naturalness in literary translation

7/31/2019 Naturalness in Literary Translation

1/24


2/24

form to attain a matching literary level to the original. Other references to

naturalness are merely notions, less crystallized in the form of a concept.


3/24

Naturalness in Literary Translation

1.Features of Naturalness

The salient features of naturalness can be classified as primary and secondary, the

latter - such as intelligibility, accessibility or readability being generated by the

former. The primary ones, which are well-formedness, acceptability, idiomaticity,

authenticity and contemporaneity, are more rigid than the secondary ones.

2.1 Well-Formedness

Well-formedness is a property of syntax which requires that the target language be

consistent with the TL grammar rules (a requirement elaborated on in 3.2) and be

free from SL syntactic interference.

Acceptability2.2

Acceptability in the TL can be ensured by compliance with the target linguistic and

cultural norms. More restrictively, it may ensue from grammaticality, which applies

particularly to literature since literary language, the standard, is normally

grammatical and acceptable. This holds true except for some neologistic forms

which cannot be accepted immediately by readers (a point amplified in 3.1.2 below).

On the other hand, some constructions that are prima facie ill-formed may be

incorporated as acceptable in a language due to currency of usage. Such ill-

formedness often results from the impact of literal translation, that is, translationese.

It is rejected by a norm of naturalness that stipulates authenticity and well-

formedness. An instance of translationese which has become acceptable in Arabic is

the proverb:

mujbarun ' axa:ka la: batal


4/24

Your brother is forced, not a hero.

, axa:ka is an accusative form which should be nominative (' axu:ka), since it is the

predicate of a nominal sentence.

However, in literary translation acceptability extends to include other facets from

which the concept of literary intuition may be hypothesized. Simply stated, the

translator should possess a literary competence which manifests itself firstly by his

acquaintance with the rhetoric and the dominant aesthetic canons of the TL culture.

Consequently the translator can discern whether certain stylistic features are

acceptable or not in the TL culture. Secondly, his subjective presence and aesthetic

selectivity, which can be substantial in literary translation, should be permeable in

limited ways, for instance for neologizing and for discriminating current usages

from archaic ones. That is to say, the translator's mastery of writing should be not

less than the SL writer's if he is to translate naturally. Thirdly, he can recognize and

identify the tenor of the original, e.g. 'elevated', 'serious', 'simple', 'florid' and so forth

(Tytler in Rener, 1989:193). In point of fact, he can achieve a high level of

literariness.

2.3 Idiomaticity

Idiomaticity is a feature of authenticity (see 2.4) which is basic to natural translation.

It can be characterized as the tendency to use certain established formulas in the TL

culture, namely collocations, idioms and proverbs (see 3.4). Such formulas are part

of the literary heritage of a language. As a corollary, the longer the tradition in which

a language is rooted, the more it is likely to beget and preserve such formulas. Such

languages may demonstrate a very marked register of literary language, since they

possess a plethora of literary norms, part of which is their idioms. In Arabic, the


5/24

sacred text of the Qur'an is the most abundant source for literary norms in general

and idiomatic formulas in particular.

2.4 Authenticity

The prime distinctive characteristic of natural translation is authenticity. Authentic

language is characterized by well-formedness and acceptability, that is, freedom

from SL linguistic and cultural interferences (as pointed out in 2.2). More

significantly, authentic language tends to utilize the TL literary resources so as to

attain naturalness. In other words, it exploits the TL rhetoric and aesthetic canons. It

also maintains an equilibrium between the natural flow of content on the one hand

and literariness on the other. Natural translation can thus approximate or even

surpass the original literary level which recalls Nida and Taber's ideal (1969: 12)

that "the best translation is the one that does not sound like a translation."

Consequently, it should not "exhibit in its grammatical and stylistic forms any trace

of awkwardness or strangeness," that is to say, it should carefully avoid

'translationese', which Nida and Taber equate to "formal fidelity" (ibid.: 13).

However, it should be noted that natural translation does not undermine content

accuracy and it by no means diverges towards 'imitation', which is another state of

the equilibrium. It exerts an effort to employ the particularities of the TL forms but

simultaneously adheres to the SL content (for examples, see 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4).


