University of Petra
Faculty of Arts and Sciences
English Department Rendition of Allegory in Contemporary Political Discourse: A Study in Translated Corpora
نقل المجاز الرمسي في الخطاب السياسي المعاصر: دراسة في المذونات المترجمة
A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master's Degree of Arts in English Language and Translation
By: Fadi Abd Al Kareem Al Saifi
Supervised By: Professor A.B. As-Safi
University of Petra
Faculty of Arts and Sciences
Rendition of Allegory in Contemporary Political Discourse: A Study in Translated Corpora
نقل المجاز الرمسي في الخطاب السياسي المعاصر: دراسة في المذونات المترجمة
A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master's Degree of Arts in English Language and Translation
By: Fadi Abd Al Kareem Al Saifi
Supervised By: Professor A.B. As-Safi
To My Late Sister Jihad, My Dearest Parents And Brother.
My greatest gratitude and deepest appreciation are due to professor Abdel-Baki As-Safi who whole-heartedly initiated, conscientiously supported and diligently supervised this research with indispensible guidance and perseverance. He has been a constant source of insights, ideas and inspiration throughout the whole research.
My deepest unconditional love goes to my parents and brother Mohammad ‘Mutaz’ for all their moral support and thoughtfulness throughout the preparation of this thesis.
I would like to thank the committee members for the useful feedback they provided and their patience in reading thoroughly through the thesis.
Finally, I would like to thank the University of Petra and in particular Dr. Nehal Omeira who has been abundantly helpful starting from the day I joined the university up to the end of the course of this thesis.
Table of Contents
Table of Contents………………………………………………………………iii
Abstract in English……………………………………………...……………..vii
Abstract in Arabic…………………………………………...……………..….viii
Chapter One: Introduction……………………………...…….…..…………..1
1.0 Preliminaries……………………………..…..…….…………..….1 1.1. Statement of the Problem…………………...………………...…...1 1.2. Hypothesis……………………………………..….…………….....3 1.3. Objectives of the Study………………………………..…..….…...3 1.4. Research Methodology……………………………….….…….…..4 1.5. Significance of the Study…………………….……………..……..5 1.6. Review of Related Literature……………………………….……..5 1.7. Limitations of the Study………………………………………….6
Chapter Two: Allegory: An Overview…………...…..…….…………………7
2.1. Allegory: Conceptual/Historical Survey …….……...……….……..7
2.2. Types of Allegory…………………………………….…………….12
2.2.1. Rhetorical Allegory……………………………………………….14
2.2.2. Interpretive Allegory: Allegoresis………………………………..16
184.108.40.206. Personificational Allegory……………………………………..16
220.127.116.11. Figural Allegory………………………………………………..16
2.2.3. Cognitive Allegory……………………………………...... 18
18.104.22.168. Conceptual Integration and Allegory in Old and New Media….21
22.214.171.124.1. Postmodern Allegory…………………………………………22
126.96.36.199. Allegory, Blending and Possible Situations……………………24
2.2.4. Allegory: Counter-Discoursal and Post-Colonial………………..26
2.3. The Context for Allegorical Criticism……………………………..27
2.4. Related Terms and Concepts……………………………………….29
188.8.131.52. Parable versus Fable: from Symbolism to Allegory?...... 31
184.108.40.206. Extended Metaphor……………………………………………..35
220.127.116.11. Allegory: A Stylistic Device Based on Metaphor……………...35
Chapter Three: Allegory in Political Discourse……………………………….42
3.1. Componential Analysis: Generalities……...……………………..42
3.1.1. Semantic Components: Preliminaries…………………………….45
3.1.2. Semantic Components of Allegory…………………………….....48
3.2. Componential Analysis of Allegory………………………………..48
3.3. Political Discourse………………………………………………….50
3.3.1. Allegory as a Rhetorical Device of Political Discourse………….50
3.3.2. Function of Allegory in Political Discourse……………………..51
3.4. The Politics of Allegory…………………………………………….51
3.4.1. The Poetics of Censorship: Allegory as Form and Ideology……..52
3.4.2. Fourth Estate as Allegory………………………………………..52
18.104.22.168. Symbolizing Press………………………………………………53
22.214.171.124. Symbolizing Networked Fourth Estate…………………………54
126.96.36.199. Alternative Meanings…………………………………………..54
3.4.3. Fifth Column as Allegory………………………………………..55
188.8.131.52. Narrative Background of Fifth Column………………………..56
184.108.40.206. Contemporaneous Narrativity…………………………………..57
220.127.116.11. Later Narrativity………………………………………………..58
3.4.4. Fifth Estate as an Allegory………………………………………..59
18.104.22.168. Narrative Background of the Fifth Estate………………………59
22.214.171.124. Social Media as a Fifth Estate…………………………………..60
3.5. National Allegory in Political Discourse…………………………..61
3.6. Arab Spring Allegory: A Narrative Background…………………..63
3.6.1. The Allegorical Iconicity of Mohammed Bouazizi………………64
3.6.2. The Allegory of the Syrian Shabeeha…………………………….65
126.96.36.199. A Narrative Background………………………………………..65
3.6.3. The Allegory of Baltagiya………………………………………..67
188.8.131.52. The Narrative Background……………………………………..67
184.108.40.206. Baltagiya in the Egyptian 25 January Revolution……………..68
220.127.116.11. Identifying Baltagiya by Region……………………………….68
Chapter Four: Translation of Allegory………………………..……………70
4.1. Preliminaries: Translation Strategies Conceptual Overview…….....70
4.1.1. Textual Strategies vs. Procedural Strategies……….….…..71
4.1.2. Global Strategies vs. Local Strategies………………..…....71
4.1.3. Direct vs. Oblique Translation Strategies…………………72
4.1.4. Syntactic, Semantic and Pragmatic Strategies……………..72
4.1.5. Domestication vs. Foreignization Strategies………………73
4.2. Rendering Allegory………………………………………...………74
4.3. Allegory and Translation…………………………………………...76 4.4. Transference Strategies of Allegory……………………...….78
4.4.1. Strategy of Full Transference……………………………...82
4.4.2. Strategy of Partial Transference …………………...……...91
18.104.22.168. Acculturation: Cultural Transference ………………..….91
4.4.3. Strategy of Zero Transference……………………………105
Chapter Five: Conclusions and Recommendations…………….…………114
Appendix: Diana Moukalled’s STs and TTs in full length arranged in reverse chronological order from April 2014 down to June 2011.
The current study tackles the transference of the allegorical sense from the ST into the TT in contemporary political discourse. The examples of allegory are extracted from bilingual articles written by the professional author-translator Diana Moukalled, namely her opinion articles which are The ."انششق األٔسط" published in the Arabic London-based online newspaper study comprises five chapters. Chapter one serves as an introduction. Chapter two explores the historical perspective of the concept of allegory. Furthermore, this chapter discusses the types of allegory and examines the concepts which are essentially related to it. Chapter three presents allegory’s role in political discourse and deals with the translator’s structural integration of componential analysis in the process of transferring the allegorical sense of political ideas. Chapter four involves discussing and analyzing selected examples that bear an allegorical sense based on componential analysis of their allegorical components which reflects the magnitude of transference of these components whether full, partial or none. Also, this chapter reveals that the transference strategies, namely the strategy of full transference, the strategy of partial transference and the strategy of zero transference, are mainly governed by the major political substratum which surrounds the bilingual articles manifested by means of the processes of monitoring, managing and censoring. Chapter five presents the conclusions, findings and recommendations. The findings show that to some extent partial transference is the most attainable due to linguistic and cultural discrepancies between the ST and the TT. Also, the study reveals that allegory reflects native speakers’ value judgments and conceptual frames of reference; therefore, rendering allegorical sense opens up dialogue between different cultures and potentially spares them political, ideological and cultural misconception resulting from mis-transferring allegory.
ذؼانج انذساسح انحانٍح َقم يؼُى انًجاص انشيضي يٍ انُض األطهً انى انُض انًرشجى فً انخطاب انسٍاسً انؼًاطش. ٔقذ اسرخهظد أيصهح انًجاص انشيضي يٍ يقاالخ شُائٍح انهغح كرثرٓا انكاذثح-انًرشجًح انًخضشيح دٌاَا يقهذ ًْٔ يقاالخ سأي ذُششْا طحٍفح انششق األٔسط االنكرشٍَٔح انرً ذظذس فً نُذٌ. ٔذضى ْزِ انشسانح خًسح فظٕل. ؼٌرثش انفظم األٔل ْٕ تًصاتح انًقذيح نهذساسح، ؼٌٔشع انفظم انصاًَ انًُظٕس انراسٌخً نًفٕٓو انًجاص انشيضي ٔفضال ػٍ رنك ٌُاقش ْزا انفظم إَٔاع انًجاص انشيضي ٌٔثحس فً انًفاٍْى انًشذثطح تّ اسذثاطا أساسٍا. أيا انفظم انصانس فؼٍشع انذٔس انزي ٌهؼثّ انًجاص انشيضي فً انخطاب انسٍاسً ٌٔرُأل قذسج انًرشجى ػهى االسرفادج يٍ َظشٌح ذحهٍم انًكَٕاخ انذالنٍح فً ػًهٍح َقم يؼُى انًجاص انشيضي نالفكاس انسٍاسٍح. ٌٔرطشق انفظم انشاتغ انى يُاقشح أيصهح يخراسج ذحًم يؼُى انًجاص انشيضي ٔذحهٍم يكَٕاذٓا انذالنٍح راخ انظهح تانًجاص تشكم ؼٌكس حجى اَرقال ْزِ انًكَٕاخ سٕاء كاٌ رنك تشكم كهً أٔ جضئً أٔ يؼذٔو. ٌٔثٍٍ ْزا انفظم أٌضا اسرشاذٍجٍاخ َقم انًجاص انشيضي انصالز: )١( اسرشاذٍجٍح انُقم انكهً )٢( اسرشاذٍجٍح انُقم انجضئً ٔ)٣( اسرشاذٍجٍح اؼَذاو انُقم، ٔذخضغ ْزِ االسرشاذٍجٍاخ جؼًٍٓا نهخهفٍح انسٍاسٍح انًحٍطح نُظٕص انًقاالخ شُائٍح انهغح انًرًصهح تؼًهٍاخ انُقم انحشفً ٔانرشجًح ترظشف ٔانشقاتح. ؼٌشع انفظم انخايس االسرُراجاخ ٔانُرائج ٔانرٕطٍاخ. ٔذثٍٍ َرائج ْزِ انذساسح أٌ ذشجًح جضء يٍ انؼًُى األطهً فً أغهة األحٍاٌ ْٕ األكصش ذحققا كُرٍجح نالخرالفاخ انهغٌٕح ٔانصقافٍح تٍٍ نغح األطم ٔنغح انُض انًرشجى. ٔذثٍٍ انذساسح أٌضا أٌ انًجاص انشيضي ؼٌكس انًُظٕياخ انقًٍٍح ٔاألطش انًشجؼٍح انًفاًٍٍْح نهًرحذشٍٍ تانهغح األطم، ٔنٓزا فاٌ َقم يؼُى انًجاص انشيضي ٌفرح افاق نهحٕاس تٍٍ انصقافاخ ٔيٍ انًًكٍ أٌ ذحذ يٍ سٕء انفٓى انسٍاسً ٔاالٌذٌٕنٕجً ٔانصقافً انُاجى ػٍ سٕء َقم انًجاص انشيضي.
Chapter One Introduction
1.0. Preliminaries Based on political articles and their translations, this study tackles types of allegory and journalistic allegorical expressions that are common in political discourse and discusses strategies for translating them. Translators play important roles as cross-cultural transmitters, attempting to interpret concepts involving allegory as accurately as possible. However, this is an intrinsically difficult task for translators because they often encounter problematic aspects of the translation of culture-specific items. This is also the case when the translation of political discourse comprising allegorical expressions is in question. Little attention has been given to allegory in political discourse in translation studies so far. Therefore, it seems necessary that the reciprocal dimension of translators’ perspectives on allegory be further investigated in this field.
1.1. Statement of the Problem Adequate rendition of allegory is problematic in political discourse; in fact, in many cases, allegory is not adequately rendered. This indicates the serious consequences when the essence and purpose of allegory and subsequently the skopos is put to waste and as in the parable, a related term to allegory, it is important to pinpoint the ground of the genre based on its didactic impulse in an illuminating manner.
The problem of transferring allegory is intensified by the different types of allegory which the corpora subsume such as conceptional allegory, generic allegory and figural allegory. In the journalistic political discourse we find instances of allegory such as “Alice in Wonderland”, in the following excerpt from: (The Guardian 7 December 2011- War on Iran has already begun. Act before it threatens all of us). The allegory within the English source text (ST) “Alice in Wonderland” is which is within the Arabic target text (TT). The ”أليس في بالد العجائب“ rendered as Source Text (ST) is: “The whole campaign has an Alice in Wonderland quality ”تغلب على الحملة قاطبة سمة أليس في بالد العجائب“ about it.” The Target Text (TT) is Furthermore, we have for instance the allegory within the English (ST) which is ”كرأس أشعث“ Monty Python's People's Front of Judea” is rendered as“ within the Arabic (TT), in the following excerpt from: (The Guardian 22 November 2011- Egyptian elections: the key questions answered): The (ST) is: “making the electoral landscape feel at times like Monty Python's People's األمر الذي جعل المشهد االنتخابً ٌبدو فً بعض األحٍان “ :Front of Judea.” The (TT) is ”كرأس أشعث.“ In the above two examples, although the meaning is clear to the English reader, it may not be so for the Arab reader; the allegorical sense has not been adequately rendered because the contexts in the two languages are significantly discrepant. Since there is a considerable amount of instances of problems in transferring allegory and allegorical expressions, from English into Arabic and vice versa, it is important to examine how professional translators handle these instances. Using synonymy in the TT is only one way to render them, so it is useful to identify the other translation strategies employed by competent translators. There is also a plethora of instances of generic or figurative allegorization to be investigated in the political discourse. The study will try to
2 find out the different translation strategies used by translators and to explain the various translation decisions they make in rendering allegory.
