non-fictional” courtroom situations. Therefore, it permits of different
readings and interpretations of the play. Portia’s success in playing her
role does not necessarily mean that Shakespeare approves of what she
does; Shakespeare may or may not be in Portia’s side, but whatever
Shakespeare’s attitude may be, Portia’s language has always to be
neutral, or else she would fail to attain her goal, and the play would fail
to be recognised as a realistic play.
Buhairy’s rendering sacrifices the neutrality of the original by
resorting to additions that keep the metre and rhyme “intact” but bias the
speech in a way which challenges Portia’s credibility. In the translation
the neutral “alien” becomes الغريب by itself is األجنبي though ,األجنبي
enough to convey the intended meaning. “Any citizen” in “)h(e seeks the
life of any citizen” stresses the neutrality of law as well as the generality
of the situation described, and is consequently in stark contrast with
Buhairy’s الطيب where the possessive pronoun and the ,مواطنها
laudatory epithet accentuate the bias to the Venetians. To the same effect
is Buhairy’s use of األخيب ,”as a translation of “your predicament سعيك
which renders the tone too personal for a lawyer; it sounds as if Portia is
reproaching Shylock, gloating over his failure to attain his goals. ولم is another addition that accentuates the reproachful tone, and so is تحسب
the last line as a whole.
Thus, Buhairy’s version of the speech highlights a view of the
situation herein depicted which is radically different from that believed to
be the “correct” view, at least as far as the Arabic-speaking reader is
concerned. It casts doubt on the credibility of Portia and the concept of
149
Page 160
justice she is supposed to be standing for through presenting Venice as a
xenophobic, chauvinistic society. This view is reinforced by Buhairy’s
rendering of “the privy coffer of the state”; األغلب الحاكم إلي ونصف
suggests that justice is lacking on the economic level as well.
This view is in line with relatively recent readings of the play. The
Merchant of Venice has always been classified as a comedy simply
because it has a happy ending, and one of the most famous exponents of
this view is John Dover Wilson, who describes The Merchant of Venice
as one of Shakespeare’s happy comedies )1962(. In fact, Buhairy himself
describes it as the best Shakespearean comedy )1978, p.14(. This
traditional classification of the play has come to be challenged recently.
Enani )1988,p. 30( agrees with Christopher Barry )1976( that the happy
ending does not mean that all is well in the world of the play, pointing
out that in condemning Shylock Shakespeare is condemning the Christian
party as well. Generally, humanistic approaches have taken over from
approaches which Jews would describe as “anti-Semitic” in dealing with
The Merchant of Venice, and though they have come to gain wide
popularity they seem to be out of the question as far as the average
Arabic-speaking reader is concerned. This is simply because the lifelong
enmity between the Arabs and Israel is never given a chance to fade
away thanks to the Israeli brutality towards the Palestinians and the
international leniency to it. Accordingly, the reading unwittingly
highlighted here is less likely to be accepted by the average Arabic-
speaking reader)2( than the traditional, more “ideologically convenient”
reading which is based on condemning Shylock and never questioning
the legitimacy of the Christian party’s situations and motives.
150
Page 161
Deviant readings of Shakespeare’s plays are also highlighted in
Buhairy’s translations through using certain metres in rendering certain
speeches. Generally, the use of the classical forms of Arabic metres in
translation blurs the inevitable stylistic differences which distinguish
Shakespeare’s characters from one another, imparting to them, all alike,
the sense of loftiness and elevation usually associated with these metres.
This acquires special significance in Buhairy’s version of The Tempest ,
where blurring the stylistic differences through the use of the classical
forms of the Arabic metres implicitly suggests that our traditional view of
Caliban and Prospero be revised. In the second scene of Act I Caliban
tells the story of his enslavement to Prospero as follows: Caliban: This island’s mine, by Sycorax my mother,
Which thou takest from me. When thou comest first,
Thou strokedst me, and madest much of me; wouldst give me
Water with berries in’t; and teach me how
To name the bigger light, and how the less,
That burn by day and night: and then I loved thee,
And show’d thee all the qualities o’the isle,
The fresh springs, brine pits, barren places and fertile
Cursed be I that did so. all the charms
Of Sycorax, toads, beetles, bats, light on you!
For I am all the subjects that you have
Which first was mine own king: and here you sty me
In this hard rock, whiles you do keep from me
The rest o’the island. )I, ii, 331:344(
Caliban objects to his servitude to Prospero on the grounds that he is
the real owner of the island, and Prospero is but a usurper. He recounts
details of Prospero’s past attitude to him that call up to mind the so-called
“white man’s burden” and like ideas used by colonisers to legitimise their
151
Page 162
positions in the occupied territories. Though Prospero justifies the change
of his attitude to Caliban on convincingly moral grounds he does not
bother to refute the accusation of usurpation: Prospero: Thou most lying slave,
Whom stripes may move, not kindness! I have used thee,
Filth as thou art with human care; and lodged thee
In mine own cell, till thou didst seek to violate
The honour of my child. )I, ii,344:348(
Post-colonial approaches to the play have always focused on the
relationship between Prospero and Caliban and the legitimacy of
Prospero’s position as the master of the island. Within a post-colonial
framework the aforementioned lines are of great importance. Prospero’s
“filth as thou art” shows that Prospero’s attitude to Caliban is not simply
a reaction to the latter’s attempt to rape his daughter but is an attitude
based on a deeply entrenched belief that Caliban is “naturally” inferior to
him, a belief similar to the racist attitudes of colonisers to the natives of
the colonies. Buhairy renders these lines in a way that seems to support
the post-colonial reading of the play. His metrical choices unintentionally
question the idea that Caliban is inferior to Prospero. He uses the same
metre for both Caliban and Prospero as follows:
: تركت كلبان ما كل عندي الجزيرة هذيومدخر إرث من سكوركس إذ أمي مني أنت غصبتها
السكر تملقني طيب شرابا منحي نظير مزدهرا الصبح سراج أسمي الشمس وأن باسم الليل، وكوكب
والقمرخافية أبقيت فما انخدعت شجر حتي ومن غاب من عنك بسرها
بها األجاج والملح الينابيع عذب
152
Page 163
نضر ومن فيها قاحل من ما واألرض ليت بجهلي، ذاك فعلت
حجر سحرت وفي ليل في سكوركس خنفساء أمي من
وضفدعة المطر وخفاش وابل فتحكي عليك تلقيتحكمني حين وحدي الرعية سيد أنا وكنت
قدري مالكا نفسي،وتسلبني جحر في أحبس الجزيرة اآلن أنت
بروسبرو:كذاب أنت بل ال،
ويطمعه بطش يؤدبه جلباب عبد األقذار من عليه رفق،أكرمه كاإلنسان رعيتك محراب لقد و ظل جئته إذا كهفي
لتغصبها بنتي علي عدوت ص 1978... )حتي ،43:44)
The metre herein used, Baseet, is a composite metre, or one of the metres
whose metrical composition involves two different kinds of feet.
Composite metres are naturally more complex than the pure metres )or
the simple, unmixed metres to use Nazek al-Mala’ika’s term(, which
depend on the repetition of one kind of foot, essentially, with
modulations. Besides, Baseet is one of the composite metres which have
always had an important position in the culture of Arabic, being
associated with such great poets as Al-mutanabbi, Ibn Zaydoon and
Shawqi. Therefore, the fact that such a “reputable” metre is efficiently
used by Caliban in Buhairy’s translation makes it difficult for the
audience/reader to think of Caliban as an uncivilised creature. Buhairy is
so carried away by the music of Baseet that he does not bother to change
the metre with the beginning of Prospero’s speech, which accentuates the
effect of using Baseet for the supposedly monstrous Caliban; according
to Buhairy’s version of the lines, Caliban is no less eloquent, and
consequently no less of a human, than his master, yet as a coloniser
153
Page 164
Prospero tends to overlook Caliban’s potentials so as to legitimise his
position as the master of the island.
Buhairy’s approach to the aforementioned lines makes one feel that
something is wrong, either with the traditional view of Caliban, in which
case a post-colonial reading of the play would be the alternative, or with
the translation’s claim to realism, in which case the effect will also be
foreignising since accepting that a monster can recite such eloquent
poetry does shatter the illusion of poetic reality, at least temporarily.
Still, this post-colonial reading of The Tempest is more off-beat than
mainstream reading. Although there was time when it enjoyed great
popularity it has recently come to give way to more humanistic readings,
with the consequence that relatively recent productions of the play have
been bent on questioning racial and sexual boundaries by casting black
actors in the role of Ferdinand, for instance, or giving Prospero’s part to a
lady )Lindly, 2003; in Enani, 2003,p.40(.
Another foreignising aspect described by Venuti that Buhairy’s
translations reflect is unintelligibility. According to Venuti,
unintelligibility can result in extreme cases of foreignisation. Venuti cites
as an example the Zukofskys’ 1965 translation of Catullus’s poetry,
where depending on homophonic translation results in a version of
Catullus which is “opaque, frustratingly difficult to read on its own and
only slightly easier if juxtaposed to a transparent version” )1995,
pp.251:216(. Unintelligibility is not typical of Buhairy’s translations of
Shakespeare in general but it rather characterises certain parts of his
translation of The Merchant of Venice. Again, the reason is Buhairy’s
insistence on the greatest degree of metrical regularity through using the
classical forms of the Arabic metres. Following is Buhairy’s translation
154
Page 165
of Arragon’s speech prior to his decision to choose the silver casket,
where the effect is similar, to a great extent, to that described by Venuti:: القلب أراجون يخفق رصاص،فضة،لحظي
ذهب" تعب " في العمر أرب رفيقي له يقضي فما
! أوله منذ الذهب؟ حقير يخبر فماذاكالنا حظه سبب رفيقي له موصول س
كثر هم كالناس؟ كسبوا وما بما حمقي وهمللهوا هنا جاءوا أوانتخبوا إذا فإختاروا
خادعة جد طلبوا مظاهر ما القلب وسرللناس ذاك ارتكبوا سأترك بما أرضي وال
األمر؟ ما فضة "ويا الدأب" حظه رفيقيالعار الذهب في لعبوا نعم ومن عبثوا لمن
المسعي أشرف الغلب ولكن وراءه يكونعات لحكمه أرب يذل عامل ويعلوشرف له ضاع طلب فما له رد وال
أختار الصندوق "إلي الدأب" حظه رفيقيالمفتا فلتعطني !أال يقترب الحظ إن ح
ص 1978 ) ،170)
Arragon’s speech is supposed to give important information about
Arragon which can help the audience to foresee his failure. Through
Arragon’s way of thinking as revealed in these lines the audience is
supposed to arrive at the weak points in Arragon’s character which
would “doom” his attempt to win Portia’s hand in marriage. However, in
Buhairy’s version of the speech such information is not available, and
consequently his decision to choose the silver casket, as well as his
failure, is not justified in the translation. This is simply because it is not
easy to make sense of the speech in Buhairy’s translation. In other words,
155
Page 166
it is difficult to arrive at a logical relationship between the sentences
constituting Arragon’s justification of his decision. It is quite obvious
that Arragon refuses to choose the golden casket on account of the fact
that it is chosen by the majority, but it is by no means obvious why he
holds such a disdainful attitude to the majority. للهوا هنا جاءوا is ...إذا
sheer obfuscation. Similarly, Buhairy’s translation of the inscription on
the silver casket is unintelligibly laconic, and the four lines following it
only make things worse. العار الذهب في takes us back to the ...نعم
golden casket and makes it possible for us to think that Arragon would
choose it since he does not count himself as one of those given to playing
and fooling around.ولكن in المسعي أشرف is meaningless, since...ولكن
the idea following it is not contradictory to the one before it. The line
may be said to have meaning per se, but the two lines following it,
apparently an explanation of it, can hardly be related to it. Generally,
Arragon’s speech is not coherent; it is closer to intermittent flashes with
little meaning but much musicality. Following is the original speech of
Arragon, which makes things clearer: Arragon: And so have I addressed me. Fortune now
To my heart’s hope! Gold, silver, and base lead.
‘Who chooseth me, must give and hazard all he hath.’
You shall look fairer ere I give or hazard.
What says the golden chest? Ha, let me see:
‘Who chooseth me, shall gain what many men desire.’
What many men desire: that ‘many’ may be meant
By the fool multitude that choose by show,
Not learning more than the fond eye doth teach
Which pries not to th’interior, but like the martlet
Build in the weather on the outward wall,
156
Page 167
Even in the force and road of casualty.
I will not choose what many men desire,
Because I will not jump with common spirits,
And rank me with the barbarous multitude.
Why then, to thee, thou silver treasure house.
Tell me once more what title thou dost bear.
‘Who chooseth me, shall get as much as he deserves.’
And well said too, for who shall go about
To cozen Fortune and be honourable
Without the stamp of merit? Let none presume
To wear an undeserved dignity.
O, that estates, degrees, and offices
Were not derived corruptly, and that clear honour
Were purchased by the merit of the wearer!
How many then should cover that stand bare!
How many be commanded that command!
How much peasantry would then be glean’d
From the true seed of honour, and how much honour
Picked from the chaff and ruin of the times
To be new varnished! Well, but to my choice.
‘Who chooseth me, shall get as much as he deserves.’
I will assume desert. Give me a key for this,
And instantly unlock my fortunes here. )II, ix, 18:51(
The first thing to strike us here is the discrepancy in length between
the original and the translation. The original thirty four lines are reduced
to no more than fifteen lines in the translation. It is obvious that
Buhairy’s rendering of the speech does away with most of the details that
make Arragon a lifelike character and make his defeat expected and
deserved. Shakespeare’s Arragon is an extremely proud man with much
class consciousness manifest in his “the fool multitude”, “common
157
Page 168
spirits” and “barbarous multitude”, and the irony of the situation
Shakespeare creates here lies in the fact that in condemning those short-
sighted people who judge by appearances Arragon is actually
condemning himself. Buhairy’s rendering of the speech turns Arragon
into a flat character, leaving him with almost nothing to qualify him as a
character in a real drama. The reader )or audience, if Buhairy’s version of
the play ever came to be staged( would certainly be distracted from the
action in his/her attempt to make sense of what s/he is reading/hearing,
which means that the illusion of reality which the translator, as a rewriter
of the original, is supposed to be creating will be shattered, and questions
about the nature of the text in hand will arise.
Thus, Buhairy’s “archaising” approach to the verse of Shakespeare’s
drama has resulted in translations which deviate from the target reader’s
expectations about translation and verse drama. Due to the strict
regularity of the form he chooses for his translations Buhairy shies away
from conforming to both the contemporary translation standard and the
standard for verse drama as established by such poets as Salah Abdul
Sabour and Abdul Rahman Al-Sharqawi. Material on the reading
public’s reaction to Buhairy’s translations is rare, yet his views about
translation were discussed in an internet forum concerned with drama in
the context of comparing his verse translation of Macbeth with Lewis
Awad’s prose translation of the same play. In the discussion Buhairy’s
translation is described as inadequate for the same reasons foreignising
translations are usually faulted, the most interesting of which being the
visibility of the translator, through his “loud” medium, at the expense of
the credibility of the characters of the play. Buhairy is criticised for
choosing a medium which allows his own voice to be dominant and blurs
158
Page 169
the inevitable stylistic differences among the characters which give the
play its identity as a specific drama. Awad’s prose translation is
applauded because of the invisibility of the translator; the flexibility of
the medium Awad uses allows the translation to retain much of the
poeticality of the original and preserves for each character its
individuality )www.MASRAHEON.com/old/phpBB2/ viewtopic.php?
p=8787&sid=d02096c186649ece4b5eac6f061fcbd4(.
This is not to say that prose translations of verse drama are
necessarily domesticating. In fact, using prose in rendering verse can be
foreignising when it has a role to play in shattering the illusion of reality.
Translating a dialogue between two Shakespearean characters as prose
can safely be described as domesticating since, after all, the outcome
would sound truthful. However, translating the songs in Shakespeare’s
plays as prose undoubtedly violates the target reader’s expectations about
how songs should be and brings into focus the secondary nature of the
text in hand by leading the target reader to consider the differences
between the text in hand and other texts originally written in the target
reader’s language.
Translating songs as prose seems to be a very popular practice
among the translators of Shakespeare’s drama. In this connexion an
interesting example is Mo’nes Taha Hussain’s translation of Twelfth
Night , where Feste’s famous love song, performed at Orsino’s request, is
rendered as prose. What makes the rendering interesting is that Hussain
tends to maintain certain lyrical aspects of the song while using prose : Feste: Come away, come away, death;
And in sad cypress let me be laid;
Fly away, fly away, breath,
159
Page 170
I am slain by a fair cruel maid.
My shroud of white, stuck all with yew,
O prepare it!
My part of death no one so true
Did share it!
Not a flower, not a flower sweet,
On my black coffin let there be strown;
Not a friend, not a friend greet
My poor corpse where my bones shall be thrown;
A thousand thousand sighs to save,
Lay me, O, where
Sad true love never find my grave,
To weep there! )II, iv, 50:65(
الموت: أيها أقبل أقبل، فيستهالحزين السرو من نعش في وألطرح
. النفس أيها بعيدا انطلق بعيدا ، انطلق
قاسية حسناء فتاة قتلتني فقدبالزهر المغطي األبيض كفني أعدد
أعدد يقوم من مني أصدق فليس
الموت دور بتمثيلزهر ينثر ال زهر، ينثر ال
األسود نعشي عليصديق يحي ال صديق، يحي وال
البائسة جثتيعظامي تلقي حيث هناك
ألوفا الزفرات ترسل ال وحتيكئيب وفي حبيب يستطيع ال حيث ضعوني
قبري إلي يهتدي أن( ! ص دموعه عليه (80-79ليسفح
160
Page 171
Hussain’s translation of this song embodies the translation ideal on
which the Arab League Translation Project was based. The project,
which published prose translations of Shakespeare’s plays by different
translators, adopted an extremely formal concept of faithfulness. Enani
)1997, p.242( explains that the translators of the Arab League Project
regarded the single word as the unit of translation, and were primarily
keen on producing word-for-word translations. Hussain’s commitment to
this approach helps him to preserve the original number of lines in
translation; for the original sixteen lines he provides sixteen Arabic
counterparts. Meanwhile, the formalistic approach he adopts entails that
repetitions in the original be preserved in translation, hence .. ال زهر ينثر الزهر .. andينثر صديق يحي ال صديق يحيي which are natural in the ال
original context but are certainly uncalled for in the prose context. The
repetitions stress the hybrid nature of the text in hand, shattering the
illusion of reality for a while.