6/24

2.5 Contemporaneity

Contemporaneity can be illustrated in the translation of any ancient work that

addresses its new readership in the language of the new age (Prochazka in Garvin

1964:95). It presupposes that literary norms can change across cultures and periods,

as was instanced by the violation of meter in poetry to allow free or blank verse or

poetic prose to evolve, and the tendency to embellish language with ornaments in

certain literary periods but to be simple in others. Contemporaneity is important due

to its incidence on naturalness, i.e. on intelligibility, acceptability and readability.

However, in seeking contemporaneity the translator may seem to lean towards

imitation. Hence it should be made clear that contemporaneity is rather the opposite

pole to archaism. A contemporary translation language therefore tends to discard

archaic usages which are undesirable in terms of intelligibility and aesthetic value.

Furthermore, certain stylistic usages in an old work may not appeal to the taste and

literary awareness of the contemporary reader; for example they may strike him as

exaggerated. In these circumstances the translator may manipulate such usages by

compromising between them and the norms of his own period. Zlateva (in Bassnett

and Lefevere 1990:32) comments on a translator of an ancient work explaining that

he had rendered it in an essentially different way from the original because the latter

contained "different archaic words and structures, many synonymous verbs, and

adjectives so colourful and outdated that they represent an obstacle to any smooth

reception of the text."

Nonetheless, we feel bound to add that making a natural translation contemporary

does not contradict the tendency to have recourse to tradition, that is, to the

authenticated. In fact, evading archaic usages on the one hand and borrowing from


7/24

tradition make up a dual strategy, for which purpose the subjective aesthetic

selectivity of the translator must constantly be applied. This manner of proceeding

may be necessary when criteria and statistics are lacking to help decide between the

tendencies, for instance in deciding whether to use archaic words like the two below

as equivalents to the English word 'leafless' and thereby fill a lexical gap:

leafless trees

/

'ashja:r 'ubla:/sulub

Such words are hardly a natural choice despite their historical authenticity, since

they impair intelligibility and any literary effect. The use of a third equivalent, other

derivatives of which are still current, viz:

'ashja:r marda:' (Ath-Th'a:libi: 360,59)

Can be both intelligible and aesthetically acceptable, hence natural.

1. Levels of Naturalness

Naturalness can be studied in terms of the stylistic elevation achieved by

utilizing the resources peculiar to the TL.

. Lexical Level

Naturalness on this level requires proper diction, i.e. proper choice of vo-

cabulary, and demands transfer of the connotative meanings of SL words over and

above their denotative meanings. If the connotations go unheeded, as is liable to

happen in literal renditions, meaning will not be reproduced (Benjamin in Schulte &

Biguenet, 1992:72). Furthermore, one element of propriety is precision, which


8/24

implies that proper diction should not express any irrelevant or superfluous notions

which were not intended originally (Corbett, 1971:430). To put it differently,

naturalness entails that one word may be appropriate in a given context whereas

even its synonyms are not. Take, for example,

tilka idhan qismatun di:za: (An-Najm:22)

That were indeed an unjust division (Arberry 1964:550)

This Qur'anic verse mocks the Arabs' contradictory attitude to women in the pre-

Islamic era. They used to bury young girls alive, and yet they considered idols and

angels as girls whose father was God. 'di:za' imparts this connotation, whereas its

synonyms 'ja:'ira'and 'za:lima'do not function

similarly and so could not replace it. This makes di:zs the precise natural word

choice.

Likewise the tendency to vary diction, but to forego words whose emotive power

is almost stripped away, maintains proper choice and hence naturalness. A case in

point is the following two Qur'anic verses, which vary diction in a similar context.

This variation gives rise to a stylistic effect as well as a pragmatic connotative

meaning; thus the two words used represent natural choices :

idrib bi'aa:ka alhtajar fanfajarat minhu ithnata: cashrata caynan (Qur'an, AI-

Baqara:60)'Strike with thy staff the rock' and there gushed forth from it twelve fountains

(Arberry 1964:7,8).


9/24

The same verse appears in AI-ara:f:, but with the word 'fanbajasat' instead of

'fanfajarat'. The variation accords with the intended meaning, that is, with the

associations of the words used to depict the two events: in the first case, where

Moses himself has asked for water, 'fanfajarat' makes a stronger impact on the

reader than does 'fanbajasat', which is used when it is Moses' people who were the

askers (La:shi:n, 1979:50).

In translations, similar criteria should prevail so as to lead to a felicitous natural

choice imparting perspicuity, vividness and expressiveness while being economical.

In the following example, the translator seems to convey a different, imprecise

meaning and effect due to an unnatural choice of word. He (Hussayn, 1990:593)

uses the word 'al-mustala' as an equivalent to the italicized words below:

He shifted slightly on the hearth,... Gudrun was aware of the beautiful

panels of thefireplace,... (Lawrence 1960:367)

Though the denotative meaning of 'istala' is 'to warm oneself', its derivative

'mustala' conveys an image of horror due to the dominant effect imparted by the

verb root 'sala' 'to be burned by fire.' This verb and its derivatives are used in

the Qur' an to connote the agony that awaits sinners in Hell.

3.1.1 Morphological Sublevel

Morphology studies the structure or form of words (Crystal 1978:100). The form of

a word, both in Arabic and English, often corresponds to a syntactic category, e.g.

'hulmi' 'dream' (noun), 'hulum' 'dream-like' (adjective). Naturalness requires that

when no TL lexical equivalent with the same syntactic category is available, the

translator should use a semantically equivalent word with a different syntactic

category; this in turn usually imposes a change of morphological structure, as in:


10/24

sajja:nu: al-quru:n al-wusta: (noun structure and word form)

mediaeval jailors (adjectival structure and word form).

3.1.2 Neologism

Strictly speaking, neologism is the coining of new words in the language (Shaw,

1979:253). However, new words can be produced by a writer's idiosyncracies and

deviations. Neologisms can be stylistic devices, foregrounded by their strangeness

and unexpectedness. A translator, on the other hand, may be more given to

neologizing than the original author because of doing it to fill lexical gaps as well as

using it for aesthetic effect. A neologism is ipso facto not natural (in our sense of

'natural'), since it cannot be accepted immediately by the reader's intuition. Hence

this is an area where naturalness has to be suspended in order that literary creation

may prevail. It means that the translator should endeavour to neologize to enhance

literary effect, or to compensate for loss of effect elsewhere in the text where he has

been unable to render an SL neologism by a TL neologism; and finally, sometimes,

in order to cope with a lexical deficiency. For all of these purposes, he should

endeavour to make felicitous aesthetic choices and avoid processes of word-

formation likely to beget cumbersome words, such as blending or compounding in

Arabic; and of course he must avoid deriving ill-formed words. The following

example of a derivation illustrates a natural choice of neologism which at the same

time fills a lexical gap; it concerns an idiosyncratic use of 'wrung' as an adjective by

Faulkner (1954:332):

and they swung and tilted in the wrung branches.


11/24

Jebra (1979:332) translates 'wrung' by the neologism 'mahsur', deriving it by

regular morphological formation from 'hasara' 'to bend down (a branch), to produce

a crack'.

3.2 Sentential Level

3.2.1 Syntax

Syntax studies the grammatical rules of sentences and the interrelationships between

sentences (Crystal, 1987:30). Naturalness requires well-formed sentences. It follows

that a syntactically natural translation should be well-formed and that the source text

may have to be restructured in line with the rules of the TL syntax (Nida, 1964:165),

for example in order to deal with translation of agentive and agentless passives

between English and Arabic.


12/24

3.2.2 Rhetoric

Furthermore, a 'rhetorical' sentence, which can be roughly defined as "a carefully

and skillfully assembled construction" (Rener 1989:161-162), subsumes well-

formedness; the product of the latter being convergent with the main features of

rhetorically natural sentences, namely smoothness, intelligibility and acceptability.

Basically, however, attainment of a rhetorical sentence rests mainly on attaining

harmony and coherence. For this, phonetic effects may be used, i.e. alliteration,

assonance or parallelism; or simply the elimination of "clashes of harsh-sounding

consonants, meetings of two vowels" and "the repetition of the same syllable" (ibid.:

162). In addition, a naturally rhetorical sentence tends to exploit the particular

resources of the language, such as paronyms and repetitions in Arabic, so as to

generate sentences that are harmonious, e.g.

wataxsha: an-na:sa wallahu 'ahaqqu an taxsha:hu

(Qur'an, AI-' AJ:lza:b:37)

fearing other men; and God has better right for thee to fear Him

(Arberry 1964:431).