1.2. Hypotheses It is hypothesized that: 1. Allegory is sometimes mechanically or automatically transferred in translated corpora even through contextual and cultural specificity. 2. The vivacity of allegory has not always been readily conceived by translators, which leads to misperceiving and mis-capturing its figurative transformative spirit and consequently being mistranslated. 3. Allegory is an evolutionary diachronic textual phenomenon that needs to be tackled by translators through a dynamic holistic approach to translation. 4. Mistranslating allegory does not only create a cultural gap between the TL reader and the translated text but also deprives him/her from recognizing and appreciating its potential aesthetic merit.
1.3. Objectives of the Study This study endeavors to achieve the following objectives: 1. To investigate various types of allegory occurring in political discourse and in relation to other relevant terms; 2. To discover and explain the various translation strategies utilized by author-translator in rendering instances of allegory; 3. To analyse the reasons for the usage of allegory; and 4. To make certain observations about how allegory and its translation help produce an aesthetically appropriate and comprehensible target text that recreates similar effects on the target readership.
1.4. Research Methodology Being corpora-based research, a descriptive analytical method is expected to be utilized to have results of investigated instances of allegory thoroughly analysed and described. The methodology used in this research adopts the following procedures: 1- Identifying all instances of allegory in the source texts. 2- Specifying how each of the above instances has been rendered in the target texts. 3- Discussing the various translation strategies in handling allegory utilized by the author-translator and specifying their applicability in dealing with allegory. The following strategies are considered: a- Strategy of full transference; b- Strategy of partial transference, which can best be exemplified through the strategy of acculturation: cultural transference; and c- Strategy of zero transference 4- Finalizing the study by conclusions, findings and recommendations especially that further studies need to be conducted in the future in other fields of research such as proverbs, fables and parables. 5- It is worth noting here that the corpus’s span of time covers in reverse chronological order the first two decades of the twenty-first century from which we have extracted the ones dealing with the last four years, mainly the articles which are produced by the author-translator, Diana Moukalled, ranging from 2014 down to 2011.
1.5. Significance of the Study To the best of the researcher’s knowledge, no M.A., Ph.D. or any other sort of scholarly research has been conducted within this field: translating allegory within the political discourse, let alone dealing with the phenomenon of an author-translator corpus material is a crucial decision. Furthermore, the significance of the study of rendering allegory in the political discourse arises from the sociolinguistic necessity of this phenomenon as an integral tool in the process of forging, transmuting, creating and condensing powerful ideas, feelings and reflections whether being motivated by optimism during times of stability and progress or resisting despair and melancholy in challenging times of social upheavals, moral dilemmas and political turbulence. This study is also significant as it touches upon the following points: A- It explores a serious and troublesome aspect in translation: how allegory is handled in translation. B- It investigates the different translation strategies utilized by the professional author-translator in rendering allegory from the source text into the target text. C- It tries to explain the various translation decisions concerning allegory made by the author-translator from the ST into the TT.
1.6. Review of Related Literature To avoid repetition, an extensive review of the related literature will be elaborately furnished in detail in chapter two which discusses the topic of allegory and its historical and conceptual development.
1.7. Scope of the Study This study has the following scope: 1- Allegory is a stylistic device found in numerous text types and genres in original and translated corpora. However, this study is concerned with allegory in only one genre, which is journalistic political discourse. 2- Due to the limitations of time and space, the corpora are limited in scope in the sense that there is only one author-translator which has been the subject of the corpora. 3- Although the researcher has gone through corpora of different kinds like original and translated articles from the Newsweek ,online newspaper الشرق األوسط magazine, The Guardian newspaper and the research is limited to only one corpus, namely Diana Moukalled’s .online newspaper الشرق األوسط bilingual opinion articles, in
Chapter Two Allegory: An Overview
2.1. Allegory: Conceptual-Historical Survey
Throughout history a plethora of definitions of ―allegory‖ has been propounded, but it is beyond the scope of the present research to include all of them. Hence, here are the main definitions and concepts. Fletcher (1964: 2) states that ―in the simplest terms, allegory says one thing and means another.‖ Frye (1991: 12) notes that ―we have allegory when the events of a narrative obviously and continuously refer to another simultaneous structure of events or ideas, whether historical events, moral or philosophical ideas, or natural phenomena.‖
According to Quintilian, ―allegory, which is translated in Latin by inversion, either presents one thing in words and another in meaning, or else something absolutely opposed to the meaning of the words.‖ (in Tr. Butler 1922: 44).
―Allegory — the word means to speak figuratively, or to speak in other terms, or to speak of other things in public, from the Greek allegorein, allos meaning other, plus agoreuein, to speak (in public), from agora, an assembly, but also the marketplace or customary place of assembly.‖ (Miller, 1981: 355). ―Therefore I speak to them in parables,‖ said Jesus, ―Because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.‖ — (Matthew 13:13). ―If the allegorical is attractive for the present day and age it is because it models a relationship of breaks, gaps, discontinuities, and inner distances and incommensurabilities of all kinds.‖ Jameson (2001: 25).
Perhaps a succinct definition of allegory is given by the Encyclopedia Britannica (2006: 30): ―a symbolic fictional narrative that conveys a secondary meaning not explicitly set forth in the literal narrative.‖ Allegory is briefly defined in the twelfth edition of Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry and Drama as: ―A narrative in verse or prose in which the literal events (persons, places, and things) consistently point to a parallel sequence of symbolic ideas. This narrative strategy is often used to dramatize abstract ideas, historical events, religious systems, or political issues. An allegory has two levels of meaning: a literal level that tells a surface story and a symbolic level in which the abstract ideas unfold. The names of allegorical characters often hint at their symbolic roles (Kennedy and Gioia, 2011:G1).‖ It is also described as ―a complete narrative that may also be applied to a parallel set of external situations that may be political, moral, religious, or philosophical‖ (Roberts and Jacobs 1992: 1613). Johnson goes on to say ―I suggest that we define allegory as that class of works that fulfills its rhetorical purpose (whatever that purpose might be) by means of the transformation of some phenomenon into a figural narrative‖ (2012: 8). A comprehensive and in-depth definition of allegory is given in Cousineau‘s Word Catcher as follows:
An allegory is a description in which a place, object, or action is personified or holds moral, social, religious or political importance. To fully appreciate the magnitude of this word, think of an average day in classical Athens… Our English word derives from 14th century French allégory, via the Greek allegoria, from allos, another, different, plus agoreuein, to speak openly in the agora. Thus, to be allegorical means to express yourself openly but differently, figuratively, metaphorically, symbolically, sometimes furtively (Cousineau, 2010:10-11). It is worth noting that from Bényei (2001: 4)‘s point of view allegorizing language itself is a strategy of meaning-making; it has to be a self-scrutinizing, deconstructive allegory, turning back upon itself as language and aware of the
8 inevitable failure of (allegorical) signification. According to de Man, allegory is a coherent narrative structure, provided that it is set in an ideal time (1983: 217). Honig states that allegory has to possess a "metaphor of purpose" (1959: 12), i.e. the reason for the allegorical constitution of the text is related to the authority of the writer. This authority, from Miller‘s point of view, "supports the parabolic way of telling the story" and "validates the allegorical image" (1981: 358). Paul de Man earns his position as the patron saint of allegory with his strong defense and redefinition of the term, as well as his assertion of its indefinite nature: Attempts to define allegory keep reencountering a set of predictable problems, of which the summary can serve as a preliminary characterization of the mode. Allegory is sequential and narrative, yet the topic of its narration is not necessarily temporal at all, thus raising the question of the referential status of a text whose semantic function, though strong in evidence, is not primarily determined by mimetic moments; more than ordinary modes of fiction, allegory is at the furthest possible remove from historiography (Paul de Man, 1996: 53).
Even within the realm of art, a distinction must be made between allegory in pre-modern art and allegory in contemporary art. Before the twentieth century, a handful of symbols and an abstract title fulfilled the requirements of allegory in painting or sculpture, marking the statue of blindfolded Justice holding up her scales as an allegory, as well as the era‘s countless personifications of Peace and Fortune. During the French Revolution, many works depicted the people and events of the time as being those of ancient Rome. These historical paintings, in which the present was rewritten in terms of the past, were also considered allegorical. Personification, seen as a kind of labeling, marked allegory as externally added and therefore superfluous, as did historical painting, which marked allegory as superfluous because it asked the viewer to step dozens of centuries into the past in order to understand what was
9 already sensible in the present. These forms did much to discount allegory as a viable way of working for almost a hundred years. Allegory went into hibernation during much of the twentieth century and until the 1980s, awakened only intermittently with the works of Benjamin (1985), de Man (1983) and Jameson (2001). Benjamin was the first to champion allegory, proclaiming that ―At one stroke the profound vision of allegory transforms things and works into stirring writing‖ (1985: 176) at the same time that it tends ―to pile up fragments ceaselessly, without any strict idea or goal‖ (ibid: 56). Jameson takes cues from Benjamin‘s vision of history, and several years before de Man‘s defense of allegory, he sees the form as being devoted to the ―deciphering of meaning from moment to moment, the painful attempt to restore a continuity to heterogeneous, disconnected instants‖ (1974: 72). Thirty years later he returns to connect allegory to a critical era in architectural history, asserting that first, allegory arises from a historical and specific crisis in representation, marking itself as a structure that ―designates difficulties, if not outright impossibilities, in meaning and representation‖ (2001: 27). Narrative is established as the second essential condition for allegory, completing its division from both symbol and metaphor. For Jameson, these conditions are linked: ―Allegory is a narrative process precisely because it needs to tell the narrative to the solution of its representational dilemma‖ (ibid: 27). These theories and observations made it possible for Owens to declare allegory ―an attitude as well as a technique, a perception as well as a procedure‖ (1980: 68) ripe for appropriation from literature and a re-defined reuse in the arts, the withdrawal of which may be one factor in their ever-accelerating loss of audience. Connecting it to the practice of art, and highlighting an aspect that is critical for design, he writes:
Allegorical imagery is appropriated imagery; the allegorist does not invent images but confiscates them. . . He does not restore an original meaning that may have been lost or obscured; allegory is not hermeneutics. Rather, he adds another meaning to the image. If he adds, however, he does so only to replace: the allegorical meaning supplants an antecedent one; it is a supplement. This is why allegory is condemned, but it is also the source of its theoretical significance (ibid: 69). Allegory, then, has become a device that embraces fragmentation, discontinuity, problematization, appropriation, aggregation, heterogeneity, and narrative in an attempt to reclaim a particular history or solve a specific crisis of representation. Lastly, allegory has the capacity to present two clearly defined and mutually incompatible readings in the same space, an interference of literal and figurative readings. The allegorical process involves what Honig calls, in his book Dark Conceit: The Making of Allegory, ―a dialect transfer‖; by which agents clarify as well as dramatize their ideational roles through action (1959: 137). According to Fletcher (1964: 360), allegory is perceived as a monumental commemoration for our ideas and ideals. On the one hand, it is a potential weakness of the mode: anesthesia, diffusion of inner coherence, as it threatens never to end (ibid: 367), while on the other hand:
The strengths of the mode are equally clear. It allows for instruction, for rationalizing, for categorizing and codifying, for casting spells and expressing unbidden compulsions, for Spenser‘s ‗pleasing analysis,‘ and, since aesthetic pleasure is a virtue also, for romantic storytelling, for satirical complications, and for sheer ornamental display. To conclude, allegories are the natural mirrors of ideology (ibid: 368). Thus, allegory is the opposite of straightforward communication; it paradoxically reveals and conceals its meaning simultaneously. According to Abrams and Harpham, allegory is a narrative, whether in prose or verse, in which the agents and actions, and sometimes the setting as
11 well, are contrived by the author to make coherent sense on the "literal," or primary, level of signification, and at the same time to signify a second, correlated order of signification (1999: 5).
One of the most useful studies about the developmental nature of allegory through history is made by Schiebe (2006: 1). She focuses in her research on a large scale diachronic study of the history of the prescriptive and descriptive theory of allegory from the first occurrence of Latin allegoria (Rhetoric to Herennius 4.46, ca. 80 B.C.) down to around 1800, the time when Latin had ceased to be the dominant language of education (ibid: 2). The investigation took its starting point in the observation that rhetorical theory of allegory on the level of parole (essentially stemming from Quintilian, (95 AD, 1922: 44) and grammatical theory of allegory on the level of langue (codified by Donatus) came to diverge, although the stock examples remained on the whole the same in both branches (ibid: 4). By way of recapitulation, allegory is an act of interpretation, a way of understanding, rather than a genre in and of itself. Poems, novels, or plays can all be allegorical. These can be as short as a single sentence or as long as a ten- volume book. The label "allegory" comes from a symbolic interaction that creates a coherent meaning beyond that of the literal level of interpretation.