In fact, the practice of rendering songs as prose, with its foreignising
effect, seems so common that such a reputable poet as Khalil Mutran
resorts to it. Mutran translated four Shakespearean plays into Arabic
prose, and though his reason for preferring prose to verse is not stated a
look at the prefaces to his translations shows that the use of prose is part
of a domesticating approach which he enthusiastically adopts. For
example, in the preface to his translation of Othello Mutran finds
similarities between Shakespeare’s style and the “standard” Arabic style,
such as the tendency to exaggerating and digressing, as well as the daring
use of metaphor )1974, p.4(. Mutran even goes so far as to wonder
whether Shakespeare was of an Arab descent, or, at least, had access to
some Arabic texts “faithfully” translated into English )ibid(. Accordingly,
161
Page 172
he concludes that his aim is to produce a genuinely Arabic Othello, and
his reference to the process of translation as “Arabicisation” is not
insignificant.
Mutran’s domesticating approach would have entailed preserving for
songs their identity as songs in translation, a task by no means difficult
for such a poet as Mutran, yet what happens is that Mutran handles songs
inconsistently in his different translations of Shakespeare. For instance,
in his version of The Merchant of Venice he handles songs
domesticatingly, making use of a variety of Arabic metres, both pure and
composite, in bringing about functional equivalence, such as in the
following example: Song: Tell me where is fancy bred
Or in the heart, or in the head?
How begot, how nourishèd?
Reply, reply.
It is engend’red in the eye,
With gazing fed, and fancy dies
In the cradle where it lies.
Let us all ring fancy’s knell.
I’ll begin it – Ding, dong, bell .
All: Ding, dong, bell.)III, ii, 63:72(
: ينشد ومنبته صوت الهوي مكان فيأين
مولده الفؤاد في أم العقلفقد الجالل به مباه أيده ومن المالكين من دال
: ينشد السواهي آخر العيون هن تلك للحب
مهودنارا اللحظ يسقه اللحود إن وهن قضي
األسي هتاف ليهتف ينشــــــــــــــد األسف الجميع نواح ويسمع
162
Page 173
المني صريع الشغف يخف سريع ويودي ( 95ص )
The domesticating approach is particularly manifest in the changes to
which Mutran resorts so that the song should become a genuinely Arabic
song. He does away with both “How begot, how norishèd?” and “Reply,
reply” probably because they are understood from the context. مباه ومنالجالل is an addition which helps Mutran to make up for the ...به
briefness of the first voice’s share in the song resultant from the
omissions. Mutran’s rendering of “Let’s all ring fancy’s knell…” is
rather an interpretation than a translation, and the last line in the
translation is obviously an addition since nowhere in the original is it
mentioned that the knell to be rung can have such a disillusioning effect.
Needless to say, within a domesticating framework translators often
regard such changes as inevitable losses balanced by the gain in
musicality, or, in other words, by the fact that it is such changes that
enable the translator to succeed in reproducing the relationship between
the original text and its reader in translation. Mutran presents a song
which lives up to the target reader’s expectations. The song begins with
Monsareh, a composite metre whose music is of a very special nature,
and one that can only be mastered )and appreciated( by an ear very well
trained in the tradition of Arabic poetry )Enani, 2007,3, p.44(. Monsareh
is followed by Mojtath, another composite metre, and the song is
concluded with a modulated form of Motaqarab.
In translating Othello Mutran unexpectedly gives up his
domesticating approach to songs. He renders all of the songs in this play
as prose, such as in the following example, where the “prose” song is in
stark contrast with the stage direction ينشد:
163
Page 174
Iago: King Stephen was a worthy peer,
His breeches cost him but a crown;
He held them six-pence all too dear,
With that he call’d the tailor lown.
He was a wight of high renown,
And thou art but of low degree:
’Tis pride that pulls the country down;
Then take thine auld cloak about thee.
)II, iii, 89:96(
:) ينشد ) شريفا ياجو نبيال إتيين الملك كان
بتاج سراويالته يشترينقدا الثمن من بنسات ستة في مغبونا ويظنه
بالضحكة الطرزي يلقبالشهرة بعيد شابا كان
دنيئا رجال إال لست وأنتلألمم مضيعة الكبرياء
. العتيق بدثارك وتدثر فقمص 1974 ) ،30)
This contrasts sharply with Mutran’s declared intention to produce a
genuinely Arabic Othello. The prose he uses here results in what we may
call a “suspension of belief”; it brings into focus the fact that what we
have here is not actually Iago’s song but a version of it, conditioned and
mediated by the circumstances of a rewriting process, which are naturally
independent of the circumstances of the original process of writing.
While Shakespeare had the illusion of reality in mind from the very
beginning Mutran probably had to define )or re-define( his priorities
according to a certain schedule; in the preface to his version of the play
Mutran explains that he translated Othello at the request of George
164
Page 175
Abyad, the famous actor, so that the play could be staged by the latter’s
theatrical company )1974, p.1(. It might have taken Mutran a longer time
to translate the play had he insisted on rendering the songs as verse, and
perhaps Abyad’s version of the play would have done away with the
songs after all. If this was true Mutran could be said to be applying
Levý’s “minimax principle”, according to which the translator “resolves
for that one of the possible solutions which promises a maximum of
effect with a minimum of effort” )1967; in Venuti, 2000, p.156(.
Another poet-translator who adopts an inconsistent approach to songs
in translating Shakespearean drama is Abu Shadi. In his version of The
Tempest Abu Shadi uses both verse and prose in rendering songs, but he
tends to use prose more frequently. His rendering of the following
excerpt sums up his attitude to songs as well as the rationale behind this
attitude: Stephano: I shall no more to sea, to sea
Here shall I die ashore --
This is a very scurvy tune to sing at a man’s funeral: well,
here’s my comfort. [Drinks. Sings]
The master, the swabber, the boatswain, and I,
The gunner and his mate,
Loved Mall, Meg, and Marian, and Margery,
But none of us cared for Kate;
For she had a tongue with a tang,
Would cry to a sailor, go hang!
She loved not the savour of tar nor of pitch;
Yet a tailor might scratch her where’er she did itch:
Then to sea, boys, and let her go hang!
This is a scurvey tune too but here’s my comfort. [Drinks]
)II, ii,42:55(
165
Page 176
Abu Shadi translates this as follows:: البحـ ستيفانو في البحر في أسيح أراني الشط لن علي هنا ولكن ر
موتي! ! عزائي هذه حسن، رجل جنازة في ليغني جدا خسيس لحن هذا
) يغني) ثم يشرب،مولي أحببنا ورفيقه وأنا،والمدفعي والمالحظ والغاسل الربان
وماريان ومرجريتقاطع لسان لها كان إذ بكيت منا أحد يحفل لم ولكن ومارجري،
: بالمالح يصيح "! يا " البحر فإلي القار، وال القطران تعشق لم الشنق إلي اذهب
ودعوها أوالد،! الشنق إلي تذهب
( ! عزائي هنا ولكن أيضا ، خسيسة ص 1930نغمة ،42)
The excerpt herein quoted includes a song, which Abu Shadi translates as
prose, and a fragment of a song, rendered as verse. Most probably, the
choice of either prose or verse here is conditioned by the length of the
piece involved. Abu Shadi is obviously applying the minimax principle
here.
Buhairy’s translations naturally retain for songs their lyrical identity,
yet it must be noted that Buhairy’s approach involves a considerable
degree of standardisation. As Buhairy adheres to the classical forms of
Arabic metres all the time in his translations songs can hardly be
expected to be distinguished from dialogue, which is no less musical than
the songs. The result is that songs are not foregrounded enough in
Buhairy’s translations, especially when the metres used for translating
them are the same as those used in translating dialogues. For instance,
Buhairy uses Majzou’s al-Waafir in rendering some of the songs in The
166
Page 177
Tempest, such as Stephano’s aforementioned song. Following is his
translation:...: المال ستيفانو والسيد والمساح أنا ح
بالخرقةوجندي الفرقة ونوتي، مع بمدفعه
ميجي بحبنا ماري نخص بحبنا نخصأيضا حبنا مارجيري ونمنح و لماريانا،
كيتي عن نسأل أحمق وال لسانها ألنسبب بال صاحت فلتشنق فكم البحار علي
طعم لها لذ والزفت وما القطران منالحائـ إلي النكت فأدوها و للحكة كالبحر إلي !وألقوها الموت إلي الشنق، إلي
ص 1978 ) ،69)
yet it must be noted that Buhairy does not preserve Majzou’s al-
Waafir )or any other metre( for songs. He uses Majzou’s al-Waafir in
rendering “highly informative” parts of the dialogue, and it is this latter
use of Hazaj that is more persistent in his version of The Tempest.
Following are some examples of Buhairy’s use of Majzou’s al-Waafir in
non-lyrical contexts:
Ariel: I boarded the king’s ship, now on the beak,
Now in the waist, the deck in every cabin …
)I, ii,196:197(
: الملك إريل سفينة الصدر صعدت علي بها فقمتباألوسـ قمت الظهر وحينا في والسكان ط
(36ص )
************** Prospero: Come with a thought. I thank thee, Ariel: come.
)IV, i, 164(
167
Page 178
: الفكر بروسبرو كلمحة ذكري تعال في مر لشئ
أصبحت إريل بالشكر ويا لك مدينا (102ص )
From all of Shakespeare’s translators whose works are investigated in
this study it is Enani who foregrounds songs in translation while adhering
to the illusion of reality most of the time, and “most of the time” is a key
phrase here. The most prolific of Shakespeare’s translators, Enani has
always had a good opportunity to state, explicitly and repeatedly, the
main principles of his approach to Shakespeare’s plays, which is
obviously a domesticating approach adopted with a view to producing
what Shakespeare himself would have written had his mother tongue
been Arabic. On the level of metre, Enani sets certain rules for the use of
both New-Verse metres and the classical forms of Arabic metres which
guarantee that functional equivalence be achieved. In the preface to his
translation of The Merchant of Venice, one of his early translations of
Shakespeare, Enani states that his translation is not meant as an absolute
equivalent of Shakespeare’s play, but is rather a version of it which
derives its identity from an orientation to the contemporary, Arabic-
speaking reading public/audience )1988, p.5(. However, certain
departures from the rules occasionally occur, distinguishing Enani’s
style, and therefore bringing about an effect close to that of the visibility
of the translator which Venuti calls for. It is important here to investigate
Enani’s domesticating approach to Shakespeare’s use of verse in his
plays before dealing with the foreignising departures.
168
Page 179
First of all, Enani’s domesticating approach excludes the classical
forms of Arabic metres as far as rendering dialogue is concerned, not
only because their use involves a lack of faithfulness to the contemporary
reading public/audience, but also because it involves a lack of
faithfulness to the original. In his preface to The Merchant of Venice
Enani compares the English metres with the classical forms of the Arabic
metres, referring to the great flexibility characterising the former, a
flexibility, he states, which allows iambus to be always regarded as such,
no matter how great the modulations it is subjected to may be )1988,
p.24(. He explains that Shakespeare makes use of this flexibility as he
depends in conveying changes in his characters’ states of mind on
modulations which can push the musical identity of the iambus to the
background )ibid, p.25(.
In a later article, Enani rephrases these ideas, focusing on syntactic
considerations which make it difficult, if not impossible, to regard the
classical forms of Arabic metres as equivalents of Shakespeare’s blank
verse. Enani )2007,3, p. 48( explains that Shakespeare mainly depends on
run-on lines, notably in extended metaphors which abound in his plays.
Blank verse, with its diverse and flexible modulations, allows
Shakespeare to develop the metaphors without having to bother much
about the form. This would not be available to the translator if he insisted
on using the classical forms of Arabic metres in rendering dialogue, for
having a fixed number of feet in each line limits the number of allowed
modulations, and even makes certain modulations mutually exclusive
)ibid(.
Meanwhile, Enani shies away from using prose in rendering dialogue
for, after all, Shakespeare’s plays remain verse plays, even if the music of
169
Page 180
this verse is low “by nature”. Therefore, for his translations of
Shakespeare Enani chooses the New Verse, which had already been
established as the standard in poetry and verse drama by the time Enani
began to translate Shakespeare’s plays. The New Verse is based on
remarkably flexible versions of some traditional, unmixed Arabic metres.
It makes use of the foot, the unit of traditional Arabic poetry, but does
away with the rules governing the number of feet allowed in each line as
well as with the strict rhyme pattern characterising traditional poetry. For
instance, traditional Ramal is a pure metre based on the foot فاعالتن ,
which consists of a short syllable followed by a long syllable and another
short syllable respectively.)3( Two kinds of Ramal are recognised by
traditional prosodists, depending on the number of feet in the line. The
first of these is the hexameter, to which belongs the following famous
line by Shawqi:فجفا يجفو كيف كفي علموه ما منه القيت ظالم
The second Ramal kind is the tetrameter, used in the following lines
by Ali Mahmoud Taha:غــاب حوريـــــة للشعراء هي تـبـن لم
الـ بنات من لرائي وعروس تبد لم جن
In New-Verse Ramal there are no limitations on the number of feet in
each line. The traditional form of the line gives way to a more flexible
form, where the rhythm follows the flow of the poet’s ideas, which can
result in great discrepancy in the lengths of lines. The concept of rhyme
is also more flexible in the New Verse; rhyme seems to occur naturally,
and sometimes it never occurs. A good example is the following free-
verse Ramal lines by Salah Abdul Sabour:الضياء األرض جبهة في وثوي
170
Page 181
ذراع ألف له تنين األكواخ إلي الحزن ومشيذراع دهليز كل
نهار نصف في الله يا الليل حتي الظهر أذان من
نهار نصف في الصماء المحن هذي كلالوديع زهران رأس تدلي مذ
It is noteworthy that Enani’s choice of free verse in translation is
consistent with his attitude to poetry in general. Enani produced three
poetry collections, three verse stories and two verse plays. In almost all
of these he mainly depends on New-Verse metres as the main medium of
expression, notably New-Verse Rajaz, and Khabab. Whenever traditional
verse occurs in his original works it seems that it is there to serve a
particular end or to produce a special effect. In other words, an awareness
of the ability of the classical forms of Arabic metres to evoke a past era
underlies Enani’s use of them in his original works. In نجاة or A( طوق
Lifeline ), his version of the shipwrecked Don Juan’s story, Enani mainly
depends on the New Verse, which, he explains, is naturally more suitable
for narration )2004, p.12(. He resorts to the classical forms of Arabic
metres when writing a song within the play, such as in the following
example:العاشقان اشتهاه بما الزمان وأتي
القرصان أبحر والدها - –إذ) القرصان ) ديدن السفائن ليصطاد
والشطآن الخضر والمروج الجزيرة لحبهما وخلت...
العاشقين خيال يغذو الذي وصيفتها ورأتفضاعفت بقيثار جميل داعبته فأتت
! حين بكل الخيال تغذو لذة من ألحانه...
171
Page 182
: " مقتضب " بحر موج في فأبحرت االقتضاب إليها طلباالقدر تبسم إنوالسمر فالمراح
العمر هي ساعة يحتضر والزمان
ذاهبة الحياةعبروا أتوا من كل
غلس في راح كيفص ) ذكروا الذي (33-32أمسك
In this example New-Verse kamil gives way to Moqtadab, a
traditional Arabic metre rarely used in Arabic poetry as we are told by
traditional prosodists. However, the use of this metre is enough to refer
the reader/hearer back to a past era that suits the “carpe diem” theme of
the song. The use of Moqtadab here is likely to call up to mind Ahmed
Shawqi’s famous Moqtadab poem الحبب كأسها which can be ,حف
described as a carpe-diem poem in its own right. This is most manifest in
the lines: بها خف نديم الطرب يا بك كبا ال
عواقبها تقل األدب ال فالعواقب Interesting is that the similarity is accentuated by Shawqi’s :
لسيدنا ترتقب ليلة الزمان فيوما الرشيد الكتب دونها له أخلدت
where the preference of a brief night of “fun” in the Khedive’s court to a
lifetime in the court of the allegedly sensual Abbasid Caliph parallels, in
some respects, the comparison implied by Enani in العمر هي , ساعة
though the former is obviously “politicised”.