To take a translation example, compare our proposed Arabic rendition

of the following English sentence with the first translation below:

Here they sat, folded together, folded round with the same rug

(Lawrence 1982:436 )

huna: jalasa:, muntawin cala: al-'a:xar, muntawiyayn

luffa: bibara:niyya wa:hida (Hussayn 1990:698).


13/24

This is our proposal

istaqarra: hahuna, yantawi: ahaduuma: ahdha:ma: 'ala; al-a:xar, wafi

ditha:rin wa:hid yantawi:yan.

We submit that our version is more consistent with natural Arabic rhetoric than

Hussayn's, since, though both use a paronym, ours foregrounds it in the manner

exemplified by the Qur'anic verse quoted earlier.

Moreover, it should be borne in mind that Arabic does not altogether reject

repetition of syllables as unnatural. Criteria discriminating desirable from

undesirable repetition can be found in Al-Jurjani's monograph on paronymous

effects (in La:shi:n, 1979:141). Al-Jurjani was a renowned Arab rhetorician and

semanticist of the eleventh century. For him, such usages should be regulated by the

content.

The use of phonetic effects may alleviate clashes between syllables or between

vowels, and build up a natural sentence, as illustrated in the second of the two

translations below, which is ours:

and the awful inchoate eyes, which seemed to be decomposing

(Lawrence: 362)

.

wal-baynayn al-faz:'atayn al-qa:timatayn, al-bada: iyatayn,

allatayn k:anata: tabduwa:n mutahallitaya (Hussayn 1990:585)

wal-'aynayn al-manqu:satayn al-mu:qicatayn lil-faraq wal

qa:timatayn, tabdu: a~aduhuma: ma: tabrahtu tanhalu.

. Cohesive Level


14/24

Cohesion requires that redundant elements be curtailed from a translation and the

text made compact, powerful and smooth. In this way the style is elevated and

meanings are lucidly exposed. The more cohesive a text is, the more natural it is and

the better it becomes stylistically. Al-Jurjani (La:shi:n,1979:166) views style as

clarity of meanings and ideas whose integration is ensured by cohesiveness, hence

by the natural flow of content. Cohesiveness is deployed with "ia rhetorical

purpose", that is, in order to be convincing, and to that end affects the presentation of

content by making some elements of the text more conspicuous than others (Hatim

and Mason, 1990: I 44ff.) A case in point in Arabic is deletion, which represents a

rhetorical feature of cohesion:

wa-lam yaj'allahu 'iwa:jan, qayyima:

(Qur'an, AI-Kah :l, 2)

and has not assigned unto it any crookedness; right

(Arberry 1964:228)


15/24

Since the combination of crookedness and righteousness to describe the same

thing, viz. the Qur'an, is contradictory, it can be inferred that a deleted verb precedes

'qayyima', i.e. 'azalna:ha' 'He sent it down'. The deletion makes for economy and

gives prominence or focus to the notion of righteousness (AI-Ansa:ri:,534-535).

Each language has its ways of building up a cohesive text. If the discrepancies

between the cohesive systems of different languages are disregarded, translations

may be unintelligible, unacceptable and unreadable - in other words, unnatural. An

example of the discrepancies between Arabic and English is coordination versus

subordination; Arabic coordinates clauses far more than English does.

Generally speaking, lack of TL cohesive devices results in poor coherence in

translations, as can be observed in certain renditions that are too literal and thereby

impose the cohesive system of the SL on the TL. Nonetheless, it does not follow that

achieving a natural target text is a matter of using cohesive devices to a greater or

lesser extent than the source text does. It is the proper use of cohesive devices that is

first and foremost required. Improper use includes overuse. It may arise

unintentionally from literal translation, or from deliberately seeking to reproduce the

SL coherence - a procedure which hampers readability because the devices do not

have the same function in the TL, and which has a negative effect on literariness.

Here is an example:

Ursula, left alone, felt as if everything were lapsing out. There seemed to be no

hope in the world. One was a tiny little rock with the tide of nothingness rising

higher and higher (Lawrence:75)

.

.


16/24

amma: ursyu:la: allati: turikat wahdaha: faqad sha'arat kama: law inna kulla

shay'in ka:na a:yilan ila: zawa:1. faqad tala:sha: kull 'amallaha: fi: al-'a:lam,

'ala: ma: bada: ka:na aI-mar' 'iba:ra can hijarain saghiratin ta:fihatinfi: hi:n,

fi: hli:n ka:na madd al-Ia:shay'iyya fi: 'irtifa:' mutaza:yin, muta:zayid.

Our proposed revision, which follows, is made more natural by alleviating

cohesion, besides using an idiomatic expression (shay'an fashay'an) and changing a

piece of diction (al-Ia:shay'iyya) that hampers smoothness:

.

., waIam yabduw laha: thammat amal fi: al-'a:lam muta:la:'ilan

yatasaadu bi'aza: ihi madd al-'adam shay'an fashay'an.

On the other hand, deliberately overused cohesive devices can, by their proliferation

or extravagant repetition, constitute a stylistic feature. One such rhetorical device is

polysyndeton, that is, "deliberate use of many conjunctions" for certain effects

(Corbett, 1971:471), e.g.

.

wakuntum amwa:tan fa'ah haa: kum thumma yumi:tukim thumma yuhilyi:kum

thumma ilayhi turja'u:n. (The Qur'an, AI-Baqara:28)

seeing you were dead and He gave you life, then He shall make you dead, then He

shall give you life, then unto Him you shall be returned (Arberry 1964:4-5).

However, such overuse should be accompanied by phonetic effects so as to

maintain smoothness. As for the translation, the translator should endeavour to

reproduce the intended overuse, the rhetorical device, by working analogous

phonetic effects into the target text lest the repetition should seem redundant, as it

does in the first translation below:


17/24

He watched it, then dropped another daisy into the water, and after that another, and

sat watching them with bright absolved eyes (Lawrence: 145)

.

ra:qabaha:, thumma 'asqata 'iqhliwa:na 'uxra: fi: al-ma:', thumma uxra: ba'dd

dha:lik, wa-jalasa yura:qibuha: bi'aynayn barra:qatayn mustaghriqatayn.

(Hussayn, 1990:244)

Here is our version, in which parallelism and phonetic effects are used in analogy

to the original and make the translation seem natural:

.

raqa:baha:, thumma alqa: fi: al-nahr 'iqhiwa:na uxra:, thumma

'intaba: 'iLa 'uxra:, fajalasa, wabi'aynan barra:qatayn mustaghri-

qatayn ra:qababa:.


18/24

3.4. Idiomatic level

Since naturalness gives preference to idiomatic language, it implies that wherever

established formulas - collocations, idioms and proverbs - exist in a language, they

should be used rather than free word combinations. The translation is thereby made

more intelligible, acceptable and effective. By the same token, some collocations

may be more authentic than others according to the literary heritage of the language.

Such forms are particularly conducive to naturalness.

3.4.1. Collocations

A collocation is "the habitual association of a word in language with other particular

words in sentences" (Robins 1967:67). Here are some examples of non-natural and

natural translations involving collocations.

SL TL Unnatural TL Natural

To invent lies :/

yulaffiq/yabtadic al-' aka:dhib

yaftariy kadhiban

A low status: /

daraja/manzila wa:!i' a

al-darak ai-' asfal

He has a wide

experience :

labu xibra !awiyla

labu ba:c !awiyl.

For further exemplification, see: A.B. As-Safi. " The Dynamic vs. Static Translation

of Literary Texts into Arabic." Turjuman. 1994, 3, (1), pp. 57-79.


19/24

4.Conclusion

The principles that this article propounds are as follows.

4.1 The main features of naturalness can be firmly identified as: grammaticality,

acceptability, idiomaticity, authenticity and contemporaneity, all of which aid in

maintaining intelligibility and readability.

4.2 Acceptability depends in large part on well-formedness, that is, on

grammaticality. Yet it extends to encompass judgments on literary usages insofar as

the latter are appealing or not to the TL reader; these judgments demand a high level

of proficiency in the TL, namely a level at which the translator possesses literary

intuition. At that point the translator's subjective interference, which is

indistinguishable from literary creation, may come into play. It enables him to apply

aesthetic selectivity, notably for neologisms, and to avoid usages that are authentic

but likely to be perceived as archaic.

