---

Author(s): Ramadan Ahmed Almijrab.

Volume/Issue: Volume 4 , Issue 1 (2021)

Abstract:

In translation, the target text in general displays fewer linguistic variations than the source text and its lexical and syntactic patterns incline to be copied, creating interference and standardization of the ST. Is a translation meant for audiences who are unable to comprehend the original text? Or is it saying the same thing again? These questions demonstrate the divergence of the audience in the domain of art. Yet any rendition, which tries to convey the function, cannot transmit anything but essential information. Does this mean that conveying the essential information represents the cause of inferior translation? Does the inferiority come as a result of the transfer of an inaccurate content? This is the trademark of translationese. Is it true that traduttore, traditore? Does this really mean a translator is born not made? However, scholars engaged in heated debate about what is generally regarded as the essential material of a literary work, what it contains in addition to information. Does it mean that we admit that literary work is profound and mysterious? Do we admit that literary work is poetic to the extent that it can only be reproduced by a translator only if he is also a poet? This will be true whenever a translation undertakes to serve its readerships. However, do we blame the translator if the original culture does not exist in the reader’s language and culture? In the present paper, we will attempt to lay a finger on the significance of achieving equivalence in literary translation within cultural implications that may block the translator. A primary of place is assigned to البلاغة (Arabic rhetoric) as one of the cornerstones of Arabic.

Keywords:

Arabic Rhetoric, A Figure of Speech, English-Arabic, Culture, Literary Translation

No. of Downloads: 32