2.2. Types of Allegory
In this study the taxonomy of allegory is mainly based on the functional criterion. From Abrams and Harpham‘s point of view, two main types of allegory can be distinguished according to their function (1999: 5). The first type is historical and political allegory, in which the characters and actions that are signified literally in their turn represent, or "allegorize," historical personages and events. So in John Dryden's Absalom and Achitophel (1681),
King David represents Charles II, Absalom represents his natural son the Duke of Monmouth, and the biblical story of Absalom's rebellion against his father (2 Samuel 13-18) allegorizes the rebellion of Monmouth against King Charles (ibid: 5). The second type is the allegory of ideas, in which the literal characters represent concepts and the plot allegorizes an abstract doctrine or thesis (Abrams and Harpham, 1999: 5). However, at the same time, Abrams and Harpham further taxonomize these two types of allegory into two subcategories, namely sustained allegory and episodic allegory, based on the scale of application of allegory in any given literary or non-literary work (ibid: 6). In other words, both types of allegory may either be sustained throughout a work, as in Absalom and Achitophel and John Bunyan's The Pilgrim's Progress (1678), or else serve merely as an episode in a nonallegorical work. A famed example of episodic allegory is the encounter of Satan with his daughter Sin, as well as with Death, who is represented allegorically as the son born of their incestuous relationship, in John Milton's Paradise Lost, Book II (1667). In the second type, the sustained allegory of ideas, the central device is the personification of abstract entities such as virtues, vices, states of mind, modes of life, and types of character. In explicit allegory, such reference is specified by the names given to characters and places. Thus Bunyan's The Pilgrim's Progress allegorizes the Christian doctrine of salvation by telling how the character named Christian, warned by Evangelist, flees the City of Destruction and makes his way laboriously to the Celestial City; en route he encounters characters with names like Faithful, Hopeful, and the Giant Despair, and passes through places like the Slough of Despond, the Valley of the Shadow of Death, and Vanity Fair. A passage from this work indicates the nature of an explicit allegorical narrative:
Now as Christian was walking solitary by himself, he espied one afar off come crossing over the field to meet him; and their hap was to meet just as they were crossing the way of each other. The Gentleman's name was Mr. Worldly-Wiseman; he dwelt in the Town of Carnal-Policy a very great Town, and also hard by from whence Christian came (1678: 6).
Works which are primarily nonallegorical may introduce allegorical imagery (the personification of abstract entities who perform a brief allegorical action) in short passages. Familiar instances are the opening lines of Milton's L'Allegro and Π Penseroso (1645). This device was exploited especially in the poetic diction of authors in the mid-eighteenth century. An example, so brief that it presents an allegorical tableau rather than an action, is the passage in Thomas Gray's "Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard" (1751): Can Honour's voice provoke the silent dust, Or Flatt'ry soothe the dull cold ear of Death?
Allegory is a narrative strategy which may be employed in any literary form or genre. The early sixteenth-century Everyman is an allegory in the form of a morality play. The Pilgrim's Progress is a moral and religious allegory in a prose narrative; Edmund Spenser's The Faerie Queene (1590-96) fuses moral, religious, historical, and political allegory in a verse romance; the third book of Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels, the voyage to Laputa and Lagado (1726), is an allegorical satire directed mainly against philosophical and scientific pedantry; and William Collins' "Ode on the Poetical Character" (1747) is a lyric poem which allegorizes a topic in literary criticism — the nature, sources, and power of the poet's creative imagination. John Keats makes a subtle use of allegory throughout his ode "To Autumn" (1820), most explicitly in the second stanza, which represents autumn personified as a female figure amid the scenes and activities of the harvest season. Generally, allegory involves using many interconnected symbols or allegorical figures in a way that in nearly every element of the narrative it has a
14 meaning beyond the literal level, i.e., everything in the narrative is a symbol that relates to other symbols within the story. The allegorical story, poem, or play can be read either literally or as a symbolic statement about a political, spiritual, or psychological truth. This narrative acts as an extended metaphor in which the events reveal a meaning beyond what occurs in the text, creating a moral, spiritual or even political meaning. The act of interpreting a story as if each object in it had an allegorical meaning is called allegoresis.
2.2.1. Rhetorical Allegory
The negative critical attitude to allegory focuses on its rationalistic proclivity and its authoritarian control of the play of meaning, which implies dryness and rigidity. Yet the same intellectual bent of allegory can be construed in radically different terms as textual openness requiring the reader‘s active participation. According to Quilligan (1979: 26), after the use of allegory as rhetorical persuasion by Greek and Latin critics, allegory emerged as a defined literary narrative genre under the influence of Christian theology in the Middle Ages. Allegory as a narrative genre is mainly characterized by its intertextuality. The narrative is built in relation to a preceding text. In this way, allegory can be understood as a commentary on a prior text, and as a form of criticism. Quilligan insists that allegory emphasizes the process of signification itself and therefore raises the reader‘s awareness "of the way he creates the meaning of the text" (ibid: 28). She explains that the relation between an allegorical text and its pretext is a deep connection: The pretext is not merely a repository of ideas, it is the original treasure house of truth, and even if that treasure house has been plundered and is assumed to be empty, it still retains its privileged status in guiding not only interpretation but the possibilities of the allegory. And it is primarily the status of language in the pretext which determines the development of allegory; if its language
can name truth, then the language of the allegorical narrative will be able to. If its language is not felt to have special powers of revealing reality, then the language of the allegory will have a corresponding difficulty in articulating the truth of the human condition (ibid: 97-98). Hunter perceives allegory in a more positive light on the basis of what she calls its rhetorical stance: the interaction of the author, the text, and the reader. Allegory draws the reader‘s attention to its own status of textual construction and thus encourages him/her to go beyond the text and seek out its multiple links with reality. "But the stance of allegory, by being overt about its writing and specifically directing us to question epistemology and ideology, can engage any reader in the reading" (1989: 179). Paradoxically, allegory appears both open and closed, both authoritarian and libertarian, both flexible and rigid.
2.2.2. Interpretive Allegory: Allegoresis
The allegorical text must somehow invite the reader to do some sort of deciphering, to switch his/her attention from the literal to the figurative level of meaning. Allegorical reading (what Quilligan calls allegoresis) is a hermeneutic strategy that can, in principle, be applied to any text; allegorical writing is an active textual demand for allegoresis. Fletcher writes: The whole point of allegory is that it does not need to be read exegetically; it often has a literal level that makes good enough sense all by itself. But somehow this literal surface suggests a peculiar doubleness of intention, and while it can, as it were, get along without interpretation, it becomes much richer and more interesting if given interpretation (1964: 7).
Allegory is broadly divided into personificational and typological or figural allegory, a distinction that goes back to the Middle Ages. Quilligan describes the difference between the two kinds in terms of their underlying structure: "Typology relies basically on a certain way of understanding the
16 connection between specific historical events ... Personification allegory relies on the reification of language itself..."(1979: 115).
22.214.171.124. Personificational Allegory In personificational allegory, abstract concepts (originally virtues and vices) are embodied in separate characters. It tends to freeze into a static tableau with a rigid moral representation.
126.96.36.199. Figural Allegory Figural allegory, on the other hand, is based on a system of historical correspondences: a concrete historical narrative is encoded in a fictional plot. But there are also different uses to which personificational allegory and typology can be put to, especially in authoritarian societies. Ford outlines in Beissinger et al, (1999: 43) that throughout this long history, that protean thing called allegory always has involved social practices and institutions that define literature and criticism as well. I reaffirm this point, since to discuss allegory historically is problematic from certain points of view today, especially theories that would identify allegory with the workings of language itself. If one defines allegoria etymologically as "saying one thing and meaning something other," allegory may appear not simply as one mode of speech among others but as the figure of speech that most directly exemplifies the fundamental arbitrariness of language, its lack of any firm bond between signifier and signified. These lines of analysis suggest that to give an account of allegory in historical and social terms is only to offer yet another allegory of allegory while evading its ubiquitous and uncontrollable character. After all, a recovery of true but concealed early meanings has been one of the favorite promises of allegoresis (ibid: 45). One might argue in turn that conceiving allegory solely as a trope rather than as the act of an interpreter is itself an interpretative strategy, which can be
17 situated historically within the late and postromantic revival of allegory as a symbolic mode. But the issue is whether it is adequate to define allegory solely as an affair of diction or reference. In my view, reducing allegory to operations on a linguistic plane cannot account for the extremely varied uses allegoresis has had, uses ranging from defensive recuperation of threatened traditions to their radical reevaluation. To attempt to historicize allegory need not be to quest after its chimerical origins but may allow us to see it as a practice whose semantic dislocations always take place within a culturally and historically specific context (ibid: 46).
2.2.3. Cognitive Allegory
According to Crisp, investigating allegory entails dealing with historical contexts and transformations under the lens of the human cognition (2005: 337). In another study, he recognizes that allegory is a generic didactic narrative in which abstracts are concretized (2008: 294). This reflects the potential overlap between related genres such as political allegory, romans à clef, parables, etc. Consequently, studying allegory is inherently interdisciplinary. It argues and/or instructs as it entertains. Hence, allegory is a literary and rhetorical genre (ibid: 294). Cognitive science has confirmed literary and rhetorical criticism in revealing the literal/figural division as more of a graded "continuum of linguistic understanding" (Gibbs 1994: 243) than a binary dichotomy, and nowhere is this clearer than in the panoply of genres that reward allegoresis directly, allegory, the quintessential expression of intentional duality, but also fables, parables, apologues, morality plays, satires, parodies, romans à clef, and, on a more 'unconscious' and cultural level, folktales and myths. All of them are fundamentally symbolic figurative genres. Love, for example, "really is" a
18 feeling, audience know, but they go along with the narrative ride in which Love walks and talks "as if" it were an autonomous agent (Crisp 2008: 295). Pertaining to the cognitive level of allegory Michael Sinding states that:
Where semiological models cramp or exclude important insights into recurring questions about allegory, the semantic fine print of cognitive rhetoric makes problems more coherent and tractable and preserves the insights of critics of various stripes (2002: 505).
First, there is the ancient view that figuration is the aesthetic and/or purposive manifestation of dispositions which form everyday discourse and reflect common thought, with metaphor always at the center of attention (Crisp 2008: 299). While rhetoricians always paid their closest attention to the crafted figures, they recognized that figures are not weird and shiny decorations hung onto otherwise literal speech, but, rather, that figures are built out of the same basic resources that shape daily language. Quintilian, for instance, notes that allegory is so natural a turn of speech that it is often employed unconsciously (95 AD: 51). Periodically in the rhetorical tradition, with scholars such as Giambatistta Vico, George Campbell, and Alexander Bain, the psychological implications of figuration were made more explicit. But it is in the 20th century, with rhetoricians, like I. A. Richards, Kenneth Burke, and Ernesto Grassi, that figurative tradition turns most fully toward the mind. Most explicitly, we have Richards's declaration, in The Philosophy of Rhetoric, that "Thought is metaphoric, ... and the metaphors of language derive therefrom" (1936: 94). Consequently, in the case of allegory, the human mind is allegorical and allegorical language is its natural byproduct. Second, there is the recent set of homologous developments in linguistics, often in ignorance of, and frequently with contempt for, the rhetorical tradition (Crisp 2008: 299). The watershed for these developments is George Lakoff and Mark Johnson's Metaphors We Live By, which introduced the term "conceptual metaphor" for analogic frames like life is a journey. That frame structures some
19 of our talk about life in terms of talk more primarily associated with journeys. "Oriana is just starting out," we say, and " Galen is on the fast track," and "Abe is over the hill," and so on. Lakoff and Johnson's influential insights, and the work that has come out of them, are tremendously important for the positions adopted and developed in this issue. Metaphors We Live By is doubly helpful for building a framework in which to investigate the cognitive dimensions of allegory because, above and beyond its general case for the cognitive underpinnings of metaphor there are specific analyses of analogic frames in which the source is a journey, centrally life is a journey, which is virtually definitional of allegory. The third line of scholarship leading unavoidably to the conclusion that allegory manifests mental structure is cognitive narratology (ibid: 299). The great Homeric poems, and oral epics generally, leverage a range of mental dispositions for their mnemonic properties, but their overall structure, and many of their substructures, are narrative. Adages, too, those bits and pieces of oral culture still floating about in the literate and digitized 21st century, if they do not have an explicit figurative basis (for instance, the consonance of "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater"), have an implicit narrative ("The road to hell is paved with good intentions") or a sponsoring narrative ("That's just sour grapes"); very frequently they both explicit figuration and implicated narrative ("Don't cry over spilled milk"). Recognizing these aspects of story, literary studies of narrative took a decidedly cognitivist turn in the later 20th century, marked by influential works like van Dijk and Kintsch's Strategies of Discourse Comprehension (1983) and Fludernik's (1993) The Fictions of Language and the Languages of Fiction, and, more recently, Herman's (2002) Story Logic. But the vision of narrative as resonant with mental structure has spread well beyond literary studies. Developmental psychologists, for instance, are investigating how narrative affects comprehension. These three lines of research, revealing the fundamental linkage between figuration and cognition, exploring the
20 specific mental structuring of analogic frames, especially journey frames, and uncovering the importance of narrative to thought, memory, and reasoning, led the pageant of scholarship towards this special issue on cognitive allegory. From de Man (1971: 205)‘s point of view, the accumulation of a multiplicity of meanings associated with one image in allegory, leads to illegibility, because it becomes impossible to decide in favour of one interpretation, as in deconstruction there is not an ‗ultimate‘ meaning or transcendent signified. In the absence of a ‗true‘ fixed meaning, all multiple interpretations acquire an equal status. Thus, in deconstruction of meaning the ‗treasure house of truth‘ is empty, leaving the reader with an endless dynamic process of competing perspectives, which lead to further interpretations (ibid: 205).