4.3 To be natural, the translation should use established formulas from the literary

heritage of the TL, that is to say, it should be idiomatic.

4.4 Authenticity requires full utilization of the TL's particular resources and

conformity with its aesthetic norms. In this way a high literary standard can be

attained. Nevertheless, though it focuses on form in its seeking after authenticity,

natural translation does not entail deviating from the content of the source text; it

creates an equilibrium between accurate content reproduction on the one hand and

aesthetic reproduction, smoothness and literariness on the other.

4.5 Contemporaneity is a facet of naturalness which might appear incompatible with

authenticity in some texts. It is important to distinguish between authenticity in the

sense in which we use here and archaic usages which were authentic in their day but


20/24

which are now undesirable because they hinder intelligibility and readability, or

because they are remote from what appeals aesthetically to contemporary readers.

4.6 The study of naturalness at these various levels favours stylistic elevation. On

the lexical and cohesive levels, naturalness is a concomitant of proper diction and

proper use of cohesive devices in compliance with the TL system. On the syntactic

level, well-formedness brings about natural sentences which makes good use of TL

resources.!

Note

1. The authors wish to thank Professor Brian Harris of the University of Ottawa for

his help in editing this article.

References

AI-'Ansa:ri:, Ibn Hisha:m. no date. Mughni: al-Labi:b. Vol.2 Cairo: Da:r al'Ma

a:rif. 336 + 700pp.

Arberry, A. J. (trans.) 1964. The Koran Interpreted. London: Oxford University

Press. 673pp.

Benjamin, W. 1992. "The Task of the Translator". In Theories of Translation. by

Schulte and Biguenet. pp. 71-83. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Corbett, E.PJ. 1971. Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student. New York: OUP.

630pp.

Crystal, D. 1987. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Oxford: Basil

Blackwell, 339pp. Faulkner, W. 1954. The Sound and the Fury. USA Vintage

Books. 401,pp. Harris, B. 1977. "The importance of Natural Translation" in

Working Pages on Bilingualism. Vol. 12. p.96-114. Lancaster: University of

Lancaster.


21/24

Hatim, B. and Mason, I. 1990. Discourse and the Translator. London: Longman.

238pp.

Hussayn, A. (trans.) 1990. Nisa:' 'a:shiqa:t. Baghdad: Da:r al-Ma'mun. 449 + 860pp.

Jebra, I. Jebra (trans.) 1979 As-Saxab wal 'unfBeirut: Da:r aI-' Ada:b. 338pp.

AI-Jurj:ni, 'abdul-Qa:hir. 1954- 'Asra:r al-Bala:gha. in Riter (ed.) Istanbul:

Government Press. 24pp.

La:shi:n Abdul-Fatta:h. 1979. AI-Badi:' fi Daw' 'Asa:li:b aI-Qur'an. Cairo: Da:r

aI-Maarif. 206pp.

Lawrence, D.H. 1960. Women in Love. England: Penguin. 541pp.

Newmark, P. 1983. "Introductory Survey". In The Translator's Handbook. ed. by

Picken.1-20. London: ASLIB.

Newmark, P. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. London: Prentice Hall. 292pp.

Nida, E. 1964. Towards a Science of Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill. 331pp.

Nida, E. 1975. Language, Structure and Translation California: Stanford

University Press. 219pp.

Nida, E. and C. Taber. 1969. The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E.

J. Brill. 323 pp.

Prochazka, V. 1964. "Notes on Translating Technique". In Prague School on

Esthetics: Literary Structure and Style, ed. by Gavin, 83-112. Washington:

Georgetown University Press.

Rener, F. M. 1989. Interpretation: Language and Translation from Cicero to

Tytler. Amsterdam: Atlanta G. A. 367pp.

Robins, R. H. 1967. General Linguistics: An Introductory Survey. London:

Longmans. 391pp.

Shaw, Harvy. 1972. Dictionary of Literary Terms. McGraw-Hill Book Cy. 1405

pp.


22/24

Steiner, G. 1975. After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. London:

OUP. 507pp. .

