Abstract This dissertation aims at studying the translation of Macbeth by Jabra Ibrahim Jabra (1990) from a linguistic perspective. The analysis depends on the theory of equivalence; I study the translated text on three levels: the lexical, grammatical, and cultural one. The study consists of three parts. The first part tackles briefly the different attempts to translate Macbeth by Arab translators and persons of letters before Jabra‟s rendering and after it. The second part presents the theoretical background of the study mainly the translation theory of equivalence. The third part analyzes the translated text by Jabra comparing it with other two renderings; the one that was done by Khalil Mutran (1974) and the other by Ahmed Ameen (1994). Conclusions are drawn as to their accuracy and their fidelity in preserving the characteristic settings of the original work, and retaining their literary and dramatic nuances and impact. 1 Acknowledgment I express my deep gratitude to my supervisor Dr Maha Al-Saloom. With her encouragement, help and invaluable knowledge this work has come into being. I shall forever remain indebted to her. Besides being a notable scholar, she is a woman of great humanity and kindness. I would like to thank Professor Elias Khalaf, the chairman of the English Department at Albaath University, for his help and advice in collecting material and for his advice regarding my research. My appreciation also goes to the teaching staff in the Department of English at Albaath University. I owe special thanks to Dr Talal Alkhaleel for some valuable suggestions. I am grateful to Dr Ahlam Hadi, the great critic, for her help in my first reading and evaluating the different Arabic versions of Macbeth. 2 Declaration I declare that this research is substantially my own work and that it has not been presented previously either wholly or in part for any other degree. Candidate Noor Sheikh Sobh The Supervisor Dr Maha Al-Saloom 3 ABBREVIATIONS SL Source language ST Source text TL Target language SC Source Culture TC Target Culture TT Target text 4 Table of Contents Abstract...................................................................................................1 Declaration ............................................................................................. 2 Acknowledgement................................................................................... 3 Abbreviations............................................................................................4 Table of Contents.....................................................................................5 Chapter One Introduction 1.1 Problems of Translating Shakespeare..................................................8 1.2 Statement of the Problem ............................................................... 13 Chapter Two Theoretical Background 2.1 Translation equivalence: its nature and types.....................................16 2.1.1 Formal Equivalence 2.1.2 Dynamic Equivalence 2.2 Literal Translation……………..……………………………………19 2.3 Meaning and Translation…………………………...……………….18 2.3 Word meaning and poetic context …………………………….……20 Chapter Three Analysis of Jabra’s Translation 3.1 Lexical level …………………………………………………..........26 3.1.1 Introduction 3.1.2 Translation problems related to denotation.....................................27 5 3.1.2.1 Synonymy………………………………………….....................28 3.1.2.2 Literalness ………………............................................................33 3.2 Grammatical Level ………….……………………………………...43 3.2.1 Translation Problems due to Morphology 3.2.1.1 Derivatives……………………………………………………...44 3.2.1.2 Morphological Repetition…….………………………………....48 3.2.2 Translation Problems due to Sentential Issues 3.2.3 Cohesion and Coherence ............................................................... 59 3.3 Cultural Level ...................................................................................65 3.3.1 Metaphor........................................................................................66 3.3.2 Allusions........................................................................................74 Conclusion .............................................................................................82 References................................................................................................85 6 Chapter One Introduction 7 1.1 Problems of translating Shakespeare Although more than a century has passed since Shakespeare began to be translated into Arabic, the translations still endure a number of problems which deserve to be examined. Practical suggestions are necessary to get better translation of Shakespeare into Arabic and produce more faithful and accurate versions. To translate literary texts from quite different languages and cultures is difficult. The case becomes more complicated and problematic when one translates Shakespeare‟s plays into Arabic, since the Elizabethan cultural background is totally different from the Arab one‟s. English and Arabic differ widely in idioms, puns, proverbs, grammar and images. Most of the times, these plays are translated into Arabic for an Arab reader who has neither read Shakespeare in English, nor had the chance to see a performance of the plays on stage. Therefore, a very accurate and faithful translation is needed in order retains all the dramatic aspects and themes of the Shakespearean plays. However, a serious question arises as to how the passages in verse should be translated into Arabic since these plays were composed of prose and verse, Kamal Nadir (1958, p. 166) believes that: For this reason a good translation of Shakespeare into Arabic verse has been found impracticable, and the Arab audience has to content itself with prose. Thus the Arab translator is not only translating from one language to another, but from one distinct medium into another. Later, M. B. Twaij (1973, p. 51) adds that translating Shakespeare into Arabic verse would corrupt the original: 8 Applying Arabic poetry to Shakespeare translations would require any poet, however great his genius is, to interpolate his own words to satisfy versification demands, which would of course mean corrupting and distorting the original. Both Nadir and Twaij discussed the possibility of translating Shakespeare into only classical Arabic forms of poetry or the form of the traditional qasida but ignored other Arabic poetic forms such as free verse . Since the early fifties [of the 20th century], free verse has largely replaced the traditional qasida as a medium of poetic expression all over the Arab world (Alsaai, 1997, p. 31). Rhyme in the free verse movement is optional, and it can give greater freedom to translators which the traditional qasida does not allow. Hayan Alsaai (1997, p. 33) states in his dissertation A Critical Assessment of the Translations of Shakespeare that Shakespeare's verse can be translated into any Arabic poetic form and that poetic prose is strongly recommended to be used by the translator. He provided the following reasons: First, the capability of the Arabic language to reflect the richness of Shakespeare's language. Second, the importance of offering this literature, with all its characteristics, in Arabic for readers without making major or minor changes that affect the dramatic work, such as rendering Shakespeare's verse into Arabic mere prose. In addition, poetry constitutes a very important element in Shakespeare's plays, particularly with regard to characterization. Badawi (1979, p. 131) asserted that “Poetry with all its elements is more effective than prose and more adequate to describe psychological experience.” In talking about poetic dramatic characters such as the character of Lady Macbeth , we 9 only see part of these characters in case we separate them from poetry and the poetic atmosphere in which they exist. Translating Shakespeare‟s poetry into prose will undoubtedly affect the dramatic impact. This leads us to another major problem. We are looking for adequate translations of Shakespeare in Arabic that keep all the peculiarities of the Shakespearean play. Shakespeare has drawn different types of characters in his plays who often reflect their social setting according to the level of language which they speak. Therefore, more than one level of language should be used by his characters in any translation. The language that a king or a prince would use is different from that of a servant or a gravedigger. The question therefore arises as to how this characteristic can be retained in an Arabic translation of Shakespeare. In other words, what levels of Arabic would a translator use to make this characteristic clear in the Arabic version? Many Arab translators did not restrict themselves to the original text. They gave themselves liberty to omit and make many changes in the text. But, apart from that, they at times used what could be described as cultural translation. Sometimes, for example, they introduced many Islamic oaths which are common in Mutran and Ameen rendering. Lexical gaps create yet another problem for translators. This particular problem requires more concentration so that it can be overcome, particularly when Shakespearean literature is translated into Arabic. In this context we are confronted with a crucial textual feature. It is sometimes difficult for non-academic native speakers of English to understand thoroughly some Shakespearean texts unless they read the commentaries and explanations to that particular texts. A similar problem will face an Arab