188.8.131.52. Conceptual Integration and Allegory in Old and New Media
According to Oakley and Crisp (2011: 152), an allegory in the generic tradition may be thought of as a kind of super extended metaphor/metonymy. Since the early 19th century, however, it has frequently been used in literary and rhetorical contexts to refer to works, such as The Pilgrim’s Progress, whose metaphoric/metonymic extension is so systematic that overt, literal reference to the underlying topic is eliminated. An allegory thus directly refers to and characterizes a fictional situation, in The Pilgrim’s Progress that of an extended journey. The language used to refer to and describe this situation is thus either literal or, if it is figurative, its topic/referent is still the fictional situation itself rather than the underlying allegorical subject. ―Metaphor gives us y with a hint of x,‖ Greene (1893: 442) tells us; ―pure allegory gives us y without the barest hint of x.‖ This fictional situation itself then presents the underlying allegorical subject, in The Pilgrim’s Progress the Christian life. This underlying allegorical subject is pragmatically inferred but never directly referenced.
Oakley and Crisp (2011: 153) point out that a conceptual integration (or mental space network) will normally include a blended space. The term blend is often used to refer to any mental space that integrates conceptual material from at least two other spaces. In the context of allegory however, the kind of conceptual integration we are primarily interested in is figurative integration. Therefore, when Oakley and Crisp mention blends or blended spaces, they are referring to specifically figurative blends (ibid: 154).
184.108.40.206.1. Postmodern Allegory
According to Pokrivčák, ―The most obvious techniques to build intertextual networks of literary texts include direct reference, allusion, quotation, echo, plagiarism, collage, mosaics, palimpsest, and others‖ (Pokrivčák 2006: 20). In his view, ―Intertextual networks are also generated by cultural discourses and the media‖ (ibid: 20). All these devices point out a certain connection between the literary text a reader reads and other works of art, documents, historical records or theories. This connection with these texts is not mechanical or random like in traditional literature, but by a transformation of the meaning of alluded or parodied texts, by their putting in a different (often contemporary) context, postmodern authors transform and create a new meaning that is often based on the allegorical principle within which this meaning is created. In other words, in addition to primary meaning, there is another meaning disseminated throughout the text. Within this allegory, the author often deals with broader theoretical issues related to the relationship between the author, literary work and a reader which is a theme treated by post- structuralist theories. It is a postmodernist allegory in Brian Mc Hale‘s understanding, i. e. a kind of a metaphor creating: …a text-length trope which preserves the two-level ontological structure of metaphor (literal frame of reference, metaphorical frame of reference), but in which, instead of being announced explicitly, the two-level
structure remains implicit, disseminated through the text […] The fictional world of an allegorical narrative is a tropological world, a world within a trope […] allegory offers itself as a tool for exploring ontological structure and foregrounding ontological themes…(Mc Hale 1987:140).
What is meant by the allegorical principle is similar to what Silvia Pokrivčáková (2006:69) calls ―allegorical mechanism of representation‖ that is different from understanding of allegory as either a genre or a simplistic didactic mode of representation. Pokrivčáková (ibid: 69) further comments on other meanings of the word allegory in the context of contemporary and deconstruction theories. Źilka (1995: 29) argues that in postmodern literary works, the motifs which emphasize their metafictional nature are the characters of a writer writing a book or a detective investigating a crime. This characters‘ search, however, often becomes a symbolic search for meaning, objectivity and truth which can never be achieved and which manifests itself within the allegorical framework of a work. The symbolic quest and meaning is disseminated throughout the text and, finally, passes into postmodern allegory within which the following issues are often treated: the relationship between the author, a literary work and a reader, between life and art, a difference between a real experience and its artistic linguistic representation, the nature of reality and fiction; these are ontological issues that are also dealt with by post-structuralist theorists (ibid: 30). To invoke the word "allegory" is to conjure with it a series of critical and cultural assumptions about allegory that it is didactic; that it is merely a system of ideas coded into symbolic terms. In Coleridge's words (in Adams: 1971) it is, but a translation of abstract notions into a picture- language, which is itself nothing but an abstraction of objects from the senses; the phantom being more worthless than its phantom proxy, both alike and
unsubstantial, and the former shapeless to boot (Coleridge 1816: 437).
The contemporary critical hesitation to call any literary work an allegory may be rooted in the fear of reducing a text to a single system of meaning that assumes the stance of determining what the author "means to say." Northrop Frye assumes that authorial intent is lurking somewhere beneath the literal dimensions of the text, determining how it might be interpreted, as he puts it: ―we have actual allegory when a poet explicitly indicates the relationship of his images to examples and precepts... A writer is being allegorical whenever it is clear that he is saying "by this I also (allos) mean that" (Frye, 1957: 90). Frye evidently notes the extent to which allegory functions as a referential device, a way of using images to point to specific ideas; and in the context of longer narratives, the extent to which allegory is a mode for coding ideas into an extended metaphor. Since the publication of Frye's Anatomy of Criticism in 1957, several critics have taken upon themselves the task of re-examining the dimensions of allegory, both as a mode of writing (i.e., a technique of: literally, "speaking other") and as a genre (i.e., a genre of writing in which texts use the narrative form to construct an extended or continuous metaphor). Critics like Honig, Fletcher and Quilligan have done a great deal to illuminate how allegory works. Allegory, they argue, is not so much a picture language, but an extended aenigma, a literary riddle that calls upon readers to pay close attention to the literal surface, asking them to examine closely its words, images and symbols. The word "literal," as Maureen Quilligan notes, means more than just "real," but "of the letter." In this context, Quilligan (1979: 67) maintains that when ―a reader is reading the 'literal level'…he is actually reading the 'metaphorical' level, that is, he watches the imaginary action in his mind's eye.‖
220.127.116.11. Allegory, Blending and Possible Situations
According to Crisp (2005: 115), allegory is closely related to but importantly different from extended metaphor. Extended metaphor sets up blended spaces. Mental spaces, of which blended spaces are a subset, are radically different kinds of things from possible worlds, having, unlike possible worlds, no definable metaphysical status. Extended metaphor sets up blended spaces but allegory refers to and describes possible fictional situations. The distinction between possible situations and blended spaces accounts for important differences of imaginative effect between allegory and extended metaphor. Although allegorical scenes are not blended spaces, they do have their origin in such spaces. The differences revealed between allegory and extended metaphor emphasize the need for cognitive semantics to give a detailed account of the relations between mental spaces and questions of reference and truth (ibid: 116). Understanding these differences involves a deeper treatment of the issue of blending. Knowles and Moon (2006: 73) point out that an important part of blending theory is the concept of ‗mental space‘. As a person processes a piece of language, he or she creates a ‗space‘ in the mind. Into this space go all the pieces of information and conceptual knowledge that are needed to process the ideas contained in that bit of language. This will not be everything that is known, but only what is relevant to the context. According to Knowles and Moon (2006: 73), blending theory identifies four spaces in relation to the processing of metaphor, which can be represented as follows:
The two input spaces contain the features that characterize target and source domains, while the generic space contains the general features which are common to the two input spaces. In the blended space, the data from the other spaces blends together: the output of this space can be the meaning of allegory, extended metaphor or un-extended metaphor (ibid: 73). This process works out with the ‗backbone‘ example: If the Premier had any backbone he would stand up and say ‘I won’t have this’. One input space would contain data relating to human behaviour and actions: relevant here is the kind of behaviour and mental attitude needed when difficult action has to be undertaken. The other input space would contain data relating to spinal columns: relevant here is the fact that the backbone is more or less straight and vertical when a person is standing up and in physical position to take action. There would be mappings between the two spaces, as between target and source domains. The generic space would contain data relating to the features common to the input spaces: here it could crudely be stated as the ability to take action. The blended space merges data from the other spaces to generate a meaning relevant to a quality that keeps a person steady and firm when he/she prepares to take action. This is a simplified analysis, but broadly represents the different elements involved (ibid: 74). Hence, a significant
26 feature of blending theory is that both source domain and target domain actively contribute to the blend and eventual meaning: the blend is dynamic.
2.2.4. Allegory: Counter-Discoursal and Post-Colonial
In an oversimplified form, allegory can be understood as a mode of representation that proceeds by forging an identity between things, and it reads present events, regardless of the signifying system in which they are found, as terms within some already given system of textualised identification or codified knowledge. As Paul de Man (1969: 190) points out, allegory consists of semantic repetition in rhetoric of temporality, and within this rhetoric the sign is always grounded to another sign which is by definition adversarial to it. According to Stephen Slemon (1987: 7) in allegory signifiers from the world 'out there' are semantically fixed to a culturally positioned and historically grounded 'master code' or 'pretext' that is inherent in the tradition and is capable of acting as a matrix for a shared typology between the sign and its interpreters. In it, signs are interpreted as modalities of preceeding signs which are already deeply embedded in a specific cultural thematics, and they work to transform free-floating objects into positively identified and 'known' units of knowledge (ibid: 7). According to Macedo-Lamb (2003: 2), the allegorical dynamics offers a model to deal with the antithetical relation of aesthetics and politics, art and science, nature and culture.
2.3. The Context for Allegorical Criticism
It is necessary to distinguish between allegory as a mode of speaking and allegory as a genre of literature, although defining the word in either circumstance is difficult and problematic. Fletcher (1964: 3) studies allegory primarily as a mode of discourse, as "a fundamental process of encoding our
27 speech". His study, in one sense, is oriented towards establishing not that allegory is simply coded speech, but a mode of speaking (or writing) in which language is enriched by invoking ulterior possibilities of meaning. Allegorical language presents "a literal surface," which "suggests a peculiar doubleness of intention, and while it can, as it were, get along without interpretation, it becomes much richer and more interesting if given interpretation" (ibid: 7). What is manifest in allegory is a series of verbal structural devices that suggest dimensions of meaning that may be latent within it. Animal Farm, for example, is literally "about" animal revolt on a farm, but its characters are drawn to parallel the political players in the Bolshevik Revolution: Old Major, like Karl Marx, provides the ideological impetus for revolt; Mr. Jones and Czar Nicholas are the oppressors revolted against; and Napoleon and Lenin are the leaders of the revolution under whose auspices the new ''worlds'' are created. In Animal Farm, Orwell's technique is essentially analogical: historical personae are transfigured into animal forms just as abstract concepts are transfigured into human forms in the pageant of the Seven Deadly Sins in Langland's Piers Plowman. Allegory implies that its literal dimensions are just that, literal – a systematic representation of ideas (or concepts, events or people) within a new verbal (and imaginative) context. Allegory, subsequently, is seen as a kind of extended metaphor that, in the words of Rosemond Tuve, "exhibits the normal relation of concretion to abstraction found in metaphor, in the shape of a series of particulars with further meanings" (Tuve 1966: 105-6). As Frye (1957: 53) argues, "all formal allegories have, ipso facto, a strong thematic interest", as the manifest "literal" (i.e., verbal) dimensions of a text are necessarily underwritten by latent abstraction(s) which would render significance. Fletcher (1964: 33) observes that personifications, one of the staples of allegory, may provide "a narrowing, a constriction, a compartmentalization of meaning". Perhaps more accurately, the transfiguration of ideas into words,
28 images, and symbols may be a gesture of crystallization, of encapsulating a polysemy of meaning(s) into literary form. Ultimately, the challenge posed by allegory is metalinguistic. In normal discourse, ideas are more or less explicated, laid out in a systematic way to communicate them clearly and effectively. Allegory, however, teases its readers. Ideas are "coded," but they can be coded symbolically rather than analogically; that is, the words that "stand for" ideas can supplant them, assuming a kind of semiotic multifacetedness that allows the text to be interpreted in a number of different ways. Rather than directing readers to a specific set of social, historical, or intellectual analogues, allegory can evade exegetical closure, apparently trapping the reader in the realm of words. As Deborah Madsen argues, modern allegory ―is conceived as a way of registering the fact of crisis" (Madsen, 1991: 119), a crisis that is simultaneously perceptual and linguistic; or put in another way, the allegorist uses riddling techniques to translate ideas into words, hoping to taunt readers to solve the riddles by re- translating words back into ideas. As Quilligan asserts: All true narrative allegory has its source in a culture's attitude toward language, and in that attitude, as embodied in the language itself, allegory finds the limits of possibility. It is a genre beginning in, focused on, and ending with ''words, words.‖ (Quilligan, 1979: 15)
2.4. Related Terms and Concepts A variety of literary genres may be classified as species of allegory in that they all narrate one coherent set of circumstances which signify a second order of correlated meanings:
2.4.1. Fable A fable (also called an apologue) is a brief story illustrating a moral. It is a short narrative, in prose or verse, which exemplifies an abstract moral thesis or principle of human behavior; usually, at its conclusion, either the narrator or one of the characters states the moral in the form of an epigram. Most common is the beast fable, in which animals talk and act like the human types they represent. In the familiar fable of the fox and the grapes, the fox, after exerting all his wiles to get the grapes hanging beyond his reach, but in vain, concludes that they are probably sour anyway: the evident moral is that human beings belittle what they cannot get. The beast fable is a very ancient form that existed in Iraq, Egypt, India and Greece. The fables in Western cultures derive mainly from the stories attributed to Aesop, a Greek fabulist of the sixth century B.C. In the seventeenth century a Frenchman, Jean de la Fontaine, wrote a set of witty fables in verse which are the classics of this literary kind. Chaucer's The Nun's Priest's Tale, the story of the cock and the fox, is a beast fable. Also in many North American Indian cultures, there are the beast fables that feature Coyote as the central trickster. Furthermore, in Animal Farm (1945) George Orwell expands the beast fable into a sustained satire on the political and social situation in the mid-twentieth century.
2.4.2. Parable A parable is a very short narrative about human beings presented so as to stress the tacit analogy, or parallel, with a general thesis or lesson that the narrator is trying to bring home to his audience. The parable was one of Jesus' favorite devices as a teacher; examples are his parables of the good Samaritan and of the prodigal son. Here is his terse parable of the fig tree: He spake also this parable: A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, "Behold, these three years I come seeking
fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground?" And he answering said unto him, "Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it. And if it bears fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down" (Luke 13:6-9). Recently, Mark Turner (1996: vii), in a greatly extended use of the term, has used "parable" to signify any "projection of one story onto another," or onto many others, whether the projection is intentional or not. He proposes that, in this extended sense, parable is not merely a literary or didactic device, but "a basic cognitive principle" that comes into play in interpreting "every level of our experience" and that "shows up everywhere, from simple actions like telling time to complex literary creations like Proust's In Search of Lost Times‖ (ibid: viii).
18.104.22.168. Parable versus Fable: From Symbolism to Allegory? Parables and fables are easily confused with one another. Symbolism and allegory are similarly mixed-up: in common parlance, a parable is a story or short narrative designed to reveal allegorically a religious principle, moral lesson, psychological reality, or general truth. It always teaches by comparison with real or literal occurrences; especially "homey" familiar occurrences that can be identified by a wide number of people. The word parable comes from Greek term parábol! (pará means "beside," plus bol!, which means "a casting, putting, throwing, turning"), which the Romans called parabola in classical rhetoric. Well-known examples of parables include those found in the synoptic Gospels, such as "The Prodigal Son" and "The Good Samaritan." Unlike the parables, fables often include talking animals or animated objects as the principal characters. The interaction of these animals or inanimate things reveals general truths about human nature, i.e., a person can learn practical lessons from the fictional antics in a fable. However, the lesson learned is not allegorical. Each animal is not necessarily a symbol for something else. Instead, the reader learns the lesson as an exemplum - an example of what one
31 should or should not do. The sixth century (BC) Greek writer Aesop is most famous as an author of fables, but Phaedrus and Babrius in the first century (AD) expanded on his works. A famous collection of Indian fables was the Sanskrit Bidpai (circa 300 AD) and in the medieval period Marie de France (c. 1200 AD) comprise 102 fables in verse. After the 1600s, fables increasingly became common as a form of children's literature.
2.4.3. Exemplum An exemplum is a story told as a particular instance of the general theme in a religious sermon. The device was popular in the Middle Ages, when extensive collections of exempla, some historical and some legendary, were prepared for use by preachers. In Chaucer's "The Pardoner's Tale," the Pardoner, preaching on the theme "Greed is the root of all evil," incorporates as ―exemplum‖ the tale of the three drunken revelers who set out to find Death and find a heap of gold instead, only after all to find Death when they kill one another in the attempt to gain sole possession of the treasure. By extension the term "exemplum" is also applied to tales used in a formal, though non-religious, exhortation. Thus Chaucer's Chanticleer, in "The Nun's Priest's Tale," borrows the preacher's technique in the ten exempla he tells in a vain effort to persuade his skeptical wife, Dame Pertelote the hen, that bad dreams forebode disaster.
2.4.4. Proverb Many proverbs (short, pithy statements of widely accepted truths about everyday life) are allegorical in that the explicit statement is meant to have, by analogy or by extended reference, a general application: "a stitch in time saves nine"; or "people in glass houses should not throw stones."
2.4.5. Metaphor According to Knowles and Moon, in their book Introducing Metaphor, many of the metaphors that we look at are words or phrases: few are longer than a paragraph. However, it is possible to see whole texts as metaphorical: a story that concerns one set of events and people is really a metaphor for another. This broadly known as allegory is with the metaphorical reading usually having moral significance (2006: 11). Metaphoric language means a departure from what language users perceive as the standard norm in terms of meaning of words. As such, it is part of figurative language. In literary theory, when rhetoricians have talked figurative language they have often attempted to distinguish between tropes, or changes or conversions in meaning, and schemes (or figures of speech or rhetorical figures), where word order provides the special effects. Shakespeare, Auden, and Austen provided us with examples of tropes. Irony is a trope, as are simile, metonymy, symbolism, personification and allegory. Metaphor itself is a major trope (ibid: 123). Joel Fineman (1981: 30) states that allegory should organize itself with reference to spatial and temporal axes, that, as it were, it should embody figura, follows directly from the linguistic structure attributed to the figure by classic rhetorical theory. The standard formulation, of course, is Quintilian's, which characterizes allegory as what happens when a single metaphor is introduced in continuous series. Allegory has been defined up through the Renaissance as the temporal extension of trope as Thomas Wilson (1553, 1962: 198) succinctly puts it: "Allegorie is none other thing, but a Metaphore used throughout a whole sentence or oration". As such, the procedure of allegory and the relations that are obtained between its spatial and temporal projections are strictly circumscribed. Metaphor is the initial equivocating insight into the system of
33 doubly articulated correspondences and proportions upon which depends the analogizing logic of any troping proposition (ibid. 31). Roman Jakobson (1971: 91) in his linguistic formula, which picks up classic rhetorical theory (along with the awkward metaphoricity of the definition of metaphor itself), presents allegory as the poetical projection of the metaphoric axis onto the metonymic, where metaphor is understood as the static synchronic system of differences which constitutes the order of language (langue), and metonymy as the dynamic diachronic principle of combination and connection by means of which structure is actualized in time and in speech. Jakobson (ibid: 94) goes on to associate metaphor with verse and romanticism, as opposed to metonymy, which he identifies with realism and prose, while allegory would cut across and subtend all such stylistic categorizations, being equally possible in either verse or prose, and quite capable of transforming the most objective naturalism into the most subjective expressionism, or the most determined realism into the most surrealistically ornamental baroque. With regard to Jakobson's famous typology of the six communicative functions: the referential which stresses the context; the emotive which stresses the addresser; the conative which stresses the addressee; the phatic which stresses the contact between addresser and addressee; the metalinguistic which stresses the code in which the message is couched, allegory would be exemplary of Jakobson 's purely poetic function, namely, the message that, charged with reflexive poeticality, stresses itself as merely message (1971: 95). For Jakobson (ibid: 95), "The poetic function projects the principle of equivalence from the axis of selection into the axis of combination," and so it is always the structure of metaphor that is projected onto the sequence of metonymy, not the other way around, which is why allegory is always a hierarchicizing mode, indicative of timeless order, however subversively intended its contents might be.
22.214.171.124. Extended Metaphor Allegory can also be considered as an extended metaphor. According to Crisp (2008: 291), allegory can both be related to and differentiated from extended, linguistic metaphor. From one point of view it is simply a super- extended metaphor; from another, however, it involves a shift from a consciously apprehended metaphorical blend to a consciously apprehended fictional situation.
126.96.36.199. Allegory: a Stylistic Device Based on Metaphor Allegory has a two-fold meaning: as a stylistic term, i.e. pertaining to the realm of rhetoric, and as a denomination for a genre in literature and art on the whole (painting, sculpture, dance, etc). It means expressing abstract ideas through concrete pictures, the transfer based on similarity of objects. One should not mistaken allegory for metaphor and vice versa as the former is generally presented by a more or less complete text, whereas the latter is usually used within a lengthy text in combination with other expressive means. Speaking figuratively, metaphor is usually a brick in the structure of the text, where allegory is the cornerstone, as a rule. The shortest allegorical texts are represented by proverbs, where we find a precept in visual form. The logical content of the precept is invigorated by the emotive force of the image. Thus the proverb ―Make hay while the sun shines” implies a piece of advice having nothing in common with haymaking or sunshine; it may actually imply to take use of a favourable situation, do not miss an opportunity or do not waste time. Yet, one should not confuse proverbs with maxims, i.e. with non- metaphorical precept, such as A friend in need is a friend indeed. This maxim names things directly rather than figuratively. It is understood literally, word- by-word, whereas a proverb can be interpreted just as an inseparable whole.
2.4.6. Metonymy In metonymy (Greek for "a change of name") the literal term for one thing is applied to another with which it has become closely associated because of a recurrent relationship in common experience. Thus "the crown" or "the scepter" can be used to stand for a king and "Hollywood" for the film industry; "Milton" can signify the writings of Milton ("I have read all of Milton").
2.4.7. Irony Conspicuously; it does not suffice to refer back to the descriptive rhetorical tradition which, from Aristotle to the eighteenth century, defines irony as ―saying one thing and meaning another‖ or, in an even more restrictive context, as ―blame-by-praise and praise-by-blame.‖ This definition points to a structure shared by irony and allegory in that, in both cases, the relationship between sign and meaning is discontinuous, involving an extraneous principle that determines the manner through which the relationship is articulated. Paul de Man (1979: 209) argues that in both cases, the sign points to something that differs from its literal meaning and has for its function the thematization of this difference. But this important structural aspect may well be a description of figurative language in general (ibid: 209). According to de Man (ibid: 226) irony is a synchronic structure, while allegory appears as a diachronic successive mode capable of engendering duration as the illusion of continuity.
2.4.8. Symbolism Like every code, allegory is based on a system of correspondences between two semantic levels which, however, must be kept separate if an invariable relation of referentiality is to be established. Thus, the allegorical text is always double, split in the middle by the gap between the literal and the figurative, the wrapping and the message, the husk and the kernel. This gap can
36 only be bridged by a conscious effort of decoding on the part of the reader, which gives to the strategy of allegorical reading a distinct rationalistic and intellectual cast, compatible to puzzle-solving rather than to the emotional involvement required, for example, by poetry. This extreme self-consciousness of the mode forms the basis of Coleridge‘s criticism which opposes symbol to allegory: "the latter (allegory) cannot be other than spoken consciously; whereas in the former (the symbol) it is possible that the general truth may be unconscious in the writer‘s mind during the construction of the symbol" (in Fletcher 1964: 17). Huizinga, in discussing the proliferation of allegory in the late Middle Ages, also stresses that "allegory in itself implies from the outset normalizing, projecting on a surface, crystallizing" (1924: 197).
Leech (1969) notes that allegory stands in the same relation to an individual symbol as extended metaphor does to simple metaphor: in fact, an allegory might be described as a 'multiple symbol', in which a number of different symbols, with their individual interpretations, joined together to make a total interpretation (ibid: 163).
A symbol is a word, place, character, or object that means something beyond what it is on a literal level. Symbolism is the act of using a word, place, character, or object in such a way. For instance, the stop ‗sign‘ is literally a metal octagon painted white with red streaks. However, everyone on the road will be much safer if they understand that this object also represents the act of coming to a complete halt, an idea hard to encompass briefly without some sort of a symbolic substitute. An object, a setting, or even a character in literature can represent another, more general idea. It is worth noting, however, that symbols function perfectly well in isolation from other symbols as long as the reader already knows their assigned meaning. Allegory, however, does not work that way; allegory requires symbols working in conjunction with each other.
―Symbol and allegory,‖ writes Gadamer (1975: 67), ―are opposed as art is opposed to non-art, in that the former seems endlessly suggestive in the indefiniteness of its meaning, whereas the latter, as soon as its meaning is reached, has run its full course.‖ According to de Man (1979: 188-189), allegory appears as dryly rational and dogmatic in its reference to a meaning that it does not itself constitute, whereas the symbol is founded on an intimate unity between the image that rises up before the senses and the supersensory totality that the image suggests. In de Man (1979)‘s line of thinking, Roberts and Jacobs (1992: 328) elucidate that ―allegory is like a symbol because both use one thing to refer to something else.‖ The term is derived from the Greek word allegorein, which means ―to speak so as to imply other than what is said.‖ Allegory, however, is more sustained than symbolism. An allegory is to a symbol as a motion picture is to a still picture. An allegory is a complete and self-sufficient narrative, but it also signifies another series of events or conditions (ibid: 328). While some texts are allegories from beginning to end, many texts that are not totally allegories may nevertheless contain brief sections or episodes that are allegorical. Allegory and the allegorical method do not exist simply to enable authors to engage in literary exercise. The double meaning of many allegories is hence based on both need and reality. Rather, thinkers and writers have concluded almost from the beginning of time that readers learn and memorize stories more easily than moral lessons (ibid: 328). In addition, thought and expression have not always been free. The threat of censorship and the danger of reprisal have sometimes caused authors to express their views indirectly in the form of allegory rather than to write directly and risk political attack or accusations of libel. Universal or cultural symbol and allegory often allude to other works from humanity‘s religious, spiritual and cultural heritage, such as the Glorious
Quran, the Bible and the Torah, ancient history and literature, and works of the Western and Eastern traditions. Sometimes understanding a text or a story within a text may require knowledge of politics and current affairs (ibid: 330).
2.4.9. Iconism From Crisp‘s (2008: 295) point of view, iconicity is the representation of characters, setting and events allegorically or symbolically through urging the reader to locate them back to another parallel narrative background which reflects an iconic state. Iconism needs allegory‘s pluri-signification to describe a person or thing (ibid: 295). Icon can be a visual conceptual sign, verbal (onomatopoeia) or otherwise, with intertextual parallel inherent similarities to persons or things represented by it (Abrams and Harpham, 1999:280). The possibilities of ‗form enacting meaning‘ are virtually unlimited, as unlimited as the author‘s imaginative power over the allegorical expressiveness of language, and as the reader‘s capacity to see allegorical connections. In this respect, iconicity has a power like that of allegory: it rests on the intuitive recognition of parallel similarities between one field of possible situations and another within a cognitive mental blended space (Leech and Short, 1981:195). According to Pietarinen (2007: 53), allegory creates non-literal allegorical meaning which is a logical matter that has to do with iconicity; such semantic meaning is to be accounted for in terms of a modal of blended (‗many-world‘) interpretation. The logic of allegory takes similarity considerations to be central to iconicity. Similarity considerations are a species of iconicity in the sense of Charles Peirce‘s theory of diagrammatic signs (in Brent, 1998: 442). According to Peirce (ibid: 442), particular kinds of hypoiconic signs lie at the heart of allegorical meaning. His characterisation of allegorical icons contains an argument for allegory as conveying non-literal meaning. In other words,
39 iconicity enables the creation of various similarity considerations essential to non-literal meaning. Peirce succinctly states that: ―Hypoicons may be roughly divided according to the mode of Firstness of which they partake‖ (ibid, 1998: 446). He goes further to explain that ―those which represent the representative character of a representamen by representing a parallelism in something else‖ (ibid: 450) can be embodied through figurative language, more precisely, through allegory. The logic of allegory rests in the continuum of increasing complexity of parallel iconic symbolism. The key phrase in Peirce‘s remark is that allegory represents ―by representing a parallelism in something else‖. Because allegory is a sophisticated, evolving form of diagram, its logic is formed in an iconic language of diagrammatic logic with a special modal ingredient. This iconic logic accomplishes the representation of allegorical non-literal meaning. This hence complements the cognitive theories of the Lakoff - Johnson - Turner stripe (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980; Lakoff and Turner, 1989; Turner and Fauconnier, 1995). They propose ‗blending‘ mental concepts, whereas connecting Peirce‘s theory of linguistic iconicity to allegory only needs to account for the composition of concepts. Allegory communicates non-literal meaning. In allegory, representation is translocated from one medium into another. This transference, or parallelism of several representations, is what effects a change in meaning from linguistic or literal to non-linguistic or non-literal meaning. Iconicity is similarity, semblance or likeness of that which represents (signifier) with that which is being represented (signified). Similarity may be qualitative, structural or functional (Pietarinen, 2007: 55). Hence, it can be abstract and intellectual, and need not be based only in closeness in looks or in some visual or sensuous features. Hintikka and Sandu (1994: 151-189) argue that figurative allegorical meaning is a matter of possible-worlds semantics, which is extended with non-
40 standard ‗meaning lines‘ between objects of the domains and the interpretations of predicate terms across different possible worlds. The key is that understanding allegory, entails understanding its extensions under many kinds of circumstances besides the actual one (Pietarinen, 2007: 69). Moreover, mental conceptual mechanisms are needed to draw meaning lines in a non- standard fashion. Non-standard lines are effectuated by considerations of similarity between the interpretations of allegorical terms.
Chapter Three Allegory in Political Discourse
3.1. Componential Analysis: Generalities
A number of semanticists see that words are not the smallest semantic units; they hypothesize that words are built up of smaller components of meaning which are combined distinctively to form different words. Consider the following example which is one of the commonest in literature on this topic: the words man, woman, boy and girl have been viewed as being composed of elements such as: [+HUMAN], [+MALE], [+ADULT]. These elements which are represented by small capital letters and placed in square brackets are called semantic or sense components, and breaking words down into their semantic components is called componential analysis (CA). Lexical decomposition is an alternative term proposed to refer to CA, since it implies the analysis of the sense of a lexeme into its component parts (Lyons, 1995: 108).
Semantic components are usually presented in an either/or binary choices in the sense that either the component is present in the meaning of a word which in this case it is indicated by [+], or it is not present, indicated by [-]. Accordingly, the CA of the meanings of the words in our example would be as follows:
man [+MALE] [+HUMAN] [+ADULT]
woman [-MALE] [+HUMAN] [+ADULT]
girl [-MALE] [+HUMAN] [-ADULT]
boy [+MALE] [+HUMAN] [-ADULT]
Jackson (1988) holds the view that semantic components have a distinguishing function; they differentiate the meaning of a word from that of
42 semantically related ones, i.e. in the same semantic field. To achieve this function, two types of semantic components are usually employed in CA, namely:
a. Common components: they are shared by all the words in the semantic
field, like [+HUMAN] in our example. b. Diagnostic components: these components function to distinguish words
within a semantic field, such as [+ADULT] and [+MALE].
A number of linguists like Nida (1975) and Newmark (1988) apply CA to translation; Nida (1975) devises the CA technique to enable translators to determine the essential features of the referential meaning of a word. He believes that CA can help the translator to compare meanings both intralingually or extralingually.
Newmark (1988), first of all distinguishes CA in linguistics from CA in translation using the following words:
Componential analysis (CA) in translation is not the same as componential analysis in linguistics; in linguistics it means analyzing or splitting up the various senses of a word into sense-components which may or may not be universals; in translation, the basic process is to compare a SL word with a TL word which has a similar meaning, but is not an obvious one-to-one equivalent, by demonstrating first their common and then their differing sense components. Normally, the SL word has a more specific meaning than the TL word, and the translator has to add one or two TL sense components to the corresponding TL word in order to produce a closer approximation of meaning (ibid:114). In his discussion of CA, he points out a number of its basic concepts: Newmark notes that sense components are called "semantic features or semes" and maintains that a seme is different from a single complete sense of a word, which is called a "sememe", unlike Lyons who considers the sense component
43 an identical form of the word itself as mentioned above. Moreover, Newmark distinguishes two types of sense components:
1. Referential sense components: a SL word can be distinguished from a TL word in its referent, e.g., by its shape or size…etc. 2. Pragmatic sense components: a SL word can be distinguished from a TL word in its cultural contexts, e.g., "its social class usage and its degree of formality, emotional tone, generality or technicality" (ibid: 144).
Newmark proposes CA as a translational strategy emphasizing that the translator does not carry out the CA on all the words of the target text (TT), but only on the significant ones. If the word does not have that much of importance, the translator can use one of its synonyms. In analyzing any SL and TL word pair, the translator will find some common and distinguishing or diagnostic components.
As regards CA and translation, Newmark opines that the latter is an ordered rearrangement of sense components that are common to two language communities. He asserts that the main purpose of CA in translation is to achieve the maximum accuracy at the expense of economy. Newmark stresses that CA technique is more precise and limiting than paraphrase or definition. In CA the translator picks out characteristics in their order of importance (ibid: 115-7).
It may be safe to say that albeit CA can be too general to provide a precise meaning of a word, it plays a role in the description of meaning. Furthermore, CA can be a useful tool in translation when allegory is involved.
3.1.1. Semantic Components: Preliminaries
According to James, (1980: 98) lexemes are composed of semantic components. Similarly, Lyons (1968: 470) gives a clear account of components and how they are indentified. He considers the following sets of words in English:
man woman child bull cow calf ram ewe lamb, etc. These triads of words represent a common pattern horizontally, hence they can be set up in proportions like:
man : woman : child = bull : cow : calf Both ‗man‘ and ‗bull‘ are (+male), ‗woman‘ and ‗cow‘ (+female), and ‗child‘ and ‗calf‘ (+immature). Vertically, further contrasts can be seen: the entire first set are (+human), all the second are (+bovine), all the third (+bovine). The isolated features are semantic components. Each lexeme is a complex of such components.
These components are universals:
It has frequently been suggested that the vocabularies of all human languages can be analysed, either totally or partially, in terms of finite set of semantic components which are themselves independent of the particular semantic structure of any given language (Lyons, 1968:472). However, he questions the universality of components: why for example, man : woman, bull : cow, cock : hen are differentiated according to the criterion of gender, i.e. (+male) or (+female)? Leech (1974:232) gives further depth to this question. He first distinguishes formal and substantive universals:
i) ―All lexical definitions in all languages are analysable as a set of components.‖ (formal)
ii) ―There exists a universal set of semantic features, of which every language possesses a subset‖ (substantive) (ibid: 233).
There are two reasons justifying the importance of substantive semantic universals of language:
1. The set of universals provides the researcher with the basis of comparison, a vital ingredient for any comparative-contrastive enterprise.
2. It defines for him that background of likeness against which the idiosyncrasies of L1 and L2 stand out, and which sets the process of interference in motion.
Componential analysis provides the researcher with a third vital instrument which is the polysemous semantic feature. The English word hand, for example, has at least four senses:
i. part of the arm, with fingers
ii. a person who helps with work
iii. on a watch or clock
iv. a round of applause
Componential analysis at this stage involves providing the L2 lexical correspondences, as:
يد عاملح )عامل( =hand 2 يد =hand 1
تصفيك =hand 4 عمرب )الساعح( =hand 3
However, Di Pietro (1971: 121) states that: ―lexeme-to-lexeme comparison of languages would not be very useful‖. It is important to realize here that the conditions governing at ‗times‘ must be specified.
According to James (1980:91), componential analysis fulfils this through identifying an intermediate level of semantic organisation between the components themselves and the lexical item: this level is that occupied by the semantic feature complex. He demonstrates that each such complex specifies one of the senses of a lexeme, as in the following diagram:
COMPONENTS SENSES LEXEME
Y S1 : Z S2 L : K S3-4
M Diagram 1 If L = English hand and S1…S4 are its four senses, we now specify each sense in terms of its components, these being drawn from a set x – m. The word-for- word componential analysis of English hand with its Arabic equivalents registers the 1:4 relationship. Such ‗divergent polysemy‘ is a common source of errors among L2 learners.
3.1.2. Semantic Components of Allegory Categorically, no allegory is considered allegory unless it contains the following components:
1. Symbolic 2. Figurative 3. Iconic 4. Inferential 5. Pluri-narrative (Narrative Background, Parallel Narrativity) 6. Pluri-significant (Plurisignification, Double meaningness) 7. Conspiratorial
3.2. Componential Analysis of Allegory Roberts and Jacobs (1992: 328) elucidate that the figurative extension of meaning within allegory takes place when one or more components of the meaning of a particular term is selected and extended to cover some object which has not been within the domain of such a word (Nida: 1964: 93). The interpretation of the figurative meanings must consider the componential features carefully because the logical validity of the figurative extension is based on the shared componential features (ibid: 94). The example ―a mighty fortress is our God‖ does not mean that God is literally a fortress but there are certain features that can be regarded as characteristics of a fortress, e.g.: strength, protection, safety and unassailableness that are characteristics of God as well. Such figures of speech are based on a feature that is recognized by people as dominant in a certain speech community (ibid: 94). The literal meaning, here, remains paramount in the mechanism of semantic transfer through which words extend and change their meanings. The rule of semantic transfer is ―a lexical rule which brings about a major change in
48 the semantic specification only‖ (Leech and Short, 1981:217); an example of this is the rule of allegorical extension: ―for a meaning (a) we substitute the meaning ‗something similar to (a)‖ (ibid: 217). Another view of allegory in terms of componential semantics is that of cancellation. This method is used in analyzing the composition of allegorical sentence meanings. In this method, Cohen (1993:70) distinguishes between semantic features that ―represent attributes which are empirical, immediately evident, or relatively obvious and those which are inferential, intellectually appreciated or relatively latent‖ (ibid.). These features are referred to as empirical and inferential respectively. In the normal (literal) utterances, the inferential features are cancelled whereas in allegorical utterances the empirical features are cancelled. The following example shows that: Their legislative program is a rocket to the moon. In this allegorical sentence, Cohen (ibid) states that the legislative program could be a rocket only in a sense that it cancels such empirical features as [+ MATERIAL], [+ AIR CLEAVING], [+ CYLINDRICAL], which are incompatible with the features of ―legislative program‖, and retains features as [+FAST MOVING], [+FAR AIMING]. ‗Rocket‘ and ‗legislative program‘ could be analyzed in terms of Leech‘s diagram of conceptual reorganization of allegory as: Rocket Program 1. MATERIAL MENTAL 2. AIR CLEAVING ORGANISING 3. CYLINDRICAL SHAPELESS
[ FAST MOVING ] [ FAST MOVING ] [ FAR AIMING ] [ FAR AIMING ]
This diagram shows that both Leech and Cohen‘s methods of componential analysis of allegory are similar in splitting features and classifying them. On the one hand, Leech distinguishes between basic features that represent crucial linguistic criteria and non-criterial linguistic ones that are brought about by allegory. In this sense, his method represents a split of basic features from those which are not basic. The method used by Cohen (1993), on the other hand, distinguishes between features as empirical and inferential ones. Allegory relies on the inferential features whereas the empirical ones are neglected because they are the concern of literal meaning. Taking Leech‘s diagram of features and casting Cohen‘s features in it to apply cancellation (as done in diagram 2), an accurate componential analysis would be brought about to lead us to an accurate interpretation of allegory. Consequently, this accurate interpretation helps us to produce an adequate rendition.
3.3. Political Discourse
Political discourse is the exchange of reasoned views as to which of several alternative courses of action should be taken to solve a societal problem (Johnson and Johnson, 2000: 291). Historically, it can be noted that allegory surfaces in critical atmospheres, when for political reasons there is something that cannot be overtly said yet covertly implied. Furthermore, the language applied to political discourse uses a broad range of rhetorical devices at the phonological, syntactic, lexical, semantic, pragmatic and textual levels. This is aimed at producing the type of language that can be easily adopted by the mass media and memorized by the target audience.
3.3.1. Allegory as a Rhetorical Device of Political Discourse According to McHale (1987:140), allegory is a trope in which one system of things is spoken of as if it were some other system of things based on narrative background, and it is a ubiquitous feature of natural language. Further, he claims that ability to understand, explore and use allegory is characteristic of mature linguistic competence (ibid: 141). It is generally acknowledged that rules governing literal language involve syntactic, semantic and pragmatic conventions. Figurative utterances, e.g. allegory, generally obey syntactic rules, sometimes flout semantic rules and most often violate pragmatic principles; thus, allegory is characteristically identifiable by the form of the semantic and pragmatic violation.
3.3.2. Function of Allegory in Political Discourse
If iconologies of power are the issue, it follows that the language of politics and its rhetoric cannot be fully understood unless the allegorical method is fully comprehended. It makes no difference what particular political order is in place; the defining allegorical structure will operate and will convert to the new situation, whenever a major political or cultural manifold change occurs. In setting up its correspondence between a certain narrative and a set of meanings the method usually gives a vague impression of system. In this case, according to Fletcher (2006: 77), allegory will be either a composition or an interpretation based on correspondence between images and agents falling on one side of a wall of correspondence. He notes that allegorical narratives lead us to imagine a set of meanings located on the other side of this hermeneutic wall (ibid: 80). Further, Fletcher claims that in political and cultural terms, these meanings, which lie on the other side of the wall, comprise parts of the whole of an ideology – its commentary and interpretation (Fletcher, 2006: 83).
3.4. The Politics of Allegory
To read allegorical texts (or to read texts allegorically; i.e. allegoresis) not only requires specific forms of knowledge: it necessarily relies on a specific community — intellectual, religious, national, territorial, psychoanalytic — which negotiates and validates such readings. The practice of allegory is thus intrinsically bound up with discourses (and counter-discourses) of textual production and textual interpretation, insofar as these are anchored in political discourses regarding the composition of the public sphere, the regime of truth, the legitimacy of power and the relation between the officially sayable and the strategically secret. The double-structuredness of allegory makes it by definition a structure consisting of two or more antithetical voices, in a dynamic relation which can lead to an infinity of possible interpretations within the political discourse.
3.4.1. The Poetics of Censorship: Allegory as Form and Ideology
Gomel (1995: 23) points out that allegory is seen as striving to produce a total control of meaning and to direct the reader‘s hermeneutical activity to a specific end. She argues that the mode of allegory is widespread in authoritarian societies as a strategy of protection against censorship (ibid: 23).
From Gomel (1995: 11)‘s point of view, allegory‘s relation to political power is two-fold. On the one hand, in an obscure text whose meaning is accessible only to the initiated, allegory is a language of the literary opposition, flaunting its dissent at the face of the dumb authorities that overlook its secondary meaning. On the other hand, whatever its message, the allegorical structure is inevitably hierarchical, highly ordered and tightly controlled. It counters the political authority of the censorship-wielding state with its own textual power to define meaning (ibid: 11).
3.4.2. Fourth Estate as Allegory
The Fourth Estate is a societal or political force or institution whose influence is not consistently or officially recognized. "Fourth Estate" most commonly refers to the news media, especially print journalism or "the press". Carlyle (1908: 350) attributes the origin of the term to Edmund Burke, who uses it in a parliamentary debate in 1787 on the opening up of press reporting of the House of Commons of Great Britain (Schultz, 1998: 49). Earlier writers apply the term to lawyers, to the British queen‘s consort (acting as a free agent, independent of the king) and to the proletariat. The term makes implicit reference to the earlier division of the three Estates of the Realm.
188.8.131.52. Symbolizing Press
In current use, the term is applied to the press (Oxford English Dictionary 2002:509), with the earliest use in this sense described by Thomas Carlyle in his book On Heroes and Hero Worship: "Burke said there were Three Estates in Parliament; but, in the Reporters' Gallery yonder (sic), there sat a Fourth Estate more important far than they all" (Carlyle, 1908: 392).
In Burke's 1787 coinage, he would have been making reference to the traditional three estates of Parliament: The Lords Spiritual, the Lords Temporal and the Commons. If, indeed, Burke is making the statement Carlyle attributing to him, the remark may have been in the back of Carlyle's mind when he writes in his French Revolution (1837) that "A Fourth Estate, of Able Editors, springs up; increases and multiplies, irrepressible, incalculable(sic)" (Carlyle, 2002:146- 148). In this context, the other three estates are those of the French States- General: the church, the nobility and the townsmen. Carlyle, however, may
53 have mistaken his attribution. Macknight observes that Burke is merely a teller at the "illustrious nativity of the Fourth Estate" (Macknight, 1858: 468).
The phrase "fourth estate" is contrasted with the "fourth branch of government", a term that is originated because no direct equivalents to the estates of the realm exist in the United States. The "fourth estate" is used to emphasize the independence of the press, while the "fourth branch" suggests that the press is not independent of the government (Lee and Solomon, 1990:103).
184.108.40.206. Symbolizing Networked Fourth Estate
Benkler (2011:311) explains the growth of non-traditional journalistic media on the Internet and how it affects the traditional press using Wikileaks as an example. He describes the networked Fourth Estate as the set of practices, organizing models and technologies that are associated with the free press to provide a public check on the branches of government (ibid: 312). It differs from the traditional press and the traditional fourth estate in that it has a diverse set of actors instead of a small number of major presses. These actors include small for-profit media organizations, non-profit media organizations, academic centers and distributed networks of individuals participating in the media process with the larger traditional organizations (ibid: 315).
Hence, the allegorical concept of networked Fourth Estate can be perceived as euphemism or neutralization of the more judgmental pejorative allegory of the Fifth Estate. However, the political narrative backgrounds of both allegorical expressions are tightly interconnected on the historical level which facilitates the mental blending process of conceptual spaces.
220.127.116.11. Alternative Meanings
The allegory of Fourth Estate has alternative meanings other than the previously mentioned implications depending on its narrative background. In European law, for instance, Montaigne proposes that governments should hold in check a fourth estate of lawyers selling justice to the rich and denying it to rightful litigants who do not bribe their way to a verdict. Another explicitly inferred meaning based on the allegory‘s political narrative background is the Proletariat.
All the terms: the proletariat, mob, collectivist leaders or public leaders, whether implicitly inferred or directly recognized and connected with the allegory of Fourth Estate, justify the befitting relatedness of the allegorical concept and its conceptual ramifications with the current political situation in the Arab world and its political narrative background. The allegory mostly used in the Arab media, namely the ―Arab Spring‖ springs mainly from public mobilization of the masses resulting in political upheavals, revolutions, social unrest, moral chaos, ethical havoc, etc., which is narratively parallel to the allegory of Fourth Estate. In addition to that, the significance of the political media and journalism constitute essential parts of the Fourth Estate allegory in propagating allegorical narratives such as the Arab Spring (further elaborated in section 3.6.).
3.4.3. Fifth Column as Allegory
A fifth column is a group of people who undermine a larger group, such as a nation or a besieged city, from within. The activities of a fifth column can be overt or clandestine. Forces gathered in secret can mobilize openly to assist
55 an external attack. This concept is also allegorically extended to organized actions by military personnel. Clandestine fifth column activities can involve acts of sabotage, disinformation through media, or espionage executed within defense lines by secret sympathizers with an external force.
18.104.22.168. Narrative Background of Fifth Column
The narrative background on both the literal and figurative levels show deeply connected parallel similarities and conceptual analogies. Emilio Mola, a Nationalist General during the Spanish Civil War, told a journalist in 1936 that as his four columns of troops approached Madrid, a "fifth column" of supporters inside the city would support him and undermine the Republican government from within. The term was then widely used in Spain. Ernest Hemingway used it as the title of his only play, which he wrote in Madrid while the city was being bombarded, and published in 1938 in his book The Fifth Column and the First Forty-Nine Stories.
Some writers, mindful of the narrative allegorical background of the phrase, use it only in reference to military operations rather than the broader and less defined allegorical scope of activities that sympathizers might engage in to support an anticipated attack. Madeleine Albright, for example, in a lengthy account of German sympathizers in Czechoslovakia in the first years of World War II, reserves it for their possible response to a German invasion: "Many, perhaps most, of the Sudetens (natives or inhabitants of the Sudetenland which is a series of mountain ranges along the Czech-Polish border between the Elbe and Oder rivers) would have provided the enemy with a fifth column" (Albright, 2012: 102).
22.214.171.124. Contemporaneous Narrativity
In the United States at the end of the 1930s, as involvement in the European war seemed ever more likely, those who feared the possibility of betrayal from within used the newly coined allegory "fifth column" as shorthand for sedition and disloyalty. The rapid fall of France in 1940 led many to blame a "fifth column" rather than German military superiority. Political factions in France blamed one another for the nation's defeat and military officials blamed the civilian leadership, all helping feed American anxieties. In June 1940, Life magazine ran a series of photos under the heading "Signs of Nazi Fifth Column Everywhere". In July 1940, Time magazine called fifth column talk a "national phenomenon" (Steele, 1999: 75-6). The New York Times (August 1940) referred to "the first spasm of fear engendered by the success of fifth columns in less fortunate countries". One report identified participants in Nazi "fifth columns" as "partisans of authoritarian government everywhere", citing Poland, Czechoslovakia, Norway and the Netherlands.
John Langdon-Davies, a British journalist who covered the Spanish Civil War, popularized the term "fifth column" by publishing an account called The Fifth Column in 1940. The New York Times published three editorial caricature cartoons that used the term on August 11, 1940.
In the previous cases, the ideological function of the allegorical concept of Fifth Column can be misused by significantly influential political figures to unify public political nationalistic fear which can be manifested through exaggerated sentiments of xenophobia (intense irrational dislike or unjustified fear of people from other countries) or antagonizing foreign immigrants as the source of all evil in order to serve their own interests and agendas in their communities.
126.96.36.199. Later Narrativity
North Koreans living in Japan, particularly those affiliated with the organization Chongryun (which is itself affiliated with the government of North Korea) are sometimes seen as a "fifth column" by some Japanese, and have been the victims of verbal and physical attacks. These have occurred more frequently since the government of Kim Jong Il acknowledged it had
abducted people from Japan and tested ballistic missiles.
Some Israeli Jews, including politicians, rabbis, journalists and historians, who believe that Arab-Israelis identify more with the Palestinian cause than with the State of Israel or Zionism have referred to the Arab citizens of Israel, who compose approximately 20% of Israel's population, as a fifth column. Roee Nahmias complains: "... they hurl accusations against us, like that we are a 'fifth column'" (Yedioth Ahronoth Netnews August 2, 2006).
Robert A. Heinlein's science fiction novel Sixth Column (1949) describes the work of a ―sixth column,‖ a hidden resistance movement fighting an oppressive occupying force of Asians on American soil. He includes many references to the Spanish events in which the term has originated, so as to contrast the traitorous fifth column with the novel's patriotic ―sixth column‖. The author makes use of the fifth column allegory to coin his own conceptual allegorical inversion of the oppositionally parallel allegory of the sixth column. In this context, the allegorical concept of sixth column functions as the antidote to the poisonous effect of the fifth column in society by highlighting the conceptual interaction and blending mental spaces which are basically in common between the two concepts but functioning on two diametrically opposed political fronts.
A lot of different ideologies have their own conceptions of how those ideals are embodied, but one thing that most people can agree upon is that they are needed in their most basic and fundamental forms. Pieces of entertainment in the filmmaking industry for instance like V For Vendetta, which is derived from a work of allegorical fiction, or The Fifth Estate, derived from allegorical depiction of historical precedent, can both often help audience to find new meanings and appreciation in things that viewers can take for granted. The best stories, whether they feature a man with access to incredible information, or a masked vigilante/terrorist/freedom fighter on the front lines to secure a better world for his fellow countrymen, always lead to the ignition of a rich hybrid blend of mental spaces and ideas in peoples‘ minds.
3.4.4. Fifth Estate as an Allegory
The fifth estate is a group within a society that is seen as operating outside of the society's normal groupings in terms of their roles and viewpoints, especially as a group that is considered beyond the restrictions or rules of those other groupings.
188.8.131.52. Narrative Background of Fifth Estate
The concept originates from the classical (18th-century) formulation that a society has four basic estates: clergy (first estate), the nobility (second estate), the commoners (third estate) and the press (fourth Estate). The concept of a fifth estate is most strongly associated with journalists and media outlets that are seen as being outside of or in opposition to the mainstream media, or official
59 press. It may also include political groups or other groups that are seen as outside the mainstream in their views.
184.108.40.206. Social Media as a Fifth Estate
Making reference to the medieval concept of "three estates of the realm" (Clergy, Nobility and Commons) and to a more recently developed model of "four estates", which encompasses the media, Al-Rodhan (2007: 18) introduces the weblogs as a "fifth estate of the realm". Weblogs have potential and real influence on contemporary policymaking, especially in the context of elections, reporting from conflict zones and raising dissent over corporate or congressional policies. Based on these observations, Al-Rodhan (ibid: 56) suggests moving beyond traditional thinking that limits the ―estates of the realm‖ to governmental action and proposes a broader perspective in which civilians or anyone with access to a computer and the Internet can contribute to the global political change and security.
Al-Rodhan (ibid: 77) affirms that, of all the blogs on the Internet, only a few have a real power to influence the policy-making process, specifically political and current affairs blogs with large and involved audiences. These blogs can help organize the public to take a stance on an issue, used in political campaigns, help cultivate grassroots movements and assist in fundraising. Furthermore, blogs have several unique features that give them potential influence in policymaking: a lack of editorial supervision, low barriers to entry, difficulty for governments to censor or control content and the ease of responding to events in real time. Blogs can affect policy-making by providing insider information, facilitating communication between experts, promoting grassroots efforts, discrediting political figures and setting policy agendas. Blogs as "the fifth estate" are also influencing global security.
The conceptual blend that arises within the expression ‗fifth estate‘ resulting from the integrated mental spaces of the two expressions: ‗fourth estate‘ and ‗fifth column‘, in addition to the fact that the narrative background of the origins of each of them indicates a cognitive coinage implicating the doubtful questioning of the integrity and loyalty of the group of people falling under this social or (antisocial) category.