Zlateva, P. 1990. "Translation: Text and Pre-text. "Adequacy" and "Acceptability".

In: S. Bassnett and A. Lefevere: Translation, History and Culture. 29-34. London:

Pinter.

About the Authors

Abdul-Baki As-Safi is a professor of translation, lecturer in literary translation and

head of the Translation Department at AI-Mustansiriya University, Baghdad, Iraq.

Dean of the Faculty of Arts, Al-Zaytoonah University, Amman, Jordan He obtained

his Ph.D. in Literary Translation from the University of Lancaster ( Britain) in 1979.

He is the author of two books on linguistics and translation, has published 25

papers and supervised 16 MA theses and 10 Ph.D. theses . His translations include

Taha Hussein's novel The Call of the Curfew (Leiden, Brill, 1980).

Permanent Address: Translation Department, College of Arts, AI-Mustansiriya

University, Baghdad, Iraq .

Current Address: Faculty of Arts, Al-Zaytoonah University, Amman, Jordan.

In'am Ash-Sharifi holds an M.A. in Translation and Interpretation from AI-

Mustansiriya University. She did her B.A. in English Literature and worked

subsequently as a postgraduate research assistant.


23/24

Abstract

The present article investigates the concept of naturalness in literary translation. The

aim of the investigation is to delineate an integrated approach to 'natural' translation,

the essence of which lies in creating a compromise between accurate rendition and

literary reproduction. Such a compromise entails attaining an artistic verbal

smoothness which transcends the level of ordinary language. To this end, natural

translation calls for utilization of the target language's resources that will make the

translation read like an authentic target language (TL) work, while preserving the

content intact.

The article thus identifies naturalness as the achievement of authentic TL style, and

unnaturalness as the hybrid language of literal rendition, i.e. translationese that may

be unacceptable or unintelligible. It detects the actualization of an authentic style of

Arabic rendition on several levels: lexical, sentential, cohesive and idiomatic. On the

lexical level, naturalness is delimited in terms of proper choice of appropriate

vocabulary. On the sentential level, well-formedness is posited as the feature of

naturalness which outlines a rhetorically natural sentence, besides other concomitant

features. On the cohesive level, the features of a natural target text are based on the

use of cohesive devices to a greater or lesser degree than the source text in general

and on the propriety of their use in particular instances. At the idiomatic level, we

mention idioms and proverbs but concentrate, with examples, on collocations.

Resume

Cet article examine la notion de naturel dans la traduction des textes litteraires dans

le but de cerner une approche integree de la traduction 'naturelle' qui consiste

essentiellement a obtenir un compromis entre un rendu fidele et une reproduction

litteraire. Ce compromis exige une fluidite verbale artistique qui depasse le niveau

de la langue ordinaire. La traduction naturelle doit donc utiliser toutes les res sources


24/24

de la langue d'arrivee pour que la traduction se lise comme ouvrage litteraire redige

dans cette langue d'arrivee, tout en respectant fidelement le contenu.

Dans leur article, les auteurs definissent donc le naturel comme l'obtention d'un

style authentique dans la langue d'arrivee, et le manque de naturel comme un

langage hybride avec un rendu litteral, c'est-a-dire des traductions susceptibles d'etre

inacceptables ou incomprehensibles. L'article analyse comment mettre en reuvre, a

differents niveaux, un style authentique en arabe: lexicologie, phraseologie,

coherence et usage d'expressions idiomatiques. En ce qui concerne le niveau

lexicologique, le naturel se definit comme etant le choix correct d'un vocabulaire

approprie. Au niveau phraseologique, des phrases formees correctement sont la

caracteristique du naturel qui fait apparaitre, a cote d'autres proprietes, la rhetorique

naturelle de la phrase. Au niveau de la coherence, les caracteristiques d'un texte

redige avec naturel dans la langue cible sont basees sur des mecanismes utilises plus

ou moins intensivement que dans le texte d'origine en general et sur leur utilisation

appropriee dans certains cas particuliers. Au niveau des expressions idiomatiques,

les auteurs mentionnent de telles expressions ainsi que des proverbes, mais se

concentrent, en donnant des exemples, sur des collocations.

naturalness in literary translation

Documents