دراسة تحليلية تقابلية لترجمتين في القرآن الكريم.

Résumé: This study aims at analyzing and comparing forty rhetorical figures of two English translations of the Quran, The Holy Quran (Koran) by Abdullah Yusuf Ali and The Meaning of The Glorious Koran by Muhammed Marmaduck Pickthall. Through the deforming tendencies proposed by Berman, the Dynamic Equivalence adopted by Nida, and the interpretative theory of Paris School, we have tried to identify the tendency of these translations between the translation of letter and that of thought. The theoretical part was devoted to the features of the Quranic text , its translation, and the rhetorical figure in both Arabic and English. In addition to that, we have dealt with the translation of the letter by Antoine Berman, Nida's Dynamic Equivalence, and Paris School, coming finally to the approaches proposed by the theorists for translating the rhetorical figure. Through the analysis, it becomes clear that the two translators, only, adopted the following methods: translation of the letter / translation of the letter with interpretation/ literal translation/ literal translation with interpretation/interpretative translation/ translation by equivalence. We have noticed throughout the analysis that most of the translations have been distorted by the deforming tendencies. The dominant method of translating the rhetorical figures adopted by both translators was that of literal translation, and not the translation of the letter, followed by the interpretative translation and then, the method of literal translation with interpretation, followed by the translation of the letter. The translation of the letter with interpretation and translation by equivalence coming in the last order, and they were equal in both translations. This may lead to the conclusion that the translation of the rhetorical figure by the translation of the letter or Dynamic Equivalence would be almostimpossible; these two methods are not appropriate and even not sufficient to fulfill all the meanings of the rhetorical figures in the Quranic text. From Berman's letter approach, we can benefit those deforming tendencies in the search of how the rhetorical figures were distorted in the Quranic text. Therefore, the translator should avoid believing that the Translation is the Qur'an itself, and should replace the terms Translation and Adaptation by Quoting (الاقتباس)The translator of the rhetorical figure should also believe that there is no term called equivalence, and that what actually exists is only an approximate equivalence. He can, therefore, replace the Dynamic Equivalence by the term: modified, motivational and approximate equivalence. The translator could also start with the correct literal translation in order to make the reader understand the letter and the approximate feature of the Qur'an, the translator, then, could translate the explanation of the figure in the rhetorical exegesis because the translation, here, would be a level of understanding and interpreting the text to be translated. Thus, the translator seeks for a dynamic, modified, motivational and approximate equivalent translation of the exegesis he has chosen.

Publié dans la revue: