Professional Documents
Culture Documents
إشكالية ترجمة النصوص ذات الخصوصية الثقافية
إشكالية ترجمة النصوص ذات الخصوصية الثقافية
:
- -
" " .
.
.
-
. -
" " ) .(Common Grounds
:
.
:
.
.
.
.
.
.
) ( .
.
.
) (Normalization
. -
-
. :
) (
) (:
-
.
.
. -
:
.
.
:
)(:
" "
.
.
.
.
:
.
.
.
. " "
: ) ( R. J. Arberry
_ .
- ) (Themes
:
.
.
( :
. ) ( ) ( )(theme
.
. ) ( ) (.
. .
:
:
. " " ) (.
. " " ) (.
25
20
15
Series1
10
Series2
5
0
1
:
.
) (.
%.
%.
%.
%.
:= = = = =
) (.
%.
%.
%.
%.
%.
:= = = = =
Descriptives
Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
32.00
55.00 41.6000
8.79204
34.00
59.00 46.0000
11.15796
42.66
73.33 55.4500
11.73081
45.33
74.66 59.3280
12.43490
Valid N (listwise) 5
Means
Report
A
B
Mean
N Std. Deviation
34.00 55.0000 1
37.00 38.0000 1
44.00 45.0000 1
56.00 38.0000 1
59.00 32.0000 1
Total 41.6000 5
8.79204
T-Test
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean
Pair 1
A 41.6000 5
8.79204
3.93192
B 46.0000 5
11.15796
4.98999
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
df
.526
Sig. (2tailed)
Upper
Lower
Pair
1
AB
4.4000
18.70294
8.36421
-27.6228
18.8228
.627
T-Test
Paired Samples Statistics
Mean
Pair 1
Pair 2
A 41.6000 5
8.79204
3.93192
B 46.0000 5
11.15796
4.98999
C 55.4500 5
11.73081
5.24618
D 59.3280 5
12.43490
5.56106
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
df
Sig. (2tailed)
Upper
Lower
Pair
1
AB
4.4000
18.70294
8.36421
-27.6228
18.8228
.526
.627
Pair
2
CD
3.8780
22.15973
9.91013
-31.3929
23.6369
.391
.716
(4 2 )
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
N2 "
45
73 62.25
13.150
N4 "
40
79 64.75
14.705
Valid N (listwise) 4
Excluded
Total
.0% 4 100.0%
Report
N2
N4
48
45.00 1
57
72.00 1
75
59.00 1
79
73.00 1
Total 62.25 4
13.150
(4 2 )
Std. Deviation
Mean
N Minimum Maximum
9.38083
55.00 45.0000
34.00
VALUE
12.51799
59.00 44.8000
30.00
VALUE2
Valid N (listwise) 5
Total
Included
Report
VALUE
N Std. Deviation
Mean
VALUE2
38.0000 1
30.00
34.0000 1
36.00
54.0000 1
43.00
44.0000 1
56.00
55.0000 1
59.00
9.38083
45.0000 5
Total
:
) ( _ -
) (%. ) . (%.
) ( Themes
) (
) (% ) ( %
.
) %.
%. ( .
" ".
" !
" ..
) (
:
"
"Edmund .
" " .
. :
"
".
C. Coquard
" "
M. Murphy
" "
M. Jennings
" .
. " .
" " .
:
.
.
.
.
.
:
:
:
.
.
.
.
.
) .(Common Grounds
.
.
.
.
. .
. :
.
. ) (CALL
.
: -
"( " )
.- .
Approaches to
( " " )
. Translation
"( " )
.- .
."( " )
.
." :( ")
. ." " . ()
_______________________________
: -
Funoti, Lawrance, (1996) Translation and the Pedagoy of Literature College of
English, Volume 58, Number 3, March 1996.
Hanna, Smah (2001). Arabic Translation of Shakespears Great Tragedies In
Egypt: A socio-cultural critique Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation.
Ali, Zaneb ( 2001). Translation and Ideology, with special reference to ArabicEnglish translation during political crises Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation.
Kenny, Dorothy ( 2001). Norms and Creativity: Lexis in Translated Text A
corpus- based Study, Manchester: St. Jerome.
David Galantai (2002) Literal meaning in translation. STUDIES IN
TRANSLATOLOGYPERSPECTIVES: 2002: 3 Volume 10: 167- 194
Abstract
This article presents a new perspective on the literal versus free translation debate in
Translation Studies; central to this still influential debate is the notion of objectively definable
literal utterance meanings. A critique of this notion is given in the light of findings from the
study of metaphors and other speech figures. It is investigated how concepts relate to words
and how language relates to thought. Finally, a tentative model of the translation process,
excluding the notion of literal meanings, is set up on the basis of Reddys and Lakoffs
investigations concerning metaphors.
Oana-Helena Andone
Gender issues in translation 135
Abstract
The cultural turn in Translation Studies allows us to understand translation as being
related to other aspects of communication. It defines translation as a process of mediation
which moves through ideology and identity.
Translation has traditionally been looked upon as a secondary reproductive activity.
This is associated with misogynist stereotypes of women, and it can therefore be argued that
translation is described in gendered terms, negatively related to women. It is a fact that,
historically, women have been discouraged from participation in the public sphere. Some
turned to translation as the humble alternative to authorship. In so doing, they stayed within
accepted parameters and formally acknowledged their inferiority only to challenge the norm
and make their voice heard.
In feminist theory, translation is viewed as production, not reproduction. Language is
a means of creating meaning, and meaning is created in order to reveal feminine identity.
Feminist translation redefines the notions of fidelity, equivalence and the invisibility of the
translator. These are directed not at the original but at the feminist project, i.e. the reworking
of meaning so as to reverse the effects of male social and cultural domination.
. .
- :
: ) ( ) (
: ) ( ) (
:) (
) (
) (
) (
) (
) (
) (
- .
. ) (
- :
. .
.
) (.
. :
"
" .
" " .
" " .
"
" ..
" " ..
"
" .
" !
" ..
" "
" "
.
. :
"
" ".
" ".
" .
".
( ) .
The Ode of Tarafah
Anthology of Islamic Literature, James Kritzeck, ed., 1964 Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, NY., p.58-60 with acknowledgements for "The Ode of Tarafah," from
THE SEVEN ODES, translated by A.J.Arberry, copyright by George Allen &
Unwin, Ltd.