The use of the classical forms of Arabic metres to evoke the past is at
its best in Enani’s والغازية or The Dervish and the Belly ( الدرويش
172
Page 183
Dancer ), an Egyptian-Arabic comedy tackling the so-called
Fundamentalists’ call for the restoration of a glorious Islamic past,
reduced in their minds to scenes of male domination and sensual
gratification. The protagonist, Abu Sbaa’ by name, is a con artist making
a great use of the rising tide of Fundamentalism. He has a fascination
with the extravagant lifestyle of Al-Walid Ibn Yazid, an Umayyad caliph
only remembered for being a typical rake, and often has nostalgic
hallucinations about Al-Walid’s court in which he “features” as a poet,
and much of the comedy stems from the moderately educated man’s
success in imitating typical panegyrics. Following is an example where
both the use of Baseet and the rhyme call up to mind Al Mutannbi’s
famous panegyric beginning شبم قلبه ممن قلباه حر :وامحتدم والوجد بي برح الكلم الشوق يعرف ال بما غص والحلق
وغايتنا مرمانا الله حقق الغمم قد وانزاحت األسي عنا وزال أمال المرتضي الوليد عهد جاء به بل تزهو بل الحر به يزهو
في األمم والحسن خاطري في الود
!ناظري الكرم يعتاده بمن حل والسعدص 1994 ) ،25)
Rarely does Enani use the classical forms of Arabic metres in his own
lyrical poetry, and even when he does one cannot help feeling that Enani
is playing a role which, again, involves evoking a certain tradition. Most
of Enani’s poetry written in the classical forms of Arabic metres belongs
to fraternal poetry or “Ikhwanyyaat”, that is, intended for use by an inner
circle of ‘friends’, a genre believed to have appeared in the Abbasid era,
though it is sometimes thought to date back to the pre-Islamic era. This
naturally means that this genre depended on the classical forms of Arabic
metres as a medium of expression. In fact, many contemporary poets who
173
Page 184
write Ikhwanyyaat prefer to retain for the genre its classical identity by
copying the form as well as the themes. One of these is Enani who uses
some of the most “reputable” metres of traditional poetry in his friendly
poems, such as Baseet , Khafif, and the “elusive” Monsareh, to which
belong the following lines in honor of Dr. Abdul-latif Abdul-halim of
Cairo University, aka Abu Hammam, a poet whose name is associated
with Monsareh:يهادنه أو المين يعرف انفضحا ال أو هوي كذب فكل
كلل بال راحل كأنه منجرحا الفالة عرض يجوبمشاربه جرت كماء قل سنحا أو ما الظماء وتروي صفواوطر له الذي لحاه ... وإن فلحا بغي من ضاع يكترث لم
فهمي به سما صدق انسرحا فالشعر قد الربا فوق كالغيثص 2004 ) ،104-105)
In his translations of Shakespeare’s plays Enani primarily depends on
New-Verse Rajaz and Khabab, his reason, he explains, being that these
metres are the closest in nature to prose )1988, p. 25; 2000, p.144,149(,
and are consequently the least likely to hinder the target reader from
focusing on the dramatic action )1988, p.25(. Meanwhile, Enani sets
certain rules for the use of Rajaz, Khabab, and the other New-Verse
metres he occasionally resorts to. In the preface to his version of The
Merchant of Venice he explains that changing metres does not occur
within the speech of a single character, but is a strategy preserved for
denoting the change of speaker, or the change in a certain character’s
state of mind, in which case another character should speak before such a
change should occur )ibid, p.26(. As an example, Enani quotes his
translation of the dialogue between Bassanio and Antonio immediately
before Portia, disguised as Balthazar, is introduced )ibid(. Perhaps an
174
Page 185
even more interesting example in this respect is Enani’s rendering of the
following dialogue between Shylock and Tubal:Tubal:…)O(ther men have ill luck too. Antonio as I heard in Genoa –
Shylock: What, what, what? Ill luck, ill luck?
Tubal: -- hath an argosy cast away coming from Tripolis.
Shylock: I thank God, I thank God. Is it true? Is it true?
Tubal: I spoke with some of the sailors that escaped the wreck.
Shylock: I thank thee, good Tubal: good news, good news! Ha, ha, ha,
heard in Genoa!
Tubal: Your daughter spent in Genoa, as I heard, one night four score
ducats.
Shylock: Thou stick’st a dagger in me; I shall never see my gold again.
Four score ducats at a setting! four score ducats! Tubal: There
came divers of Antonio’s creditors in my company to Venice that
swear he cannot choose but break. Shylock: I am very glad of it.
I’ll plague him, I’ll torture him. I am glad of it.
Tubal: One of them showed me a ring that he had of your daughter for
a monkey.
Shylock: Out upon her! Thou torturest me, Tubal: it was my turquoise,
I had it of Leah when I was a bachelor. I would not have
given it for a wilderness of monkeys. )III, i, 77:97(
Though the dialogue is obviously in prose, the juxtaposition of the
news of Antonio’s plight with that of Jessica’s flight is highly poetical.
Tubal’s report follows a pattern that allows Shylock to gloat and grieve
by turns and at intervals as he takes his cue from Tubal, whose attitude
here is open to interpretations. Mahood )1987/1989, p.112( comments on
Shylock’s “)t(hou torturest me, Tubal” pointing out that “the truth or
otherwise of this accusation has to be decided by actor or director”. She
explains that Tubal can be, “a business rival now getting his own back on
175
Page 186
Shylock, or he may simply be feeding Shylock’s anger because he shares
his hatred of Antonio” )ibid(. Whatever one’s interpretation may be, the
dialogue makes Shylock a most lifelike character, with Tubal revealing
this through his revelations. In rendering this dialogue Enani employs
metre in accentuating the swiftness and liveliness of the changes we
witness here: .. ! ذلك: لي قالوا بأنطونيو حل أيضا بغيرك النحس حل بل ال فيتوبال
ماذا: جنوا.. النحس؟ شيلوك النحس؟ ماذا؟ ماذا
! : طرابلس ميناء من العودة أثناء سفنه، إحدي غرقت توبال
! ! : حق؟ هذا هل حق؟ هذا هل لله حمدا لله حمدا شيلوك
! : المالحين من الناجين حادثت توبال ! ! ! : ها أنباء من أطيبها ما أنباء من أحسنها ما الرائع توبال يا شكرا شيلوك
.. أسمعت ها هاجنوا؟ في بهذا
. ) ( : دينارا سبعين واحدة ليلة في أنفقت قد جسيكا أن سمعت توبال
! .. : سبعون اليوم بعد هيهات ذهبي أري لن إذ بخنجر طعنتني لقد شيلوك
معا؟ !دينارا دينارا سبعون : يحلفون وهم صحبتي، في البندقية إلي الدائنين من كثير وعاد توبال
!بإشهار قريب عن إفالسه! ! ! : أسعدني ما به وأنكل سأعذبه أهناني ما أسعدني ما شيلوك
: ثمنا ابنتك إياه أعطته منهم، واحد مع الزبرجد، من خاتما ورأيت توبال
لقرد! ! !) ( : لقد الزبرجد؟ الخاتم عذبتني قد توبال جسيكا يا ملعونة شيلوك
هدية ( أخذته ليحا ) زوجتي !–من أيام الله يرحمها
فيه،! التفريط أقبل لست و خطبتنا( ! قرود من األرض في ما أعطيت ولو ص 1988حتي ،121-122)
176
Page 187
The original pattern is based on contrasting two states of mind. The
translation emphasises the contrast through associating each of the two
states with a certain metre that best suits it. Rajaz, the metre preserved for
the bad news and the reaction to it, literally echoes the heaviness of heart
Shylock experiences, while Khabab, used in talking about Antonio’s
imminent bankruptcy, is a metrical translation of the spiteful Shylock’s
throbbing of heart. The Rajaz foot is relatively long, especially when
compared to the Khabab foot; the former consists of three syllables,
while the latter consists of two. Apart from length, the nature of the
syllables makes each of the two metres more suitable for the purpose
Enani decides for it. The Rajaz foot consists of two short syllables )each
consisting of a consonant and a vowel respectively( followed by a long
syllable. The Khabab foot consists of two short syllables, each consisting
of a consonant and a vowel respectively.
Interesting is that the Rajaz modulations Enani employs in his version
of the dialogue even accentuate the effect of using Rajaz here. The main
modulations Enani depends on are متفعلن and مستعلن,each of which
involves the omission of one vowel from the original Rajaz foot)4( . The
omission is expected to quicken the pace of the metre. However, متفعلن
occurs more frequently than مستعلن; while the former is used eight
times, the latter only occurs three times. Opting for متفعلن as the main
Rajaz modulation here is not without significance. Though it involves the
omission of a vowel, متفعلن is still more capable of conveying the
heaviness of heart than مستعلن. The reason does not have to do with the
metrical composition of the foot; after all, each of these modulated feet
consists of four consonants and two vowels. It is the distribution of
consonants and vowels within the foot that makes متفعلن more suitable
177
Page 188
here. In مستعلن three consonants follow one another, which makes the
foot quicker, while in متفعلن the distribution of vowels and consonants
follow a pattern; two consonants are followed by a vowel, then two other
consonants, then a vowel. This regularity brings about a sense of
monotony. Besides, the positions of the two vowels foreground them.
The stop in the middle of the foot seems to be its distinctive
characteristic, while in مستعلن the focus is on the three consonants
following one another. Thus, the change of metre, along with the
modulations, helps to drive home the change in Shylock’s state of mind.
An equally interesting example of the role of the change of metre as
defined by Enani is his rendering of the fourth scene of act III from
Antony and Cleopatra )2007(. Enani’s translation of the conversation
between Antony and Octavia in which he tries to convince her of the
necessity of his waging war on Octavius, her brother, depends to a great
extent on metre in depicting Antony as the same shrewd manipulator the
audience/reader has met in Julius Caesar. The scene opens with Antony
enumerating examples of Octavius’s ill treatment of him: Antony: Nay, nay, Octavia, not only that,
That were excusable, that, and thousands more,
Of semblable import, -- but he hath waged
New wars against Pompey; made his will, and read it
To public ear;
Spoke scantly of me; when perforce he could not
But pay me terms of honour, cold and sickly
He vented them; most narrow measure lent me:
When the best hint was given him, he not took’t
Or did it from his teeth. )1:10(
178
Page 189
This speech establishes Antony as a representative of anti-Roman
values, or, in other words, it reflects the new identity which he has come
to acquire during his stay in Egypt. The stark contrast between the
Roman world and the Egyptian world as presented in the play has been
much discussed by such critics as Charney )1961(, Adelman )1973(,
Erickson )1985( and Wilders )1995(, who generally believe that in
Antony and Cleopatra Rome, Antony’s homeland, is a patriarchal
society which prides itself on a masculine curbing of passions and control
over emotions, a society whose main ideals are giving priority to the
general interest and disdaining pleasure seeking; Egypt, on the contrary,
is the world of passion where the ideal is celebrating love and life.
Adelman, the feminist critic, discusses Antony’s identification with
Cleopatra, an identification which Antony sees as subversive to his
masculine identity by the end of the play. Whatever one’s approach to the
play may be, Antony’s “Egyptian” identity cannot be missed in the
aforementioned lines. Antony is obviously passionate, giving full rein to
his anger, and consequently violating the “nosce te ipsum” )or ‘know
thyself’( doctrine. The reason for his anger is what he takes to be an
offence to his ego, which contrasts with the ideal of self-denial associated
with the Rome of Octavius Caesar. Enani )2007, p.22( points out that St.
Augustine used to refer to the praiseworthy characteristics of Augustan
Rome, one of the most important of which being self-denial. Enani
explains that St Augustine believed that Providence was behind Jesus
Christ being born during the time Octavius Caesar was emperor . Antony
is particularly critical of Octavius speaking “scantly” of him, which can
refer to both the quality and the quantity of Octavius’s praise. Antony
laments the linguistic plainness, or even poverty, of Rome as part of a
179
Page 190
Roman lifestyle of asceticism that he can no longer abide, fascinated as
he is by the Egyptian bounty and lavishness on all levels. Wilders )1995(
explains that Plutarch, a great admirer of the Roman ideals, criticises
Antony’s fondness of the Asian style, an ornate style which takes its
name from the Asians’ classical reputation for self-indulgence and
sensuality. Plutarch, Wilders states, finds similarities between the Asian
style and Antony’s lifestyle. Antony’s fondness of the ornate style is
manifest in the hyperbolic “and thousands more/ Of semblable import”
and the bombast of the superlative in “most narrow measure lent me” and
“when the best hint was given him”. Antony deals the final blow to his
Roman identity in, “…he could not/ But pay me terms of honor, cold and
sickly”, which, along with “from his teeth”, is a lamentation of the lack
of passion typical of the Occident as opposed to the warmth of the Orient.
Enani successfully reproduces Antony’s passionate tone through the
quickness of Khabab:
! :أنطونيو ذلك علي األمر يقتصر لم بل أوكتافيا يا ال الكذلك وتغاضيت السقطة عن تغاضيت لكنت اقتصر كان لو
! علي الحرب شن أوكتافيوس لكن نوعه من سقوط ألف عنالمجلس، في علنا وتالها وصيته كتب وكذلك بومبي
! تكريمي إلي اضطر حين حتي باستهزاء عني وتكلم
مضض علي و فتور بكل التكريم كلمات ألقيإطراء، أهزل أطراني وكذلك
لمديحي فرص من له يلوح كان ما فتجاهل. صادق إحساس وبال لفظا عنه يعبر كان أو
(10-1، 208،ص 2007 )
Here Enani resorts to all kinds of Khabab modulations, and, since all
the modulations of this metre involve changing one )or more( vowel into
180
Page 191
a consonant, they are all sure to quicken the pace of the rhythm even
more. Enani mainly depends on فعلن, the original Khabab foot, which
occurs a little more than thirty times in this speech. فعلن , which results
from changing the vowel of the first syllable into a consonant, comes in
the second place, occurring twenty times. فاعل, where it is the final
vowel that is changed, occurs eleven times, and فعلك , which consists of
four consonants, is used three times. The use of such modulations allows
up to seven consonants to follow one another, such as in the following
lines:كذلك وتغاضيت السقطة عن تغاضيت لكنت اقتصر كان لو
! علي الحرب شن أوكتافيوس لكن نوعه من سقوط ألف عن
وكذلك . بومبي المجلس في علنا وتالها وصيته كتبwhich can be metrically transcribed as follows:
فعلن فعلن فعلن فعلك فعلن فاعل فعلن فعلن فاعل فعلن
.. فعلن فعلن فعلن فعلن فعلن فع فعلن فعلن فاعل فعلن
فعلن فعلن فاعل فعلن فعلن فعلن فعلك فعلن فعلن In the first of these lines five consonants follow one another as a
result of فاعل being followed by فعلن. Another five-consonant
sequence occurs by the end of the same line, where فعلك is followed by
فعلك In the third line seven consonants follow one another as .فعلن is
followed by فعلن . Thus, Enani’s choice of Khabab is significant here.
The metrical composition of Khabab and the modulations it permits of
make it possible for the translator to accentuate the passionate tone of the
speaker through this metre.
181
Page 192
Octavia’s reply establishes her as a representative of the Roman
ideals and a foil to Antony’s beloved, Cleopatra: Octavia: O my good lord,
Believe not all, or, if you must believe,
Stomach not all. A more unhappy lady,
If this division chance ne’er stood between,
Praying for both parts:
The good gods me presently,
When I shall pray, ‘O bless my lord and husband!’
‘ O, bless my brother!’ Husband win, win brother,
Prays and destroys the prayer; no midway
‘Twixt these extremes at all.)12:21(
The speech reflects Octavia’s helplessness, consistent with her role as
a woman in the patriarchal society of Rome. Erickson )1985( points out
that Octavia, the sole woman in the Roman world as presented in the
play, is only important in as much that she is useful in reinforcing the
bond between the men. Therefore, the clashes between Antony and
Octavius seem subversive to Octavia’s very raison d’être and not only to
the peace of her world which depends on the peace between the two
leaders of the world, her husband and her brother. In accordance with her
Roman sense of duty she finds it impossible to take either of the two
parties’ side, and her mention of prayers seems to stress her helplessness
in the face of the moral dilemma she is experiencing. Here she is in stark
contrast with Cleopatra, who was quick to take actions against her own
brother once she felt endangered by his growing power, and who would
have never hesitated to support the man she loves against a family
member.
182
Page 193
Octavia’s conformity to her role as a Roman woman is manifest in
her “)b(elieve not all, or, if you must believe,/ Stomach not all’, which
implies that Octavius may have actually meant to offend Antony, and
makes her attempt to pacify Antony nothing but an attempt to make him
transcend his natural vengeful thoughts and adopt self-control. Octavia is
actually pleading with Antony to restore his Roman self. Again Enani
succeeds in reproducing Octavia’s tone by using Rajaz in rendering her
words. The slow, quiet rhythm of Rajaz is carefully employed to stress
Octavia’s helplessness as well as her typically Roman self-restraint:: .أوكتافيا سمعت ما كل تصديق من الكريم موالي حذار
! إساءة فيه ما كل في تجد فال صدقته إذا أماالنساء أتعس غدوت بينكما ما الخالف ينشب إن
! للطرفين بالنجاح صالتي في سأدعو ألنني: قائلة أدعو حين مني األرباب ستسخر وعندها
"! الصالة " سأنقض إنني إذ وموالي زوجي فباركوا أال! أخي يباركوا بأن نفسه باإلخالص الدعاء أرفع حين
معا أخي فليفز و زوجي فليفز قلت إن ! معه الداعي يحطم بل الدعاء يحطم ما فعلتبينهما وسطا لنفسي أري ال أحار .وعندها
(20 :11، 208-207ص )
Octavia’s typically Roman reply prompts Antony to change his
approach. He realises that he cannot win Octavia unless he temporarily
casts off his Egyptian identity and falls back on his Roman “props”Antony:Gentle Octavia,
Let your best love draw to that point, which seeks
Best to preserve it; if I lose mine honour I
lose myself: better I were not yours
183
Page 194
Than yours so branchless. …
When it appears to you where this begins,
Turn your displeasure that way: for our faults
Can never be so equal, that your love
Can equally move with them. )22:39(
In convincing Octavia of the legitimacy of his imminent war on
Octavius Antony depends on some of the values most cherished by the
Romans, such as justice and honour, questioning his worthiness of both
wife and life in the absence of honour, and even outdoing Octavia in the
“call for reason” as he asks her to judge both her brother and himself with
utmost neutrality. Enani resorts to Rajaz to mark the change in Antony’s
approach:: ! أنطونيو يصون الذي أفضل باختيار عليك الكريمة أوكتافيا أرجوك
!حبك .. نفسي فقدت شرفي فقدت إذا إنني إذ
! الشرف ضاع أن بعد يديك في بقائي من خير اليوم تفقديني أنالعدوان ... ابتدا الذي كان من تدركين وحين
. ما يكون أن المحال من فإنه سخطك عليه سلطي .. له الحب عينك في يستوي بحيث يعيبه لما مساويا يعيبني
( ! ص لي (36 : 22، 209والحب
Antony’s adoption of the metre used by Octavia acquires symbolic
significance. Through his use of Rajaz, Enani’s Antony is declaring that
he is no longer “the other”, sanctioning his restoration of his Roman
identity by “speaking” like Octavia.
Enani’s attitude to songs and lyrical pieces is in line with his general
domesticating approach. A song, he points out, should be a song in
translation )2007,3, p.45(, which entails that the form of the original,
184
Page 195
naturally specific to the source language and its culture, be replaced by a
form which the target reader would see as part of his/her own culture.
Reproducing, rather than preserving, the original form in translation
means that the translator should by no means try to closely follow the
wording of the original in the translation. Adding to, and omitting from,
the original text in translation, as well as changing the order of words and
ideas, are common practices among the translators who regard preserving
the identity of songs in translation as their first priority. Enani )2007(
explains that the most important element in songs and lyrical pieces is
musicality, while other elements, such as images, for instance, are
subordinate. Enani is particularly critical of the translators who resort to
prose in rendering songs, pointing out that they adopt a limited concept
of meaning, for, by insisting on following the wording of the original as
closely as possible, they overlook the fact that most of the meaning of a
song lies in rhythm rather than in words. Thus, Enani believes that the
ultimate goal to be sought when handling songs and lyrical pieces is
functional equivalence, which can rarely be attained if the translator
seeks equivalence on the levels of form and content. Enani’s rendering of
the following song of Ariel from The Tempest is one of the rare
examples where seeking functional equivalence does not result in any
significant losses on the levels of form and content: Ariel: [Sings in Gonzalo’s ear]
While you here do snoring lie,
Open-eyed conspiracy
His time doth take
If of life you keep a care
Shake off slumber and beware:
Awake, awake! )II, i, 334:339(
185
Page 196
: جونزالو [أريل أذن في ]يغني
سباتك في هنا تغط صحا وبينا
حياتك أخذ يدبر ويلحظ من يرنو وللوقتتبغي كنت إذا
فبادر النجاةوحاذر الجفون نعاس بنفض
( ! تيقظ تيقظ ص 2004تيقظ ،120 : 121، 295 :300)
Enani’s version of Ariel’s song is characterised by regularity of metre
and rhyme pattern. Meanwhile, it is obvious that equivalence on the level
of form is achieved to a great extent. Lines )1(, )2(, )4( and )5( metrically
correspond to their counterparts in that both the Arabic and the English
lines are tetrameters. Though the third and sixth lines in the original are
shorter than the ones corresponding to them in the translation it can be
said that Enani’s rendering of the song preserves the general pattern of
the original. In both the original and the translation the regularity of the
rhyming tetrameters is interrupted by a shorter, single line before
regularity is restored, and so on. Equivalence is also achieved on the level
of content. Enani’s version of the song is actually a line-by-line
translation that utilises a minimum of changes. The sole changes seem to
be the addition of الجفون in وحاذر الجفون نعاس and the ,بنفض
interpretation of “open-eyed conspiracy” which does away with the
image. Such “coincidences”, however, rarely occur, and, therefore, Enani
defines his priorities so that musicality should come first.
Enani states that regularity of metre in rendering songs can be
maintained through the classical forms of the ‘pure’ metres, pointing out
that his use of the composite metres)which occurs from time to time( is
186
Page 197
by no means intentional. In an article on the translation of songs from
Shakespeare’s plays he makes it clear that he has always resisted “the
temptation of composite metres” )2007,3, p.62(.
However, it must be noted that Enani’s use of Taweel in the following
example from King Lear is calculated:Cornwall: These kind of knaves I know, which in this plainness
Harbour more craft and more corrupter ends
Than twenty silly ducking observants
That stretch their duties nicely
Kent: Sir, in good faith, in sincere verity,
under the allowance of your great respect
Whose influence, like the wreath of radiant fire
On flickering Phoebus’ front --
Cornwall: What mean’st by this?
Kent: To go out of my dialect, which you discommend so
much. I know, sir, I am no flatterer. He that beguiled
you in plain accent was a plain knave, which, for
my part, I will not be, though I should win your
displeasure to entreat me to’t. )II, ii, 99: 114(
: المعرفة كورنوول حق األوغاد هذه ألعرف إني
القصد فساد أو الطوية مكر من الصريح القول في يخفون فهم
ساذجا ذليال تابعا عشرين علي يربو ما! المداهنة واجب أداء في يخلصون
: كنت أنطق بالحق موالي إنني اخلق أال لفظي واإلخالص وبالصدق
187
Page 198
ومشرقا كريما إذنا لنا يتـــــــألق أذنتم به محيـــــــاكم جـــالل
شعاعها يزال ال نار بطاقة يخفق المهيبة الشمس جبهة علي
: تقصد؟ كورنوول ماذا تعني ماذا: . كنـــــــت أنني سيدي يا واثق فأنا الغضب كل أغضبتك التي لهجتي أغير أن أقصد
مداهنا ،والذي . لست نفسي، تأباه ما وهذا صريح وغد العبارات بصريح يخدعك
. ذلك مني طلبت إن أغضبتك ولوص 1997) ،122-123 ،97 -104)
In the original, Kent imitates the honey-tongued courtiers to bring
into focus the difference between their artificiality and his bluntness by
resorting to regularity of rhyme and metre as well as by using pompous
language )e.g. the wreath of radiant fire, flickering Phoebus’ front, etc.(.
In so doing he condemns both the courtiers and the sovereigns who
enthusiastically encourage such “bootlicking”, such as Cornwall and Lear
himself, whose vulnerability to praise has resulted in tragic
consequences. Enani could have succeeded in conveying Kent’s
intentional artificiality had he used a traditional pure metre in rendering
his lines, but he goes further, choosing Taweel to render Kent’s lines.
Taweel is particularly associated with some of the most famous
panegyrics in the culture of Arabic. People still remember Annabigha’s
famous line:كواكب والملوك شمس كوكب بأنك منهن يبد لم طلعت إذا
which they quote, often humourously, whenever they detect bootlicking.
Thus, Enani’s use of a composite metre here is a means of bringing about
functional equivalence. By using Taweel Enani is referring the target
reader/audience to a target-culture tradition equivalent to the one evoked
by Kent in these lines.
188
Page 199
Achieving functional equivalence also entails that prose be used in
translation whenever it occurs in the original. In most of the prefaces to
his translations Enani states that he translates prose as prose, preserving,
in so doing, the stylistic variation on which the original is based. In this
connexion, Enani’s translation of The Merry Wives of Windsor )2008( is
particularly important. Most of this comedy is in prose, which is in line
with the classical distinction between tragedy and comedy on the basis of
the medium best suited to each, yet Enani )2008, p.12:13( points out that
dependence on prose as the main medium in this play may have to do
with its nature as a “critique” of the so-called comedy of humours,
developed by such playwrights as Chapman and Jonson. Shakespeare,
Enani explains, peoples the world of his play with character types, rather
than characters, only as a beginning; unlike Chapman and Jonson who
make the humour of a certain character the main factor governing that
character’s behaviour and attitudes, Shakespeare soon allows his
characters to develop in a strikingly realistic way, which makes prose,
rather than verse, the medium suitable for their depiction. Accordingly,
Enani follows in the footsteps of Shakespeare, emphasising the realistic
nature of the play by mainly depending on Modern Standard Arabic in
translating it, and preserving verse for the songs as usual.
It may be useful now to investigate Enani’s departures from the
aforementioned domesticating rules as well as the effects these
departures have. One of the most persistent departures has to do with
shifting from one metre to another. It is noticeable that in Enani’s
translations more than one metre can occur within the speech of a single
character. Enani recognizes such changes when it is Ramal, Rajaz and
Hazaj that are involved simply because of the close relationship between
189
Page 200
the three metres. Enani)2000, pp.178:179( discusses this relationship,
explaining that the addition of an initial short syllable to a Ramal line
suggests Rajaz rhythms. Meanwhile, Enani proceeds, this leaves us with
the option of regarding the change as a Ramal modulation, even
according to traditional prosody. Enani also points out that the omission
of an initial short syllable from a Ramal line results in Hazaj or Waafir
)ibid, p.179(. These changes often occur in Enani’s translations, a case in
point being his rendering of the following lines from Othello: Othello: It is the cause, it is the cause, my soul, --
Let me not name it to you, you chaster stars! --
It is the cause, yet I’ll not shed her blood;
Nor scar that whiter skin of hers than snow,
And smooth as monumental alabaster.
Yet she must die, else she’ll betray more men …
If I quench thee, thou flaming minister,
I can again thy former light restore,
Should I repent me: but once put out thy light,
The cunning’st pattern of excelling nature,
I know not where is that Promethean heat
That can thy light relume. When I have pluck’d the rose,
I cannot give it vital growth again.
It must needs wither: I’ll smell it on the tree. [kisses her]
Ah balmy breath, that dost almost persuade
Justice to break her sword! Once more, once more,
Be thus when thou art dead, and I will kill thee,
And love thee after. One more, and this is last.
So sweet was ne’er so fatal. I must weep,
But they are cruel tears: this sorrow’s heavenly:
It strikes where it doth love. She wakes.
) V, ii, 1:24(
190
Page 201
Enani renders these lines so that the base rhythm should be Ramal,
while Rajaz and Hazaj occur occasionally:: ! عطيل ! باسمها أبوح لن نفس يا العلة إنها العلة إنها
! لكن العلة إنها عفة ذات طاهرات نجوما يا لك
! ! الثلج مثل بيضاء بشرة بالندوب أصيب لن قط الدم أريق لن ! لكنها الصقيلة التماثيل مرمر مثل ملساء بشرة
تموت أن الرجال ...البد خيانة من المزيد علي أقدمت إال و هذا
.. يتوقد ضياء من مالكا يا أطفأتك إذا إنيندمت إن إليك أعيده أن أستطيع
الحياة هذه نور أطفأت إذا أماالطبيعة صنعه في تفوقت الذي الرائع المثال ذاك
الوقدة بالغ بشواظ آتي أين أدري فلستنورك يعيد بروميثيوس –كي كنت ولو حتي
جديد من النمو لها أستطيع لن وردة قطفت إذا إني! ! ذبولها من مناص ال بل األحياء سائر مثل
الشجرة علي ما أعطر األنفاس[ يقبلها]فألشمها
تكاد أن تقنع ربة العدالة نفسها بكسر سيفها!
قبلة أخري! فلتمكثي من بعد أن تموتي هكذا
وسوف أقتلك.. وبعدها أحبك! ذي قبلة أخري!
وهذه هي األخيرة! ما كان يوما فاتك ومهلك
بمثل هذه العذوبة! ال أستطيع أن أقاوم البكاء!
191
Page 202
لكنها دموع قسوة! إن حزني مثل أحزان القوي العلوية
-1، 265-264، ص2005فالله يبتلي الذي يحبه! إنها تصحو! ) 22)
Enani makes use of the relationship between Ramal, Rajaz and Hazaj
in depicting the instability of Othello in such a critical moment. The
metrical shifts of the translation stress the hesitation Othello experiences
before murdering his wife. The first shift is from Ramal to Hazaj, which
immediately gives place to Rajaz. The line: ! تموت أن البد لكنها الصقيلة التماثيل مرمر مثل ملساء بشرة
scans as follows:صقيلة ص تماثيل مرمرت مثل ساء مل بشرتن
مفاعي مفاعيلن فاعال فاعالت فاعالتن
تموت أن البدد كننها المتف مستفعلن مستفعلن
Even if the third and fourth feet are ص ماثيل ت or( مرمرت
فاالتن the regularity of Ramal is inevitably broken by the Hazaj )فاعالت
foot مفاعي. The introduction of Razaj does not negatively affect the
harmony simply because مستفعلن, the Rajaz foot, has the same metrical
value as مفا which results from the omission of the initial long ,عيلن
syllable from a Hazaj line. The rest of the speech is in Rajaz which
occasionally changes to Ramal, such as in .. أطفأتك إذا من إني ملاكا يايتوقد أن or to Hazaj, such as in ضياء بعد من هكذا فلتمكثي تموتي . The lines:
الوقدة بالغ بشواظ آتي كيف أدري فلستنورك يعيد كي
192
Page 203
bear witness to the close relationship between Rajaz and Ramal, for if
one chose to stop at the end of the first line, which is Rajaz, the next line
would be Ramal.
In fact, this Ramal-Rajaz-Hazaj combination is noticeably frequent in
Enani’s translations. Following is an example of it from a relatively early
translation-namely, that of King Lear :Lear: Of all these bounds, even from this line to this,
With shadowy forest and with champains rich’d
With plenteous rivers and wide-skirted meads,
We make thee lady: to thine and Albany’s issue
Be this perpetual. What says our second daughter,
Our dearest Regan , wife to Cornwall, speak. )I, i, 64:69(
: كلها البقاع هذي الحدود –ليــــــــــــــر هذه بين .–ما يمينك ملك
تجري األنهار تحته خصيب لبستان ظليل غاب فمن ! نسلكما من لألوالد ثم يمينك، ملك كلها الشاسعات للمراعي
. الزمان آلخر بل الكريم، والدوق أنتالعزيزة؟ ريجان تقول ماذا الوسطي؟ بنتنا تقول ماذا( ! تكلمي تكلمي كورنوول؟ زوجة تقول :59، 59 : 58،ص 1997ماذا
64)
The speech begins with a Rajaz line, followed by a Hazaj line which
makes use of both the full and the modulated Hazaj feet, scanning as
follows:رتجري أنها تهل تح خصيبن لبستانن ظليلن غابن فمن
مفاعيلن مفاعيلن مفاعيلن مفاعي مفاعيلن
مفاعي The third line also begins as Hazaj, but only if we chose to treat the
preceding line as a run-on line; if not, the whole line would be Ramal.
193
Page 204
The fifth and sixth lines are Rajaz. Again the three metres co-occur with
one another in the following example from Antony and Cleopatra
)translated by Enani in 2007(: Cleopatra: O most false love!
Where be the sacred vials thou should’st fill
With sorrowful water? Now, I see, I see
In Fulvia’s death, how mine received shall be.
)I, iii, 74: 77(
: ! كليوباترا المقدسة؟ القوارير أين زعمته الذي الحب أكذب ما
السخينة؟ الحب بأدمع ملؤها عليك يكن ألمفولفيا موت في أري أن أستطيع اآلن
( ! ص أموت عندما منك يكون (65-62، 131ما
The speech begins as Rajaz which temporarily changes to Hazaj in
the second line, which scans as follows:سخينة حببس معل بأد ؤها مل عليك يكن ألممفاعي مفاعيلن متفعلن متفعلن متفعلن
The last line is Ramal, scanning:أموت ما عند منك يكون ما
فاعالت فاعالت (5) فاعالت
The “temporary” change from Rajaz to Hazaj is discussed by
Mostajeer
)1987, pp.126:129( as a New-Verse Rajaz modulation. Mostajeer points
out that in the New Verse مفاعيلن “passes for” a Rajaz foot when it
occurs in a medial or a final position in a Rajaz line based on the
repetition of the modulated foot متفعلن . He explains that the repetition
of this modulated foot results in a series of long syllables to which
conforms the initial long syllable of مفاعيلن, while the rest of the foot,
194
Page 205
consisting of two short syllables, can pass for مستف, with which the full
Rajaz foot begins. Enani develops this feature of New-Verse Rajaz even
more, using the Hazaj modulations where the circumstances specified by
Mostajeer for their occurrence are not to be found, such as in the
following example from Enani’s version of Hamlet : Lord Polonius:Mark the encounter, if he love her not
And be not from his reason fall’n thereon,
Let me be no assistant for a state,
But keep a farm and carters. )II, ii, 177:180(
: لها، حبه اللقاء من يتضح لم وإن بولونيوسالحب، ذاك جراء من الجنون أصابه وأنه
الوزارة وظيفة من أستقيل فسوف( ! العربات صاحب الفالح بحرفة :164، 167،ص2004وأكتفي
167)
The Hazaj foot occurs three times in these Rajaz lines, but it is the
first Hazaj foot that is important here. In fact, the speech begins as Hazaj.
The first line scans as follows:لها بهو حب لقاء منل تضح يت لم وإن
متفعلن متفعلن متفعلن مفاعيلنAs the Hazaj foot occurs in an initial position here it is marked, and is
consequently unlikely to pass for part of the Rajaz series. In the
following example, from Antony and Cleopatra, the Hazaj feet occur
medially and finally, but متفعلن is not used frequently enough to blur the
identity of مفاعيلن :
Clepoatra: Cut my lace, Charmian, come;
But let it be: I am quickly ill, and well,
So Antony loves. )I, iii,84:86(
: ردائي عن الرباط فكي كليوباترا
195
Page 206
! وشفائي اعتاللي أسرع ما تفكيه ال بل
( ! أنطونيو غرام من ألقاه ما (73-71، 131،ص2007وفق
These lines scan as follows:كيهي تفك ال بل ردائي عن ط رربا فكك
مستف مستفعلن متفعالتن مستفعلنألقا ما ق وف شفائي و تاللي ع أسرع ما
مفاعيلن مفاعيلن مفاعيل مستفعلنأنطنيو م غرا من ه
مفاعيلن متفعلن seemsمفاعيلن ;occurs only once, but this is not everything متفعلن
persistent, occurring four times, three of which are successive. Therefore,
it is unlikely that مفاعيلن is meant to pass for a Rajaz modulation here.
Rather, the use of Hazaj within Rajaz seems to be more of a feature of
Enani’s use of Rajaz.
A more daring departure is the use of Rajaz and Khabab in the same
speech. These two metres are not particularly related and therefore their
use within the same speech would be more “salient” than using Rajaz,
Ramal and Hazaj that way. Noteworthy is the use of Rajaz and Khabab
in the same speech being less persistent than the use of the
aforementioned, related, metres. It is particularly to be noticed in Enani’s
early translations, notably his translation of king Lear . Following are
some examples: King Lear: I loved her most, and thought to set my rest
On her kind nursery. Hence and avoid my sight!
So be my grave my peace, as here I give
Her father’s heart from her! )I, i, 128:131(
عمري: بقية قضاء أود كنت بل بناتي، أحب تلك كانت لير
196
Page 207
! رعايتها حنان ظل وجهي في عن ولتغربي !فلترحلي
القبر في أنشد فكما
! أبيها قلب عنها أنزع الراحة،
ص 1997) ،62 ،117: 120)
************************************ King Lear: Call Burgundy. Cornwall and Albany,
With my two daughters’ dowers digest this third:
)I, i,132:133(
: ! لير بيرجندي .. نادوا أولباني يا كورنوول يا .وأنتما
! بنتينا صداقي بين الباقي المملكة ثلث فلنقسم
(123 : 121، 62ص)
************************************ King Lear: My lord of Burgundy.
We first address towards you, who with this king
Hath rivall’d for our daughter: what, in the least,
Will you require in present dower with her. )I, i,200:203(
: ! لير إليك أوال الحديث نوجه دعنا بيرجندي أمير سيدي يا! الملك لذلك منافسا ابنتي خطبة تريد من يا
لك فورا يدفع صداقا ترضاه ما أدني هو ما لي .قل
(187 :185، 66ص)
In the first and second examples the speeches begin as Khabab then
Rajaz is momentarily used before Khabab re-occurs. In the third example
Rajaz is followed by Khabab. In the light of the above examples one may
be tempted to associate switching between Rajaz and Khabab in Enani’s
version of King Lear with Lear’s state of mind at the moment he
pronounces such words. In other words, the metrical instability may be
197
Page 208
seen as a reflection of the psychological instability characterising Lear at
this stage of the play and leading to the catastrophic decision that dooms
his family. However, we soon realise that this conclusion needs to be
reconsidered once we come across the following examples of the co-
occurrence of Rajaz and Khabab, where the speaker is not Lear: Cordelia: But even for want of that which I am richer,
A still-soliciting eye, and such a tongue
As I am glad I have not, though not to have it
Hath lost me in your liking. )I, i, 248:251(
: السبب... كورديليا كان وإنمااغتنيت بدونه للذي افتقاري هو
ولسان الفضل، تستجدي فتئت ما عينأملكه أال يسعدني ذلق
. ورضاك حبك أفقدني غيابهما ولوان
(227 :225، 68ص)
************************************ King of France: Thee and thy virtues here I seize upon:
Be it lawful I take up what’s cast away.
Gods, gods! ’tis strange that from their cold’st neglect
My love should kindle to inflamed respect.
)I, i, 273:276(
: خصالك؟ خير في أو فيك؟ أفرط كيف بل فرنسا ملك! طرحوه ما آخذ أن لي حالل اآلن
! األشياء مستغرب من أليس أربابنا أربابنااإلهمال؟ ذلك برد فؤادي في نارا الغرام يلهب أن
(251 :246، 69ص )
************************************ Edgar: Hadst thou been aught but gossamer, feathers, air
So many fathom down precipitating,
198
Page 209
Thou’dst shiver’d like an egg: bt thou’dst breathe;
Hast heavy substance; bleedest not; speakest; art sound
Ten masts at each make not the altitude
Which thou hast perpendicularly fell: )IV, vi, 59:64(
: العنكبوت خيوط من خلقت قد كنت لو إدجارالشاهق العلو ذاك من سقطت ثم الهواء من لفحة أو ريشة كنت أو
! البيضة قشر مثل تفتت قد جسمك لكانكله ذلك وعلي ثقيل والبدن تتنفس لكنك
ومعافي صحيح والجسم تتكلم بل دم أي تنزف لمبعض فوق من بعضها السواري من عشرة إن بل
ص ) منه سقطت الذي البعد تبلغ (56 :50، 219لن
In more recent translations switching between Rajaz and Khabab
rarely occurs, one of the most important examples being the following
example, from Antony and Cleopatra: Cleopatra: I prithee, turn aside and weep for her,
Then bid adieu to me, and say the tears
Belong to Egypt: good now, play one scene
Of excellent dissembling … )I, iii, 91:94(
رأسك: أدرت وقد فراقها تبكي أن أرجوك كليوباترافودعني عد ذاك وعند
سالت الدموع إن وقل
مصر مليكة بالتمثيل! لوداع اآلن تقوم أن أرجوكمهارة عن ينم مشهد في
الكذب في رفيعة(79 :76، 132 :131ص )
The speech begins with Rajaz, then Khabab is momentarily
introduced with مصر مليكة Perhaps a more interesting example of .لوداع
switching between Rajaz and Khabab in recent translations is the
following example from Hamlet: King Claudius: I like him not, nor stands it safe with us
199
Page 210
To let his madness range. Therefore prepare you
I your commission will forthwith dispatch,
And he to England shall along with you.
)III, iii, 1:5(
: به حل ما يعجبني ال إذا الملك سالمتنا علي آمنا أكون ولن
! للرحيل استعدا وهكذا الزمام عنده للجنون أرخيت! إنجلترا إلي تصحبانه ص 2004 ) فسوف ،228: 229 ،1 :3)
This example is particularly interesting because moving from Khabab
to Rajaz occurs within the same line. The first line scans as follows:اامنن ن أكو ولن بهي ل حل ما جبني يع ال
متفعلن متفعلن فعلن فعلن فعلن فعلندهززمام عن جنون للـ أرخيت إذا متنا سال علي
متفعالن متفعلن مستفعلن متفاعلن متفعلن The change of metre in the above example is difficult to detect if the
line is read without pausing before آمنا أكون which is most likely ,ولن
because of و. Still, however, pausing is a possibility. In the following
example, from Macbeth, the metrical change involves a shift from
Motaqarab to Khabab, and is more subtle and intricate: Macbeth:… I have supp’d full with horrors;
Direness, familiar to my slaughterous thoughts
Cannot once start me. )V, v, 15:17(
: يعد فلم التقتيل خبر الذي جناني في ألفة ذا الرعب أصبح لقد مكبث
. نفسي يفزع الرعب(14، 236 :235،ص 2005 )
Basically, the metre used in these lines is Motaqarab, one of the
New-Verse metres occasionally used by Enani, especially in his version
of Macbeth. The regularity of Motaqarab, which depends on the
repetition of فعولن , is suddenly interrupted by the introduction of three
200
Page 211
Khabab feet )two modulated feet followed by a full foot( before
Motaqarab is finally restored. The lines scan as follows:دررع يع لم ف تيل تق برت خ لذي جنانل في فتن أل ذا ب ررع بح أص لقد
نفسي ع يفز بفعلن فاعل فاعل فعولن فعول فعولن فعولن فعولن فعولن فعولن
فعولن فعول Enani also departs from the rule of avoiding composite metres unless
the original is equally regular. In the following example, from The
Merchant of Venice, Enani employs Khafif in rendering Shylock’s
speech, and his decision to use a composite metre cannot be accounted
for in terms of functional equivalence since the original is not metrically
foregrounded: Shylock: The patch is kind enough, but a huge feeder,
Snail-slow in profit, and he sleeps by day
More than the wild cat. Drones hive not with me,
Therefore I part with him, and part with him
To one that I would have him help to waste
His borrowed purse. Well, Jessica go in;
Perhaps I will return immediately.
Do as I bid you, shut doors after you.
Fast bind, fast find:
A proverb never stale in thrifty mind.
)II, vi, 48:53(
أكول شيلوك: النوايا طيب أبله وكسول شغله في وبطئ
كقط النهار طول ونؤومالبراري قطاط من
شهد أقراص البيت خلية فيوقرار لذة دبور وهو
201
Page 212
لمديني وقدمته بل لفظته ولهذاويمضي إليه قرضي يضيع كي
عندي إن إبنتي اآلن ادخلي رغبة
قليل بعد أعود أن .. خلفك األبواب أغلقي مطلبي اآلن نفذي
" .. اإلمالق " من يسلم اإلغالق يحكم من! الحريص ذهن عن يغيب ال مثل
ص 1988 ) ،94)
The way Enani uses Khafif here is interesting. It marks a tendency to
individuality, not only because it does not reflect a metrical departure
from Shakespeare’s “normal” iambic pentameter but also because it
involves innovations that can never be described as totally belonging to
traditional Khafif, but rather as constituting a very special version of
Khafif, a version that makes use of the modulations of traditional Khafif
as well as those of the New Verse. Some of the lines of Shylock’s speech
can be regarded as traditional Khafif. The first and second lines, for
instance, are actually a traditional Khafif distich, scanning as follows:وكسولو شغلهي في وبطيئن ياأكولو نوا يبن طي أبلهن
فعالتن مستفعلن فعالتن فاعالتن متفعلن فاعالتن
This also applies to the fourth and fifth lines, whose scansion is the
following:وقراري رلذذتن دببو وهو شهدن راص أق لبيت ت خليي في
فعالتن متفعلن فاعالتن فاعالتن مستفعلن فاعالت
and to the eighth and ninth lines, which scan as follows:قليلن د بع أعود أن رغبتن عندي إنن إبنتي ن اا أدخللفعالتن متفعلن فاعالتن فاعالتن متفعلن فاعالتن
202
Page 213
Except for these, the speech involves “experimental” uses of Khafif.
The third line is a combination of traditional Khafif and a special kind of
Khafif associated in the culture of Arabic with the name of
Abul-’Atahyah, the famous Abbasid poet. كقط النهار طول نؤوم و
belongs to traditional Khafif; it scans as follows:كقططن ر ننها طول نؤومن و
فعالتن مستفعلن فعالتنThree feet, corresponding to these, are needed so that we should get a
Khafif hexameter. However, Enani chooses to shift to the Khafif
tetrameter, completing the line with two feet instead of three, a
combination never to be found in traditional Khafif. Moreover, the rest of
the line calls up to mind Abul-’Atahyah’s famous poem beginning:مالي و خبريني للخيال ما عتب
in which the Abbasid poet deviates from the usual metrical composition
of the Khafif tetrameter by omitting the final vowel of متفعلن, an
innovation never approved by the conservative prosodists in
Abul-’Atahya’s time. Enani follows in the foot steps of Abul-’Atahyah
here; the rest of the line scansبراري قطاطل من
متفعل فاعالتن In لفظته Enani further experiments with Khafif. The... ولهذا
scansion of the line is:مديني دمتهول وقد بل لفظتهو ولهاذامتفعل فاعالت فاعلن متفعلن فعالتن
The line can be said to be combining two different forms of Khafif. It
begins with the modulated Khafif hexameter; فاعلن is the outcome of
203
Page 214
“hazf”, a modulation whereby فاعالتن loses the short syllable with which
it ends.
Enani completes the line with the aforementioned “Abul-’Atahyah’s
Khafif”. In addition to combining different forms of Khafif Enani uses
two different metres in:خلفك .. األبواب أغلقي مطلبي اآلن نفذي
مطلبي اآلن belongs to the Khafif tetrameter, while the rest of the نفذي
line belongs to the Ramal tetrameter. The line scans as follows:خلفك واب أب أغلقل مطلبي ن الا نففذ
فاعالتن فاعالتن متفعلن فاعالتن
A temporary shift to Rajaz occurs in .. من يسلم اإلغالق يحكم من . اإلمالقFinally, the last line cannot be described as Khafif since it consists of a
Ramal foot followed by two Rajaz feet, scanning as follows:لحريص ذهن عن يغيب ال مثلن
مستفعلن متفعلن فعالتن The possibilities Enani is investigating here do not belong to
traditional prosody is concerned. Meanwhile, they are unlikely to be
investigated by New-Verse poets, who generally prefer the New-Verse
versions of the ‘pure’ metres to be their medium of expression. This kind
of metrical experimentation is foreignising in that it employs the regular
and the expected in questioning their very identities. Composite metres
are not used for their own sake, but are rather elements of a game which
the translator plays. The traditional Khafif with which Enani begins his
translation of Shylock’s words makes the irregularity of what is to follow
204
Page 215
all the more dominant, and the outcome is a “resistant” Arabic version of
Shylock’s words.
It should be noted that the degree to which Enani’s use of a
composite metre is foreignising is determined by the nature of the
composite metre involved. In the above example experimenting with
Khafif leads to Rajaz and Ramal, both of which are in harmony with
Khafif simply because the composite metre is based on مستفعلن and
In the preface to his version of The Merchant of Venice Enani .فاعالتن
explains that his uses of Baseet have naturally occurred in the context of
using Rajaz )1988, p.27(. This applies to the following: Solanio: Here comes another of the tribe; a third cannot be matched,
unless the devil himself turn Jew. )III, i, 61:62(
: حال سوالنيو تجدوا أن هيهات ملتكم، نفس من ثالث، جاءكم قد
إال.. يناسبكم( ! ص الشيطان فتهود الزمان، فسد (120إذا
********************* Portia: Away then! I am locked in one of them:
If you do love me, you will find me out.
)III, ii, 42:43(
! : هيه هذي منها .. بورشيا واحد في تلقاني لسوف .. تعرفه فسوف تهواني كنت إن
( . .. ص اختياره أثناء األلحان ولتعزف كلكم (125ابتعدوا
********************* Antonio: My lord Bassanio, let him have the ring.
Let his deservings and my love withal
Be valued ’gainst your wife’s commandment.
)IV, i, 465:467(
: !أنطونيو !( الخاتم ( فلتعطه باسانيو موالي! .. .. الميزان كفة في لك حبي وكل أتعابه كل ضع
205
Page 216
ص ) زوجتك؟ أمر ترجح (187أفليس
In the first example, for instance, a full Baseet line occurs in the
Rajaz context, scanning as follows: لتكم مل نفس من ثالثن جاءكم ينا قد حللن تجدو أن هيهات
سبكمفعلن مستفعلن فاعلن مستفعلن مستفعلن فعلن مستفعلن
فعلن Baseet is in harmony with Rajaz since it makes great use of the Rajaz
foot as we see here. The point is that it is this harmony that governs
Enani’s use of composite metres in rendering dialogue )as opposed to
songs and lyrical pieces(. Though the shift to a composite metre may not
be expected by the target reader in these examples the fact that the
composite metres used do not “jar with” the free-verse metres helps
Enani to maintain a balance between his domesticating approach and the
foreignising effect of composite metres occurring in such a “metrically
neutral” context. In the same vein, Rajaz permits of other composite
metres, all of which depend to some extent on the Rajaz foot, such as
Saree’ which occurs in the following examples, from The Merchant of
Venice, The Merry Wives of Windsor and Othello respectively: Portia: How now, Lorenzo?
My clerk hath some good comforts too for you.
Nerissa: Ay, and I’ll give them him without a fee…
Lorenzo: Fair ladies, you drop manna in the way
Of starved people. )V, i, 306: 313(
) دورك: ) هذا لورنزو يا بورشياتسرك سوف الكاتب أخبار
...! : أتعاب بال له أعطيها وسوف نيريسا : أمطرتا لورنزو فاتنتان هاتيكالجوعي علي والسلوي ص 1988! )المن ،213)
206
Page 217
***************** Host: Which means she to deceive, father or mother?
Fenton: Both, my good host, to go along with me.
)IV, vi, 46:47(
: الفندق ستخدع صاحب أنها أم الوالد؟ تخدع أن تنتوي هل
صاحب فنتون:؟الوالدة يا منهما كل خداع تنتوي بل
الفندق!244،ص2008 ) 45، : 246)
***************** Iago: Good sir, be a man;
Think every bearded fellow that’s but yoked
May draw with you…)IV, i, 65:67(
! ياجو: بحق رجال كن الكريم سيدي ذي يا كل أن تنس ال
.. لحية قد زوجة إلي نير في شد إن
معك أتاه فيما !يستوي
ص 2005 ) ،219 ،65: 69 )
Most of the time, however, it is hemistiches of Saree’, rather than full
lines of it, that occur in Enani’s translations, such as in the following
example from King Lear : Lear: Pray, do not mock me:
I am a very foolish fond old man,
Fourscore and upward, not an hour more or less;
And to deal plainly,
I fear I am not in my perfect mind.
Methinks I should know you, and know this man;
Yet I am doubtful for I am mainly ignorant
What place this is; and all the skill I have
Remembers not these garments; now I know not
Where I did lodge last night. Do not laugh at me;
For, as I am a man, I think this lady
To be my child Cordelia. )IV, vii, 70:81(
207
Page 218
: مني لير تسخري أال !أرجوك مغفل! أحمق عجوز فإنني
وأكثر، الثمانين أكثر جزت أو أقل ساعة !ال
عقلي زمام مالكا أراني ما الحق أردت وإنمعك الذي وأعرف أعرفك، أني إخال
هذا في أشك لكنني كامال جهال المكان وأجهل ،
ألبسها التي المالبس تذكر علي يعينني ال ذكاء من لدي ما وكلالبارحة الليلة كنت أين ص 1997! )أو ،237 ،60: 69)
The speech begins with a Saree’ hemistich and ends with another, and
the flow of Rajaz in between is interrupted twice by two Saree’
hemistiches. The first Saree’ hemistich has a modulated last foot, and so
do the two hemistiches in the middle, scanning فعلن مستفعلن مستفعلن
. The last Saree’ hemistich represents the basic Saree’ form, scanning
فاعلن مستفعلن . مستفعلن
Other composite metres which occur in the context of Rajaz include
Mojtath and Mokhalla’ Al Baseet. Mojtath occurs relatively frequently,
though seldom as a full line: Shylock: This was a way to thrive, and he was blest;
And thrift is blessing if man steal it not.
)The Merchant of Venice, I, iii, 81:82(
: !شيلوك البركة عليه حلت إنه بل اغتني وهكذا .. بالسرقة يكن لم ما أحل ربح ص 1988! )وكل ،66)
***************** Shylock: How now, Tubal, what news from Genoa?
Hast thou found my daughter?)ibid, III, i, 63:64(
: )شيلوك ) توبال( جنوا ( في تكن أفلم وراءك؟ ابنتي؟ ماذا وجدت أما ؟
(120ص)
208
Page 219
***************** King Lear: …I am ashamed
That thou hast power to shake my manhood thus;
That these hot tears, which break from me perforce,
Should make thee worth them. Blasts and fogs upon
thee.
)King Lear, I, iv,293:295 (
: المرأة هذه زلزلتها قد رجولتي تكن إن علي عار ليرأنفي رغم ي حر العبرات أذرف أن
عبرة؟ تساوين ! )وهل لعنة كل (291 :282، 99،ص1997عليك
*************
Goneril: This is practice, Gloucester
By the law of arms thou wast not bound to answer
An unknown opposite; )ibid, V, iii,175:177(
: جلوستر جونريل يا ! مكيدة ملزما كنت ما! تجهله غريم من التحدي ذلك تلبي أن النزال لقانون وفقا
(160 :152، 216ص )
Mokhalla’ Al Baseet is used less frequently. It always occurs in
hemistiches, such as in the following example, also from King Lear: Edgar: Let’s see these pockets: the letter that he speaks of
May be my friends. ) IV, vi, 281:283(
: جيوبه إدجار في اآلن ولننظريحملها التي الرسائل في يكون فربما
( . ص يفيدني (249: 247ما
Perhaps the most interesting example of the careful choice of the
composite metre)s( to be used in a certain New-Verse context is the
following example from King Lear, where composite metres are
“distributed” between the speakers in accordance with their basic
rhythms:
209
Page 220
Goneril: This is practice, Gloucester:
By the law of arms thou wast not bound to answer
An unknown opposite, thou art not vanquish’d,
But cozen’d and beguiled.
Albany: Shut your mouth, dame,
Or with this paper shall I stop it: Hold, sir:
Thou worse than any name, read thine own evil:
No tearing, lady, I perceive you know it.
)V, iii,175:182(
! : ملزما كنت ما جلوستر يا مكيدة جونريلالتحدي ذلك تلبي أن القتال لقانون وفقا
! تهزم لم فأنت وهكذا تجهله غريم من! وخداعا غشا قتلت بل ال
! فيه : الخطاب أدس أو امرأة يا فاك أغلقي إدموند [ألباني ]إلي
! .. ! ويوصف يسمي ال فيك الصفات خبث إن فتفضل سيدي اآلن هو ها. .. تعلمينه فيه فالذي الخطاب لخطف حاجة في لست
(160 :152، 261ص )
Enani’s Goneril basically uses Rajaz but resorts occasionally to
Mojtath )in جلوستر يا تهزم in( ’and Saree )مكيدة لم فأنت while ,)وهكذا
Albany uses Khafif, both the hexameter and the tetrameter. His speech
opens with the following Khafif tetrameter:امرأة يا فاك الخطاب أغلقي أدس فيه أو
then a Khafif hemistich, belonging to the hexameter, follows, then
another Khafif tetrameter occurs, only to be followed by حاجة في لستالخطاب another hemistich that belongs to the hexameter. The ,لخطف
speech ends with a hemistich that belongs to the tetrameter. The last foot
in this hemistich is modulated via “tarfeel” whereby a short syllable is
attached to it. Goneril’s lines following Albany’s are rendered as follows: ! : به علم علي إني فلنقل جونريل
210
Page 221
يدك في ال يدي في البالد قانون إنالمحاكمة؟ إلي يحيلني أن يستطيع من هنا هل
(163 :161، 261ص )
Goneril’s shift to New-Verse Ramal can be satisfactorily justified in
terms of the change in her state of mind following her discovery that her
schemes have been uncovered. Meanwhile, the change is in line with the
rhythm of Albany’s speech, the Ramal foot being a main component in
Khafif.
It naturally follows that the composite metres are particularly
foregrounded in Enani’s translations when the aforementioned harmony
is not taken into consideration. Composite metres are more likely to
attract the target reader’s attention to themselves when there is nothing to
pave the way for them, or, in other words, when the metrical environment
into which they are introduced helps to make them more salient. This
rarely occurs in Enani’s translations, which is in line with Enani’s
domesticating approach. In the following example, from King Lear,
Enani begins the speech with a Moqtadab monostich: King Lear: Where have I been? Where am I? Fair day light?
I am mightily abused. I should e’en die with pity,
To see another thus. I know not what to say.
)IV, viii, 61:63(
: أنا لير أين كنت الصبح؟ أين نور ذاك هل ؟ ! لغيري ذاك جري لو وظلم سافر خداع بل ال
. ! أقول ما أعرف ولست عليه إشفاقا متص 1997 ) ،236: 237 ،53: 55)
Enani’s Lear uses Rajaz and Ramal here. It has already been
explained that the two metres are closely related. أنا أين كنت belongs أين
to Moqtadab, a metre that cannot be directly related to either of the two
211
Page 222
metres. In the following example, from Richard III, the Khafif tetrameter
occurs in a Khabab context: Gloucester: Who knows not that the noble duke is dead?
)They all start(
You do him injury to scorn his corse. River: Who know not he is
dead! Who knows he is? Queen Elizabeth: All seeing heaven, what a world is
this!
)II, i, 81:84(
( : دالئل الجميع علي يظهر مات؟ األكرم الدوق أن يجهل فينا من ريتشارد
) والفزع الدهشة! إليه تسئ الرجل جثمان من سخريتك
: بموته؟ علم فينا من بل موته؟ يجهل فينا من ريفرز : ! إليزابيث فيها نعيش دنيا أي والشهادة الغيب ص 2007؟ )عالم ،149:
150 ،76 : 83)
Elizabeth’s words constitute a Khafif tetrameter. The last foot in each
of the hemistiches of the line has been subjected to the aforementioned
tarfeel. The change from Khabab, one of the least marked metres of new
verse, to the highly musical Khafif tetrameter is undoubtedly salient,
notably because, unlike Moqtadab in the previous example from King
Lear, the Khafif tetrameter is rather persistent.
Rendering songs and lyrical pieces is another area where departures
from the domesticating approach Enani adopts occur. In handling these
Enani occasionally resorts to certain strategies which may not be
described as entirely foreignising but rather as having an effect that calls
up to mind Venuti’s concept of the translator’s visibility. Enani’s use of
the Arabic metres in handling songs and lyrical pieces involves
departures from regularity that attract the reader’s attention to the
existence of a rewriter of the text s/he is reading, and as such departures
212
Page 223
are recurring they constitute an important feature of Enani’s style. The
first of these is juxtaposing traditional metres with New-Verse metres in
rendering songs and lyrical pieces, such as in the following example from
The Merchant of Venice, where classical Rajaz and New-Verse Rajaz
are used in rendering the poem Morocco finds in the golden casket: Morocco [Reads]:
‘All that glisters is not gold
Often have you heard that told
Many a man his life hath sold
But my outside to behold:
Gilded tombs do worms infold.
Had you been as wise as bold,
Young in limbs, in judgement old Your answer had
not been inscrolled. Fare you well, your suit is cold.’
)II, vii, 66:73(
:]يقرأ[األمير...
ذهب براق كل ما
الحقب علي يدور مثل
روحه شخص باع كموحسب يشاهدني كيما ! الذهب توابيت في يحيا القبر دود إن بل
ثاقبا ذهنك كان لو
جسم كشجاعتك في وحويت
الهرم الشيخ حصافة رسالتك الشباب طي الرد هذا جاء ما
! خطبتك .. خسرت قد وداعا اذهبص 1988 ) ،103)
Enani’s version of the song begins with traditional Rajaz. The first
and second lines are actually two hemistiches of the Rajaz tetrameter, and
so are the third and fourth lines. The fifth line is also a Rajaz tetrameter,
213
Page 224
though the way it is written may tempt the average reader to consider it a
New-Verse line. It consists of two hemistiches and can be written as
follows:يحـ القبر دود إن الذهب بل توابيت في يا
Thus, Enani initially preserves the regularity of the original in
translation, even rendering the original tetrameters as tetrameters.
However, beginning from the sixth line it is noticeable that lengths of
lines vary. The sixth line is a free-verse line, consisting of three Rajaz
feet. With the seventh line the Rajaz tetrameter is temporarily restored,
and the song ends with two lines which are actually two hemistiches of
the Rajaz hexameter. One may say that in this example functional
equivalence unexpectedly gives way to equivalence on the level of
content as the goal sought by Enani in rendering the song. The Arabic
version of the song is not as regular as the original due to the relative
metrical flexibility that characterises the former, which, together with the
flexibility of the rhyme pattern, attracts the reader’s attention to the
second-hand nature of the text in hand. In his preface to his version of
The Merchant of Venice Enani points out that depending on the classical
forms of the Arabic metres in translating verse drama is impractical; he
compares the task of the poet who uses the classical forms of Arabic
metres to that of the translator who insists on depending on these forms
when translating verse, explaining that the former is far easier since the
poet has more freedom, being the ultimate creator, while the translator
has to handle material that already exists so that it should fit in the strictly
regular forms s/he uses )1988, p.23:24(. Thus, the flexibility
characterising Enani’s use of Rajaz in this example can be regarded as a
214
Page 225
step towards individuality as it guarantees the translator more liberty in
handling the predetermined material.
In the aforementioned example the foreignising effect of Enani’s
flexible use of Rajaz is relative. The song still retains much of its
identity, partly because it is generally in verse and partly because most of
the metrical changes to which Enani resorts still belong to traditional
Rajaz. For instance, كشجاعتك ثاقبا ذهنك كان is a New-Verse line, yet لو
it is more regular than a New-Verse Rajaz line that consists of, say, five
feet, simply because it momentarily suggests the Rajaz tetrameter; as it
consists of three feet, this line is seen, at least for a second, as a hemistich
of the Rajaz tetrameter.
In the following example, from King Lear, the departure from traditional
Motaqarab is more foregrounded: Fool: When priests are more in word than matter;
When brewers mar their malt with water;
When nobles are their tailors' tutors;
No heretics burn'd, but wenches' suitors;
When every case in law is right;
No squire in debt, nor no poor knight;
When slanders do not live in tongues;
Nor cutpurses come not to throngs;
When usurers tell their gold i' the field;
And bawds and whores do churches build;
Then shall the realm of Albion
Come to great confusion:
Then comes the time, who lives to see't,
That going shall be used with feet.
)III, ii, 86: 99(
Enani translates this extremely regular piece as follows:
215
Page 226
المهرج: يوم ذات كهاننا مال إذا
الكالم معاني دون اللفظ إلي
خمارنا بالماء وأفسدالمدام طعم و الكؤوس مذاق
أشرافنا الزهو من وباتتالهندام حائكنا تعلم
هنا المارقون يحرق ولمالغرام بجرم العاشقون بل
قانوننا عند يستوي وإذاألنام وظلم إقامة عدل
ديون من أشرافنا يشك ولمفرسان فاقة من تشك ولم
ماهرين امنا شت وأصبحلسان دون النميمة بفن
زنيم جيب نشال يأت ولم
الزحام حشود وسط ليندسهنا مراب كل وأقدم
الحرام في ربحه عن فأعلنوالمومسات القوادة أهل وأصبح
السالم دين كنائس بناةالبالد بهذي يحل فسوفزمام بغير وفوضي دمار
الزمان هذا صحب يا جاء فإنالعيان كرأي أراه وإني
أقدامهم فوق الوري سيمشي! الزمان ذاك اليوم أغرب فما
(95 : 80، 161 :160ص )
With the exception of one line, Enani’s version of the song belongs to
traditional Motaqarab; each line is actually a hemistich, constituting with
the one following it an octameter. Enani resorts to the usual licenses to
216
Page 227
preserve the regularity of the metre and rhyme pattern as much as
possible. For instance, both السالم السالم in دين دين كنائس and بناة
زنيم in جيب جيب are additions, and so is the last line, which Enani نشال
provides so as to stress the comic effect of the bathos of the fool using
the solemn style of a typical soothsayer to make such a commonplace
prophecy. However, achieving functional equivalence does not seem to
be the main goal sought by Enani in rendering these lines, a fact to which
والمومسات القوادة أهل bears witness. In this line five وأصبح
Motaqarab feet are used instead of four, and the resultant line, which
totally belongs to New Verse, is a “one-time occurrence”, foregrounded
against the highly regular background of traditional Motaqarab. A
translator who sees functional equivalence as his/her first priority would
adhere to the regularity of the metre even if this entails that part )or all(
of the literal meaning of the original line be changed or sacrificed; some
translators would even omit whole lines so as to preserve the identity of
the song )or poem( in translation, but this does not apply to Enani, who
seems to set limits to the use of such licenses. Enani only gives functional
equivalence precedence when this does not involve significant losses on
content level; once achieving functional equivalence seems to entail
much violation of the literal meaning Enani re-defines his priorities,
which opens the door to metrical innovations that bring the translator, as
a creative individual, into focus. An even more interesting example is
Enani’s rendering of the leaders’ song from Antony and Cleopatra,
where juxtaposing traditional metres and New-Verse metres have effects
more sophisticated than merely changing line length: Come, thou monarch of the vine,
Plumpy Bacchus with pink eyne!
217
Page 228
In thy fats our cares be drown’d,
With your grapes our hairs be crown’d:
Cup up, till the world go round!
Cup up, till the world go round!
)II, vii,127:132(
) ( : المؤانسة الكرمة مليك يا إلينا أقبل يغني الغالمالناعسة بالعيون السمين أيها باخوس
عبابك وسط الهموم أغرق الدنان وفي
أعنابك من بالجميل الرؤوس وكلل ) ( : معا أعتابك الجميع علي دنيانا تدور لكي فلتسقنا
أعتابك علي دنيانا تدور لكي فلتسقناص 2007 ) ،192 ،111 : 116)
Enani mainly depends on the Rajaz tetrameter here. With the
exception of the last two lines, each line can be divided into two
traditional hemistiches. For instance, the first line can be written as
follows:مليـ يا إلينا المؤانسة أقبل الكرمة ك
With عبابك وسط الهموم أغرق الدنان a change occurs that وفي
cannot be described as belonging to traditional prosody, but which,
meanwhile, is by no means a shift to New Verse. The first line ends with
a full Rajaz foot, which, according to traditional prosody makes it
necessary that each line ends either with a full Rajaz foot or with متفعلن,
as “khabn” )الخبن(, or the omission of the first vowel in the foot, is the
only modulation allowed in this case. This rule is violated in the third
line, where مستفعلن becomes مستفعل by means of Qat’ )القطع), a
modulation whereby the vowel with which the long syllable ends is
omitted, and the consonant occupying the final position as a result of the
omission is changed into a vowel. This violation of the rule does not
much affect the regularity of the metre simply because Enani commits
218
Page 229
himself to the same number of feet in each line. Enani is not resorting to
New Verse here; he is simply mixing two forms of the traditional Rajaz
tetrameter. Besides, the rhyme pattern Enani designates for his version of
the song )which is the same as that of the original song( is remarkably
regular; Enani sees to it that the change in the rhyme pattern reflects the
aforementioned metrical changes, which reinforces the regularity of the
song. The regularity, however, is suddenly interrupted by حتي ولتسقناأعتابك علي دنيانا which consists of four feet, the last of which is , تدور
modulated via tarfeel )though this modulation, in which a short syllable
is attached to the foot, can only be used with Rajaz in traditional prosody(
and consequently cannot be regarded as a full line, nor can it be regarded
as a hemistich. Moreover, the line consists of two Rajaz feet followed by
two Hazaj feet followed, in turn, by a short syllable. The Hazaj feet stand
out. As متفعلن occurs only once they are not likely to pass for Rajaz
since the metrical environment in which they occur does not permit of
their being regarded as such. The short syllable with which the line ends
does not give us the sense of closure we expect from the end of the line.
It renders the line all the more unstable.
In the following example, from Hamlet, Enani juxtaposes different
forms of Ramal in his rendering of the famous gravedigger’s song, but
more important is the way he uses the modulations of traditional Ramal:
First Clown: In youth, when I did love, did love,
Methought it was very sweet,
To contract, O, the time, for, ah, my behove,
O, methought, there was nothing meet.
…
But age, with his stealing steps,
Hath claw'd me in his clutch,
219
Page 230
And hath shipped me intil the land, As if I had never
been such.
…
A pick-axe, and a spade, a spade,
For and a shrouding sheet:
O, a pit of clay for to be made
For such a guest is meet.
)V, i, 63:95(
أحب الحفار: كنت عندما شبابي في! عذب الحب بأن تصورت كم
يحلو الذي في يمضي العمر وبأن ! وأرجو أرضي بالذي يأتي ثم
...
مسترقة بخطي يمضي العمر أن غير
ونابا في نافذا ظفرا القبضة تحكم
زلقة أرض نحو سفيني في لم ورماني فكأني
! شبابا يوما أكن
...
وجاروف بأيدينا حفار فأسلفوف أكفانا ذلك علي زدنحفره تراب من رمسا ثمضيوف من نالقي ما نالقي كي
ص 2004 ) ،296: 298 ،61: 95)
Enani’s version of the song begins as traditional Ramal. The first
stanza opens with a Ramal hexameter, scanning as follows:أحب ت كن عندما شبابي عذب في حبب ل بأنن ت تصوور كم
فاعالت فعالتن فاعالتن فعال فاعالتن فاعالتن
Four modulations occur here, but what matters to us is the modulation
to which the last foot of the line is subjected. The last foot becomes
220
Page 231
a modulation whereby the vowel of the ,(القصر) by means of Qasrفاعالت
short syllable with which the foot ends is omitted and the consonant
which takes its place is changed into a vowel. We have already seen that
according to traditional prosody modulating the last foot of the first line
necessitates that the last foot in each line of the poem be modulated in the
same way, unless the modulation involved is “Khabn”, or the omission of
the first vowel in the foot. The rest of the stanza, however, does not
conform to the rules of traditional prosody. Unlike the first and second
lines, the third and fourth lines cannot be regarded as hemistiches of the
same line since the former consists of four feet )the last of which is only
a short syllable( while the latter consists of three feet and ends with a full
Ramal foot, scanning as follows:وأرجو ضي أر بللذي يأتي ثمم
فاعالتن فاعالتن فاعالتن The second stanza is more symmetrical than the first stanza, but only
if we regarded each two lines as a distich. The outcome does not certainly
belong to traditional Ramal since it would consist of eight feet while six
feet is the maximum in a traditional Ramal line. This, however, means
more conformity as far as the aforementioned rule of modulation is
concerned, as both the first and the second “distiches” would end with a
full Ramal foot .
Regarding each of the so-called “hemistiches” as an independent line
would give us three Ramal tetrameters, but this would also involve a
radical departure from traditional prosody as the aforementioned rule of
modulation would be violated, for while each of the first and third
tetrameters would lack the short syllable with which it should end )as a
result of a modulation known as hazf or الحذف( the second tetrameter
221
Page 232
would not. Thus, regarding these lines as tetrameters means departing
from traditional prosody which would never accept mixing these two
forms of the Ramal tetrameter. In either case the last line of the stanza
would stand out because it consists of three feet rather than four.
The last stanza could have been the most regular, had not the first line
of it been highly foregrounded. The third and the fourth lines are
hemistiches of a traditional Ramal hexameter, scanning:ضيوف من مانالقي نالقي كي نحفره ترابن من رمسن م ثم
فاعالت فاعالتن فاعالتن فاعال فاعالتن فاعالتن The second hemistich ends with the modulated foot فاعالت , and so
does لفوف أكفانا ذلك علي This, together with the fact that they . زد
rhyme, constitutes a high degree of conformity to the rules of Arabic
prosody, meanwhile making the first line all the more odd. In حفار فأسوجاروف Enani makes use of a traditional Ramal modulation, but in بأيدينا
a way that seems to question its identity as a feature of traditional
prosody. The line scans as follows :ناوجاروف بأيديـ رن حففا فأس
فاعالتان فاعالتن فاعالتنThe last foot becomes فاعالتانvia tasbeegh )تسبيغ), a modulation
associated with the feet ending with short syllables, such as the Ramal
foot, which involves attaching a vowel to the foot involved. Traditional
prosodists tell us that tasbeegh is only used with the last foot in the line,
the classical example of it being the following lines: و المخب الركب المجدون أيها األرض علي ن
كنــــــــا أنتم كمـــا وكما و
تكــونــون نحــن occurs in the second hemistich but not in the first. فاعالتان
where
222
Page 233
As everything in the last stanza suggests that the first and second lines
be regarded as a distich it can be said that here Enani is using a
traditional modulation in a way that questions its traditionality. In other
words, Enani is depending on an eclectic approach in handling this
traditional modulation, as he chooses to use it but chooses not to commit
himself to the limitations set on its use by the traditional prosodists.
Generally, Enani’s version of the gravedigger’s song is an investigation
of different metrical possibilities in which the translator capitalises, to a
great extent, on traditional prosody, but only in a way that questions the
regularity associated with it. Enani’s approach to songs and lyrical pieces
in general can be described as reflecting an individualistic tendency;
songs and lyrical pieces are metrically foregrounded in Enani’s
translations, but not in a way that caters to the target reader’s
expectations. Rather, they are foregrounded as a result of the translator
giving precedence to the creative impulse rather than to rules that
guarantee invisibility .
Enani generally commits himself to functional equivalence when
handling the prose used by Shakespeare in his plays. As the use of prose
usually has significance Enani preserves it in translation. However,
Enani’s version of The Merchant of Venice constitutes an exception, for
most of the prose used in this play is translated into Arabic as verse.
Enani is aware of the implications his decision to render prose as verse
may have for functional equivalence. Accordingly, he is keen on
justifying his use of verse in place of prose whenever this phenomenon
occurs. For instance, he explains that though the second scene of Act II is
originally written in prose most commentators agree that its structure is
close to that of poetry in many respects. This, Enani proceeds, is
223
Page 234
particularly manifest in Shakespeare’s use of punning and antithesis
among other devices associated with poetry, which makes it difficult, if
not impossible, to preserve for the scene its character unless it be
translated as verse )1988, p.219(. Though Enani’s decision to use verse
here may be described as an attempt to achieve functional equivalence
after all, it is obvious that it is not functional equivalence that is sought in
the following example: Nerissa: What think you of the Scottish lord his neighbour?
Portia: That he hath a neighbourly charity in him, for he borrowed a
box of the ear of the Englishman and swore he would pay him
again when he was able. I think the French man became his
surety and sealed under for another. )63:67(
جاره: في رأيك ما نيريسااألسكتلندي؟ اللورد
المحسن : أمثولة فيه أري بورشيا! هناك األقربين لجيرانه
اإلنجليزي ذلك من نال لقدمؤلمة لطمة وجهه علي
بسيط كقرض رآها ولكناستطاع ما رده علي اليمين وأدي
! الضمان رهن الفرنسي وأمسيص 1988 ) ،58)
Enani’s translation of Portia’s reply to Nerissa’s question about the
Scottish suitor of the former is foregrounded. Unlike the rest of the scene,
where Enani depends on either Khabab or New-Verse Rajaz, the
Motaqarab lines we have here are highly regular. The first and second
lines constitute a traditional Mortaqarab distich, and so do the third and
fourth lines. The fifth line is a traditional Motaqarab hemistich, while the
sixth line is a departure from regularity, consisting as it is of five feet
224
Page 235
instead of four, and consequently not “qualifying” as a traditional
Motaqarab hemistich. The last line is a return to regularity, though, like
the fifth line, it is only a hemistich. Though the pentameter stands out in
such a context it complicates the overall effect of the lines rather than
relates these lines to the broader, metrically neutral context of the scene
as a whole. The irregularity of the pentameter in this context does not
actually counterpoise the regularity of the rest of the speech; rather, it
makes the regularity all the more dominant. Each of the Motaqarab
pentameter and the traditional Motaqarab is foregrounded in its own
right, and the stark contrast between them foregrounds Portia’s reply
against the rest of the scene in a way that cannot be justified in terms of
functional equivalence. Portia’s reply is actually a joke on the
relationship between Elizabethan England and Catholic Scotland
following the reformation of the church in the former. Enani stresses his
individuality as a rewriter of the text by choosing not to follow the
classical rule that associates comedy with prose. The loftiness of the
traditional metre would always attract the target reader’s attention to the
fact that a rewriting process, undertaken by an “individual” other than the
original writer, has taken place, especially if the target reader is aware of
Portia’s light-hearted tone.
Enani comments on the second scene of act II, where Shakespeare
uses prose to present Lancelot Gobbo, the main comic character in the
play, pointing out that the use of prose in that scene is significant and
consequently should be preserved in translation. This time Enani chooses
to commit himself to the aforementioned rule. Nevertheless, an
individualistic tendency seems to redefine Enani’s hierarchy of priorities
so that seeking functional equivalence should no longer be the ultimate
225
Page 236
goal in handling Gobbo’s prose. Enani describes the “prose” he uses in
translating Gobbo’s speeches as “rhythmic” )1988, p.223(, yet the fact is
that most, if not all, of Enani’s version of the prose in this scene can be
classified as New Verse. Following are some examples that bear witness
to this: Lancelot: Ergo Master Lancelot. Talk not of Master Lancelot, father,
for the young gentleman, according to fates and destinies, and
such odd sayings, the sisters three, and such branches of
learning, is indeed deceased, or as you would say in plain terms,
gone to heaven. ) 49:53(
!) ( .. ! ) فكما: ) لونسلوت المسكين تذكر ال كفي لكن عظيم فلونسلوت إذن لونسلوت
قضييقول وكما البشر، أقدار بشأن األسطورة، سالف في أتي وكما والقدر، المصير . .. عاد الصريحة بالعبارة أي المنية ووافته أجل قضي قد العلوم في الراسخون
( . ص 1988للسماء ،80)
*********************************
Lancelot: The old proverb is very well parted between my master
Shylockand you, sir; you have the grace of God, sir, and he hath
enough.
)124:126(
.. ! : كان: فإذا بينكما إذن فلنقسمه كفاية الله غفران في يقول المعروف المثل لونسلوت
) شيلوك ) لدي( ! ص الغفران فلديك (84كفاية،
Enani’s Lancelot uses New-Verse Rajaz in the first example and Khabab
in the second. In the following example he even uses traditional Hazaj: Lancelot: … [Looks at palm of his hand] Well, if any man in Italy have a
fairer table which doth offer to swear upon a book!—I shall
havegood fortune. Go to, here’s a simple line of life, here’s a
226
Page 237
small trifle of wives: alas, fifteen wives is nothing…
)132:135(
.. .. .. الحظ: كمثل الرؤيا تكشف كفوف إيطاليا كل في وهل أبتي يا السعد أتاني لونسلوت .. .. .. قرينات معناه الخط وهذا العمر امتداد إلي يشير خط به ما وأول كفي؟ في
( ! .. عشرين وال خمستاشر؟ (85 :84،ص1980كثيرات
The original lines are particularly important in that they constitute a
joke whose effect has to last longer since it marks Lancelot’s exit, and
has to be a “grand finale” to the comedy in the scene. Enani chooses to
foreground the lines by rendering them as traditional Hazaj, departing
from the expectations formed by the target reader in the light of Enani’s
declared approach to the prose of this scene. Traditional Hazaj, or the
Waafir tetrameter)7( , is not particularly elevated; on the contrary, it is
probably more suitable than most traditional metres for conveying the
lightheartedness characterising Lancelot’s words. However, it is the
remarkable musicality of Hazaj, rather than the content of the lines, that
would always be “in the spotlight”, especially to a target reader aware
that Enani’s use of verse here constitutes a departure from his declared
approach. The use of Egyptian Arabic is interesting here. On the one
hand, the shift to Egyptian Arabic in عشرين وال may be !خمستاشر؟
useful in making up for the inevitable loss resultant from using verse in
place of prose; the contrast between the classical nature of the metre and
the “commonplace” nature of the language is an important source of
comedy in Enani’s version of Lancelot’s speech. On the other hand, it is
the use of Egyptian Arabic that enables Enani to maintain the regularity
of Hazaj.
In the light of the foregoing it may be said that though he has chosen
to adopt a domesticating approach Enani has always succeeded in making
227
Page 238
himself visible as a translator. Throughout his career as a translator of
Shakespearean drama Enani has always found ways to stand up to the
neutrality of the New-Verse metres he has designated as his medium of
expression. An individualistic tendency has always characterised his
work. This individualistic tendency has had different manifestations as
we have seen, but more important is the way it has developed with every
stage of Enani’s career as a translator of Shakespearean drama. In the
early translations an interest in musicality is the main manifestation of
Enani’s individualistic tendency, with the consequence that the line of
demarcation between prose and verse is sometimes obliterated in
translation. Enani seems to be “carried away” by the rhythms of the
Arabic metres in his early translations; prose is translated as verse, even
traditional verse sometimes, and the metrical neutrality of the New-Verse
metres is often mitigated through utilising a rhyme pattern that cannot be
considered a reproduction of a feature of the original, such as in the
following example from The Merchant of Venice, where the rhyming
lines render Shylock’s New-Verse Rajaz all the more musical: Shylock: You call me misbeliever, cut-throat dog,
And spit upon my Jewish gabardine,
And all for use of that which is mine own …
What should I say to you? Should I not say
‘Hath a dog money? Is it possible
A cur can lend three thousand ducats?’ Or
Shall I bend low, and in a bondman’s key,
With bated breath and whisp’ring humbleness,
Say this:
‘Fair sir, you spat on me on Wednesday last,
228
Page 239
You spurned me such a day, another time
You called me dog: and for these courtesies
I’ll lend you thus much monies.’
) I, iii, 103: 121(
! وكلب: سفاح و كافر إني قلت كم شايلوك
جوخ فوق بصقت كم سترتيوحالل من ربح !ثروتيألخذ
...
أقول أن عساني ماذا ماال؟ وتطلب تأتيني ؟لك اآلنأن لي يحق أسألكأال
مال الكالب لدي وهلالنقود؟ إقراض الكلب يستطيع هل
و االنحناء مني الركوعتريد
مذلة في كالعبيد الخشوعوالهمسفي أقول خضوع وأن
: لحيتي فوق األربعاء يوم بصقت لقد العظيم سيدي يا
سمتني قريب يوم في الهوانوأنت
بعد آنا كالكالب أني آنوقلت المكرمات جزاء ما الغامرةو
القروض بتقديم الوافرة!إالص 1988) ،67 : 68)
Later in his career Enani is noticeably able to control his passion for
poetry, and the individualistic tendency comes to have more sophisticated
manifestations through Enani’s daring use of both the New-Verse metres
and their traditional counterparts, which involves departing from the
rules governing both as well as juxtaposing them in a way that calls up to
229
Page 240
mind Venuti’s call for a “heterogeneous discourse” )1998,p.12( which
makes use of the different possibilities of English, questioning the
“seeming unity of standard English”)ibid, p.11( by juxtaposing the
standard and the nonstandard, neologisms and archaisms, Americanisms
and Briticisms, jargon and colloquialisms, etc. The coexistence of
traditional metres and free-verse metres has a similar experimental effect.
It creates hybrid texts which owe their distinctive identities to metrical
diversity, and which strongly point toward a rewriter whose commitment
to domestication is always paralleled by an interest in occasionally
shifting the target reader’s attention “from the conceptual signified to the
play of signifiers on which it depends” )Venuti, 1995, p.24(, and,
consequently, to the “individual” behind the text.
230
Page 242
Chapter (4): Notes
1. Buhairy’s original words are:
عهد في بدأتها الشعرية،التي الترجمة مواصلة في أفادني وقد
أننيالشباب
ظهورها صاحب التي الجميلة، الشوقية الطريقة علي عالجتها . أشياء إليها أضفت وقد ذكرت أن سبق كما بشكسبير اتصالي
عند هامة تكن لم
ص ١٩٧٨شوقي. ) ،١٦)
2. The word average is of great importance here. Though well-educated readers
do accept the fact that many Jews all over the world are critical of the Israeli
brutality to the Palestinians, most average readers find it difficult to
differentiate between the Jewish faith and Zionism.
3. “Short syllable” is a convenient translation of what Arabic prosody refers to as
“Sabab”. In Arabic prosody two kinds of short syllables )or Asbab( are used.
The first consists of a consonant followed by a vowel, and is known in Arabic
as خفيف or a light Sabab(. The other consists of two consonants and is( سبب
known as ثقيل or a heavy Sabab(.A long syllable is what is known in( سبب
Arabic prosody as “Watad Majmou’”, a unit consisting of two consonants
followed by a vowel. In English discussions of Arabic prosody a short syllable
is sometimes referred to as a light syllable and a long syllable is called a
heavy syllable, but this classification is avoided here since it may cause
confusion regarding the nature of a heavy syllable; as one may tend to equate
“syllable” with “Sabab” s/he is likely to equate “a heavy syllable” with “ a
heavy Sabab”.
4. In Arabic prosody the concept of vowel is different from, or rather broader
than, the English concept of vowel. In addition to the traditional short and
long vowels, the concept also encompasses stop consonants, or consonants
which speakers stop at, or, in other words, which denote a stop, such as م ,ف
, etc.
5. In this Ramal line the three feet are modulated. The first and second feet lack
their final vowels; each ends with a consonant. This modulation is known as
232
Page 243
“Kaff”. The third foot ends with a vowel as the final vowel of it is omitted and
the consonant, the remainder of the last syllable, is changed into a vowel. This
modulation is known as “Qasr”
6. Actually, the third line )or the first monostich of the second distich( ends with
but it has already been mentioned that Khabn is not a modulation to ,فعالتن
which the poet should commit himself.
7. Traditional prosodists used to regard Waafir and Hazaj as independent metres,
but the close relationship between the two so-called metres has led many
scholars, such as Amin Ali El-Sayyed, to regard them as one metre, or, to be
more accurate, as two forms of the same metre. Both metres are based on the
repetition of مفاعيلن . Waafir is a hexameter; each hemistich in a Waafir
line consists of three feet the last of which is modulated through “hazf” i.e. the
short syllable with which it ends is omitted. Hazaj is a tetrameter each of
whose hemistiches consists of two full feet.
233
Page 244
Conclusion
The pervious discussions show that domestication and foreignisation
as defined by Venuti are not mutually exclusive concepts. In practice
domestication and foreignisation tend to be treated as two concepts that
can together inform the work of a given translator, regardless of the
declared approach and orientation of this translator. Translators usually
opt for the options likely to solve the translation problems they face both
efficiently and with a minimum of effort, as is pointed out by Levy
)1967(. Accordingly, a translator bent on domestication may resort to a
foreignising option if it can help him/her to solve a certain translation
problem and “move on”, and vice versa. It has been shown that Enani
occasionally handles certain translation problems in a way that results in
a foreignising effect at odds with his declared domesticating approach.
Similarly, Abu Shadi and Jabra sometimes give up their foreignising
approaches give up their foreignising approaches, opting for solutions
which make certain parts of their translations read fluently, and
consequently stand out.
Another important point highlighted by the study has to do with the
degree of intentionality in resorting to either domestication or
foreignisation. It has been shown that translators may not necessarily be
aware of the effect of their decisions on their translations as far as
domestication and foreignisation are concerned. Furthermore, the
translator’s awareness of the motives behind a certain decision s/he
makes does not necessarily guarantee that the effect of using a certain
strategy in response to these motives will result in the intended effect.
Buhairy, for instance, depends on the classical forms of the Arabic
234
Page 245
metres in translating Shakespeare’s plays with a view to producing
versions of Shakespeare’s plays that would sound genuinely Arabic, and
consequently win Buhairy a position amid the great writers of Arabic.
Despite the clarity and precision of his motives Buhairy ends up
producing translations that cannot be regarded as part of the
contemporary canon literature simply because he insists on referring the
target reader back to an earlier literary epoch whose ideal has been
“dethroned” by another ideal, where New Verse, with its more flexible
metres, plays a central role. Buhairy’s translations will always be
regarded as “archaic”, and, consequently, they will be conceived the way
Buhairy wanted them to be conceived. Thus, it is the target reader, not
the translator, who decides whether the effect of employing a certain
strategy is domesticating or foreignising.
Since domestication and foreignisation are not mutually exclusive,
and since either can occur where it is not expected by the translator it
follows that attempting to judge a certain translation as domesticating or
foreignising beforehand would be neither accurate nor rewarding. It
would be more useful to focus on the steps of decision making as
reflected by the target text, the end product of the translation process,
instead of having in mind certain presumptions derived from the
translator’s declarations concerning his approach. As the translator
usually treats each translation problem separately each decision made by
the translator should be investigated and analysed apart from other
decisions made by the same translator )either in a given translation or in
other translators by him/her(. Any conclusions to be reached should be
directly derived from what one sees on the pages of the translations, no
matter what the translator’s declared approach )or intention( may be. In
235
Page 246
other words, in handling domestication ad foreignisation as realized in
the work of translators )rather than as theoretical concepts( one should
adopt a descriptive approach, not a prescriptive approach.
236
Page 247
Works Cited
Alderman, J. )1973( The Common Liar: An Essay on Anthony and Cleopatra.
New Hanen & London.
Appiah, K. )1993(. Thick translation, Callaloo, 16:24, 808 -809.
Beekman, J. & J. Callow )1974( Translating the Word of God.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House.
Charney, M. )1961( Shakespeare’s Roman Plays: The Function of Imagery in the Drama.
Clemen, W. )1951( The Development of Shakespeare’s Imagery. Methuen )London(.
Dymokowski, C.)ed.( )2000( The Tempest. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Elam, K. )ed.( )2008( Twelfth Night. Arden.
Enani, M. )2000( On Translating Arabic: A Cultural Approach. Cairo: GEBO.
Erickson, P. )1985( Patriarchal Structures in Shakespeare’s Drama. Berkely and Los
Angeles.
Evan-Zohar, I. )1978/2000( ‘The Position of Translated Literature Within the Literary
Polysystem’, In L. Venuti )ed.( )2000(, pp. 192 -7.
Foakes, R. )ed.( )1997( King Lear. Arden.
Hervey, S. and I. Higgins )1992( Thinking Translation: A Course in Translation
Method: French to English. London and New York: Routledge.
Hockett, C. )1954( Translation via immediate constituents. International Journal of
American Linguistics, 20:24, 313 – 315.
Honigmann, E. )ed.( )1997( Othello. Arden.
Jowett, J. )ed.( )2000( King Richard III. Oxford University Press.
Leech, G. )1969( A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry. Longman.
Lever, J. )ed.( )1967/1991( As You Like It. New Swan Shakespeare. Longman Group
UK Ltd.
Levy, J. )1967/2000( ‘Translation as A Decision Process’, in L. Venuti )ed.( )2000(.
148-59.
237
Page 248
Lewis, P. )1985( The measure of translation effects, in J. Graham )ed.( )1985(, pp.13
– 62.
Mahood, M. )1987/1989( The Merchant of Venice. Cambridge University Press.
McEachern, C. )ed.( )2005( Much Ado about Nothing. Arden.
McMullan, G. )ed.( )2000( King Henry VIII. Arden.
Muir, K. )ed.( )1997( Macbeth. Arden.
Nida, E. )1964( Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Nida, E. & C. Taber )1969) The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E. J.
Brill.
Oliver, H. )ed.( )1973( The Merry Wives of Windsor. Arden.
Sapir, E. & D. Mandellbaum )eds.( )1983( Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in
Language, Culture and Personality. University of California Press.
Siemon, J. )ed.( )2009( King Richard III. Arden.
Shuttle, M. & M. Cowie )1997( Dictionary of Translation Studies. Manchester: St.
Jerome.
Steiner, G. )1975/1998( After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. London,
Oxford and New York : Oxford University Press.
Taylor, N, & A. Thompson )eds.( )2006( Hamlet. Arden.
Venuti, L. )1995( The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London
and New York: Routledge.
Venuti, L. )1998( Scandals of Translation: Towards an Ethics of Difference.
London and New York: Routledge.
Venuti, L. )ed.( )2000) The Translation Studies Reader. London and New York:
Routledge.
Wilders, J. )ed.( )1995( Antony and Cleopatra. Arden.
Wilson, J. D. )1962( Shakespeare’s Happy Comedies. Faber & Faber.
238
Page 249
Online Resources :
Sallam, A. )2009, February23( On Rhythm and the Spirit of Poetry [MASRAHEON].
A message
posted to http://www.masraheon.com
239
Page 250
العربية المراجع .) ( : المقتطف، مجلة إصدارات من القاهرة، ترجمة العاصفة شادي أبو زكي .1930أحمد
. : ط الكبري المآسي جبرا إبراهيم . 2جبرا والنشر،. للدراسات العربية المؤسسة بيروت
2000
.) ( : ط ترجمة عطيل مطران . 8خليل عبود،. مارون دار .1974بيروت
.) ( : ط ترجمة البندقية تاجر مطران .8خليل . المعارف. دار القاهرة .) ( : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة البندقية وتاجر العاصفة بحيري عامر
1978.
. : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، عامر ديوان بحيري .1982عامر
.) ( : المعارف، دار القاهرة، ترجمة فارغة ضجة حافظ .1969عباس
. : للنشر، العين دار العربي الشعر عروض إلي رياضي مدخل مستجير .1987/2006محمد
.) ( : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة البندقية تاجر عناني .1988محمد
. : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، والغازية الدرويش عناني .1994محمد
.) ( : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة وجولييت روميو عناني .1996محمد
. : لونجمان، والتطبيق النظرية بين األدبية الترجمة عناني .1997محمد
.) ( : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة الثامن هنري عناني .1998محمد
. : : القاهرة، الترجمة دراسات مبحث إلي مدخل الحديثة الترجمة نظرية عناني محمد
لونجمان، للنشر العالمية المصرية .2003الشركة
.) ( : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة العاصفة عناني .2004محمد
. : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، نجاة طوق عناني .2004محمد
.) ( : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة هاملت عناني .2004محمد
.) ( : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة عطيل عناني .2005محمد
.) ( : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة مكبث عناني .2005محمد
" " " : " : الثالث، العدد ، لوجوس في جديد مدخل األدبية الترجمة عناني .2007محمد
.) ( : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة عشرة الثانية الليلة عناني محمد
2007.
.) ( : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة وكليوباترا أنطونيو عناني .2007محمد
.) ( : العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة الثالث ريتشارد الملك مأساة عناني محمد
.2007للكتاب،
.) ( : العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة وندسور من مرحتان زوجتان عناني محمد
.2008للكتاب،
240
Page 251
.) ( : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة فارغة ضجة عناني .2009محمد
.) ( : للكتاب، العامة المصرية الهيئة القاهرة، ترجمة تحب كما عناني .2010محمد
.) ( : المعارف، دار ترجمة العاصفة إبراهيم عوض .1961محمد
.) ( : المعارف، دار القاهرة، ترجمة المرحتان وندسور زوجتا حبيب .1973مصطفي
- ط القاهرة، العربيةز اللغة مجمع الوسيط .2المعجم
.) ( : المعارف، دار القاهرة، ترجمة عشرة الثانية الليلة حسين طه .1973مؤنس
.) ( : القاهرة، ترجمة العاصفة جريس إسكندر .1929يوسف
241
Page 252
BibliographyAlderman, J. )1973( The Common Liar: An Essay on Anthony and Cleopatra.
New Hanen & London.
Appiah, K. )1993(. Thick translation, Callaloo, 16:24, 808 -809.
Baker, M. )1992( In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. London and New York:
Routledge.
Baker, M. )ed.( )1977a( The Routledge Encyclopedia of Transaltion Studies. London and
New York: Routledge.
Bassnett, S. )1980, revised edition 1991) Transaltion Studies. London and New York:
Routledge.
Beekman, J. & J. Callow )1974( Translating the Word of God. Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Publishing House.
Bell, R. )1991( Translation and Translating: Theory and Practice. London and New York:
Longman.
Catford, J. )1965) A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: OUP.
Charney, M. )1961( Shakespeare’s Roman Plays: The Function of Imagery in the Drama.
Chesterman, A. )ed.( )1989( Readings in Translation Theory. Helsinki: Finn Lectura.
Chesterman, A. )ed.( )1997) Memes of Translation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John
Benjamins.
Classe, Olive )ed.( )2000( Encyclopedia of Literary Translation. London.
Clemen, W. )1951( The Development of Shakespeare’s Imagery. Methuen )London(.
Delisle, J. & J. Wordsworth )eds.( )1995( Translators Through History. Amsterdam and
Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Dymokowski, C.)ed.( )2000( The Tempest. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Elam, K. )ed.( )2008( Twelfth Night. Arden.
Enani, M. )1995( The Comparative Tone. Cairo: GEBO.
Enani, M. )1996( The Comparative Moments. Cairo: GEBO.
Enani, M. )1999( Dictionaries for the Translator. Cairo: The Anglo-Egyptian Bookshop.
Enani, M. )2000( On Translating Arabic: A Cultural Approach. Cairo: GEBO.
242
Page 253
Erickson, P. )1985( Patriarchal Structures in Shakespeare’s Drama. Berkely and Los
Angeles.
Evan-Zohar, I. )1978/2000( ‘The Position of Translated Literature Within the Literary
Polysystem’, In L. Venuti )ed.( )2000(, pp. 192 -7.
Fawcett, P. )1997( Translation and Language: Linguistic Approaches Explained.
Manchester: St Gerome.
Foakes, R. )ed.( )1997( King Lear. Arden.
Frawley, W. )ed.( )1984( Translation: Literary, Linguistic and Philosophical Pespectives.
Newark, London and Tornto: Associated University Presses.
Gaddis Rose, M. )1997( Translation and Literary Criticism. Manchester: St Jerome.
Gentzler, E. )1993( Contemporary Translation Theories. London and New York: Routledge.
Graham, J.F. )ed.( )1984( Difference in Translation. Ithaca, Ny: Cornell University Press.
Guenthner, F. & M. Guenthener-Reutter )eds.( )1978( Meaning and Translation:
Philosophical and Linguistic Approaches. London: Duckworth.
Gutt, . )1991, 2nd edition 2000( Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context. Oxford:
Blackwell; Manchester: St Jerome.
Hatim, B. & I. Mason )1990( Discourse and the Translator. London and New York:
Routledge.
Hatim, B. & I. Mason )1997( The Translator as Communicator. London and New York:
Routledge.
Hermans, T. )ed.( )1985a( The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation.
Beckenham: Croom Helm.
Hervey, S. and I. Higgins )1992( Thinking Translation: A Course in Translation
Method: French to English. London and New York: Routledge.
Hockett, C. )1954( Translation via immediate constituents. International Journal of
American Linguistics, 20:24, 313 – 315.
Holmes, J. S. )ed.( )1970( The Nature of Translation: Essays on the Theory and
Practice of Literary Translation. The Hague and Paris: Mouton.
Holmes, J. S. )ed.( )1988a( Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation
Studies. Amsterdam: Ropodi.
Honigmann, E. )ed.( )1997( Othello. Arden.
243
Page 254
Jowett, J. )ed.( )2000( King Richard III. Oxford University Press.
Kelly, L. )1979( The True Interpreter. Oxford: Blackwell.
Larson, M. L. )1984( Meaning-based Translation: A Guide to Cross-language
Equivalence. Lanham, NY and London: University Press of America.
Leech, G. )1969( A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry. Longman.
Lever, J. )ed.( )1967/1991( As You Like It. New Swan Shakespeare. Longman Group
UK Ltd.
Levy, J. )1967/2000( ‘Translation as A Decision Process’, in L. Venuti )ed.( )2000(.
148-59.
Lewis, P. )1985( The measure of translation effects, in J. Graham )ed.( )1985(, pp.13
– 62.
Malmkjar, K. )ed.( )1991( The Linguistic Encyclopedia. London and NY: Routledge.
Malone, J. L. )1988( The Science of Linguistics in the Art of Translation. Albany:
State University of NY Press.
Mahood, M. )1987/1989( The Merchant of Venice. Cambridge University Press.
McEachern, C. )ed.( )2005( Much Ado about Nothing. Arden.
McMullan, G. )ed.( )2000( King Henry VIII. Arden.
Muir, K. )ed.( )1997( Macbeth. Arden.
Munday, J. )2001( Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications.
London and NY: Routledge.
Newmark, P. )1981( Approaches to Translation. Oxford and NY: Pergamon.
Newmark, P. )1988( A Textbook of Translation. NY and London: Prentice-Hall.
Nida, E. )1964( Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Nida, E. & C. Taber )1969) The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E. J.
Brill.
Niranjana, T. )1992( Sitting Translation: History, Post-structuralism, and the
colonial Context. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Nord, C. )1997) Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches
Explained. Manchester: St Jerome.
Oliver, H. )ed.( )1973( The Merry Wives of Windsor. Arden.
244
Page 255
Popovic, A. )1976( Dictionary for the Analysis of Literary Translation. Edmonton:
Department of Comparative Literature, University of Alberta.
Robinson, D, )1997a( Translation and Empire: Postcolonial Theories Explained.
Manchester: St Jerome.
Robinson, D. )1997b( Western Translation Theory from Herodotus to Nietsche.
Manchester: St Jerome.
Sapir, E. & D. Mandellbaum )eds.( )1983( Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in
Language, Culture and Personality. University of California Press.
Schulte, R. & J. Biguenet )eds.( )1992( Theories of Translation. Chicago and
London: University of Chicago Press.
Siemon, J. )ed.( )2009( King Richard III. Arden.
Shuttle, M. & M. Cowie )1997( Dictionary of Translation Studies. Manchester: St.
Jerome.
Snell-Hornby, M. )1988, revised 1995( Translation Studies: An Integrated
Approach. Amsterda and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Steiner, G. )1975/1998( After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. London,
Oxford and New York : Oxford University Press.
Steiner, G. )ed.( )1975( English Translation Theory: 1650-1800, Assen and
Amsterdam:van Gorcum.
Taylor, N, & A. Thompson )eds.( )2006( Hamlet. Arden.
Toury, G. )1980( In Search of a Theory of Translation, Tel Aviv: The Porter
Institute.
Toury, G. )1995( Descriptive Transaltion Studies - and Beyond. Amsterdam and
Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Venuti, L. )ed.( )1992( Rethinking Translation: Discourse, Subjectivity, Ideology.
London and NY: Routledge.
Venuti, L. )1995( The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London
and New York: Routledge.
Venuti, L. )1998( The Scandals of Translation: Towards an Ethics of Difference.
London and New York: Routledge.
245
Page 256
Venuti, L. )ed.( )2000) The Translation Studies Reader. London and New York:
Routledge.
Vermeer, H. J. )1989/2000( ‘Skopos and Commission in Translational Action’, in L.
Venuti )ed.( )2000(, pp. 221-32.
Wilders, J. )ed.( )1995( Antony and Cleopatra. Arden.
Wilson, J. D. )1962( Shakespeare’s Happy Comedies. Faber & Faber.
246
Page 257
Key words : Translation, literary translation, translating Shakespearean
drama, domestication, foreignisation, the translator’s invisibility, the
illusion of transparency, resistant translation.
) الدالة شكسبير، :)الكلمات دراما ترجمة التغريب، ، التقريب ، الترجمة
المقاومة الترجمة ، المترجم اختفاء المحلي، الطابع .إضفاء
247