3.5. National Allegory in Political Discourse According to Herman (1995: 352), in autobiographical contexts, an allegory is a specific kind of a self-construction that is chosen over other selves and in response to conditions and constraints that those other (possible) selves would be incapable of negotiating. Thus, autobiographies allegorize selves by constructing personae of a broadly symbolic import. Such persona symbolizes strategies for self-construction; i.e. the point of autobiography is to make the audience re-evaluate the possibilities and limits of strategies for creating a self, given certain initial conditions (sociohistorical contexts, political forces, etc.) (Ibid: 355). The Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish occupies a unique position in the Arab culture and in the collective memory of Arabs as ―the national poet of by the )في حضرج الغياب( Palestine.‖ Interviewed about his poem Absent Presence translator Mohammad Shaheen, Darwish notes that ―When I tell part of my personal story, it intersects with the public story because the public, here [in Palestine], is the personal, and the personal is the public‖. This comes in line with Fredric Jameson‘s use of the term allegory (1986:69). He believes that all third-world texts must be read as ―national allegories‖ because these works, ―even those which are seemingly private…necessarily project a political dimension in the form of national allegory: the story of the private individual destiny is always an allegory of the embattled situation of the public third-world
61 culture and society‖ (ibid: 70), (italicized emphasis in the original). This is so, Jameson maintains, because the historical, political and material context of third-world literature always makes the private story of an individual a statement about the collective whole (ibid: 69). BBC describes Nelson Mandela as an ―icon‖ in a news headline: Nelson Mandela death: Icon, reconciler, fighter and charmer, referring to his allegorical narrative background. Mandela functions in South African modern history as a national iconic allegory and in human history as an international allegory. Hence, by far the most interesting part of the trajectory of the late Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela is his inexorable transition in the minds of many whites from the demonic figure of a feared terrorist to the sainted figure of a beloved icon, though one might, post-demise, call him rather a sacred spirit, because the South African nation does not want to let him truly die and prefer him maintained in an allegorical limbo between life and death.
Underlying this representational shift must be an allegorical narrative, an alchemical story of transmutation from the base lead of the political dark night of the soul into the pure gold of the father of the nation. But to remove the tale from the realm of the conventional religious implications to widen its allegorical perspective an intense realization should be made of the intersections of the real world and the ideal one. Thus, despite Mandela‘s transcendence, being true to history, he remains at root both demonic terrorist and sainted icon, for to deny either is to produce impossibility and be untrue to his dualistic essence contributing to the allegorical significance of his fully-rounded dynamic character.
3.6. Arab Spring Allegory: A Narrative Background
is an allegory for the revolutionary(الرتيع العرتي :The Arab Spring (Arabic wave of demonstrations and protests (both non-violent and violent), riots and civil wars in the Arab world that began on 18 December 2010. By December 2013 rulers had been deposed from power in Tunisia, Egypt (twice), Libya and Yemen; civil uprisings have erupted in Bahrain and Syria; major protests have broken out in Algeria, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco and Sudan; and minor protests have occurred in Mauritania, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Djibouti, Western Sahara and Palestine.
The protests have shared some techniques of civil resistance in sustained campaigns involving strikes, demonstrations, marches and rallies, as well as the effective use of social media to organize, communicate and raise awareness in the face of state attempts at repression and Internet censorship. A major slogan the") )الشعة يريد اسماط النظام( of the demonstrators in the Arab world has been people want to bring down the regime").
The term "Arab Spring" is an allusion to the uprising of 1884, which is sometimes referred to as "Springtime of the People", and the Prague Spring in 1968. In the aftermath of the Iraq War in 2003 it was used by various commentators and bloggers who anticipated a major Arab movement towards democratization. The first specific use of the term Arab Spring as used to denote these events may have started with the American political journal Foreign Policy. Marc Lynch, referring to his article in Foreign Policy, writes "Arab Spring — a term I may have unintentionally coined in a January 6, 2011 article" (Lynch, 2012: 9). Joseph Massad on Al Jazeera said the term was "part of a US strategy of controlling the movement's aims and goals" and directing it towards American-style liberal democracy.
Within the same line of thinking, it is worth noting that Christopher Dickey in Newsweek Issue no. 14 March 2005 predicted the emergence of what he called ―An Arabian Spring‖ starting in Lebanon. Similarly, on one hand, Issue "الشرق األوسظ" Diana Moukalled in the Arabic London-based newspaper no. 2 March 2012, referred to what she called ―The Iranian Spring‖. She also called it the ―Twitter Revolution‖ in her Opinion article on 1 January 2010 and the ―mobile phone revolution‖ in her article ―Iran’s Demonstrations: Imperfect Revolution‖. On the other hand, the same political phenomenon has been conceptually and allegorically framed by the Western media on numerous occasions as ―the Green Revolution‖, ―the Green Wave‖, ―the Sea of Green‖, ―the Persian Awakening‖, etc.
3.6.1. The Allegorical Iconicity of Mohammed Bouazizi
did not immolate to protest against )محمد الثىعسيسي( Mohammad Bouazizi poverty or unemployment, but against the system that was denying him the right to survive with dignity by his own very limited means. His last known words were directed to his mother. The political chain reaction that follows is known: to the whole of Tunisia, to ,(سيدي تىزيد) from Mohammed Bouazizi to Sidi Bouzid Egypt and to other Arab countries including Libya, Yemen, Bahrein, Syria, etc.
It is relevant that what unites people is not a human rights activist tortured by the regime, the massive and usual frauds of the ―elections‖ or some Intelligence Agency treachery, but the suicide of the street vendor caused by the denial of his dignity; this denial of his right to live and resist oppression, this denial of his humanity by sweeping away his last chance to have the slightest control over his destiny. It is this generalized feeling of the people that united the citizens of Sidi Bouzid; when they understood that they have nothing to lose since everything including dignity has been taken away from them.
Popular icons have generally this ability to embody the whole contestation in one attitude. So was Bouazizi, so was also Rosa Parks, so were Tien An Men students. They are manifestations of national allegory representing the whole people struggling for justice and freedom and that is why they unite them to face the same enemy.
3.6.2. The Allegory of the Syrian Shabeeha
220.127.116.11. A Narrative Background
mirror (شثيحح) ’Syrian regime thugs, more commonly known as ‗shabeeha the structure and goals of the Syrian regime which relies on raw force to ensure its own survival at all costs. In order to fully grasp the allegory of Shabeeha it is of the essence to dissect its narrative allegorical background which includes the functioning, motivations and ideology of the shabeeha (al-Haj Salih, 2012:1). In their most basic form, the shabeeha can be identified by three essential characteristics. The first is the bonds of blood that link them to the family of the ruler. The second is a predisposition to be hostile towards society, which makes them a perfect means to practice violence, both organized and arbitrary, against the civilian population. The third characteristic is their obedience to their leaders. (Adwan, 2007:136). The shabeeha phenomenon is the dark face of the regime, a mirror of its fundamental political vacuity. It is the rule of privileged violence, untrammeled and arbitrary; a conceptual blend of violence, kinship and capricious despotism. The shabeeha emerged as a reserve army, enthusiastically volunteering to shield the regime from the threat of revolution in exchange for small pay (al-Haj Salih, 2012: 4). It can be observed that during the Syrian uprising the symbolic figurative meaning of the allegory of the shabeeha extends its allegorical narrative background to refer to the irregular militias which the regime sets on protestors
65 in all regions of the country. However, even though, the term becomes generalized it consequently gradually detaches itself from its original allegorical narrative background, yet its culture-specific meaning always functions as a conceptually inclusive semantic umbrella situated within the same political and social plane (ibid: 5). Just as the essence of the regime is its security policy, the essence of the shabeeha is its conceptual blend of divide-and-conquer strategy and violence. These two are more closely related than either the regime and the state, on the one hand, or the original shabeeha with the more recent, post-revolutionary shabeeha phenomenon, on the other. Indeed, were the regime to fall, its security elements would become shabeeha: in other words, the essence of the regime will be stripped of its fragile official mask and stand revealed as unrestrained violence, both random and privileged (ibid: 6). The severity of tashbeeh has an inverse relationship with the popular legitimacy of the regime. Aware of their lack of legitimacy the regime quickly resorted to ―ideological tashbeeh‖: in other words, flinging accusations of disloyalty and betrayal in every direction and working hard to foster an atmosphere of general paranoia, in which the majority of the population are put permanently on-guard against the many and various conspiracies supposedly being hatched against it by a numerously diverse underground network of the ‗Fifth Column’ culprits. The patriotism of citizens can be called into doubt at any instant. The world around them is a sinister dangerous place to be guarded against and mistrusted (ibid: 7). Verbal protest, especially in classical Arabic, carries a high risk of contamination with regime discourse. The regime‘s appropriation of the common language also plays a part in the demonstrators‘ distancing their slogans and chants from its official discourse. One cannot separate oneself from the regime unless one makes a break with its language and symbolism (ibid: 8).
3.6.3. The Allegory of Baltagiya
can be explicitly reflected within its (تلغجيح) The allegory of Baltagiya narrative context through their attacks against the demonstrators with cold steel during the 25 January uprising in 2011. Dictatorial Arab regimes use these outlaw groups through hiring them for assaulting peaceful demonstrators opposed to their rule or infiltrating protestors to create rioting and chaos.
18.104.22.168. The Narrative Background
in (تلغجيةح ) (pl. Baltagiya) (تلغجةي ) practiced by Baltagy (تلغجةح ) Baltaga in Syria (شثيحح) by shabeeha (تشثيح) in Yemen, tashbeeh (تالعجح) Egypt, Balatega are all a kind of criminal activity carried out by a person or a group of people to impose his/her/their will over another individual or group of individuals by means of controlling, terrorizing and intimidating them. They use force through abusing, torturing and sometimes killing them for the purpose of looting or suppressing peaceful people. The term is a slang word that originates from the and (تلغةح ) "Ottoman Turkish language and consists of two syllables: "hatchet hatch man‖ and "hatchet" are known to be symbols of terrorizing― ;(جةي ) "dji" and instigating fear. The suffix ‗dji‘ in the word is of Ottoman Turkish origin denoting a profession. Some Turkish surnames have this suffix transliterated as -ji/dji or -chi/tchi, following the noun representing the profession. For example, refer to tobacco, kebab and (لهةىجي ) and Kahveji (كثةاتجي ) Kebabji ,(تتنجي) Tutunji which (تسةتنجي ) coffee professionals, respectively. Another example is Bustanji simply means gardener.
22.214.171.124. Baltagiya in the Egyptian 25 January Revolution
Within the political discourse, the allegorical malignant narrative of the term is believed to stem from the fact that the Egyptian State Security Investigations officers have used these thugs in dealing with political activists, taking advantage of their need for money, where most of them belong to regions and districts described as marginal or slum areas.
The depth of the allegorical concept‘s serious influence on deteriorating the basic fabric of society lies in the impeding danger behind these thugs symbolizing brainless tools of violence. Using baltagiya to fulfill malicious aims may backfire into ruining the plans originally set by the mastermind perpetrators. The reason behind this is that security officers and other high rank officials of the Ministry of Interior do not provide them with factual information, instead they brainwash them into believing that their adversaries are enemies of the state and that they should squander and obliterate them. They can also be misled into thinking that they are defending the country from the national crisis and turmoil, rearing their ugly heads against the nation. Consequently, having all that in mind, using those thugs remains highly risky.
126.96.36.199. Identifying Baltagiya by Region
Despite the old onset of the allegory, yet its allegorically multifaceted ubiquitous presence in the media starts with the Egyptian revolution on 25 January, which is not the only one witnessing the emergence of this malignant allegorical social phenomena, even though it carries different names and synonyms; such as Balatega in Yemen, the Shabeeha in Syria, Al-chammakria ,or Royal Youth in Morocco, the regime‘s militia in Tunisia (الشماكريح) .in Sudan (الرتاعح) mercenaries in Libya and Al-rabbatah
is not so popular in Yemen, yet (تالعجح) The allegorical term of Balatega with the advent of the Arab revolutions in 2011 and the emergence of the in Egypt, it has consequently become widespread (تلغجيح) allegory of Baltagiya .(تالعجح) in Yemen with a slight diversion into Balatega
They carry out illegal tasks whether taking the form of killing, might also (تالعجح) kidnapping, threatening, sniping or terrorizing. The Balatega be assisted by different media outlets to support the front that they are backing up, spread fear among simple peaceful people; through disrupting peace and other acts of manipulative deceptive instigation.
Within the Arab Spring uprisings narrative context, what do all these parallel allegorical forms have in common? They generally share the following characteristics: the use of raw force to govern, both domestically and regionally, without any proper form of democratic representation; an ideological discourse divorced from reality; and the accumulation of wealth through the state with utter disregard of the law (al-Haj Salih, 2012:8). These political manifestations of allegory keep on generating parallel diametrically oppositional conceptual blends of conceptual abstracts. They simultaneously function seemingly as models of material production, yet they do not produce wealth, but appropriate it; systems of political governance, even though they practice repression not politics; and constructs for meaning which produce no new meanings despite their conceptual regurgitation and attempts of recycling old ideas within new conceptual forms. These allegorical political concepts are symbols of production without labour and rule or without representation and meaning without any objective referent (ibid: 9).
Translation of Allegory
4.1. Preliminaries: Translation Strategies Conceptual Overview In order to reach a conception of 'translation strategy', it would be necessary to introduce some general parameters that would restrict such a broad concept to a more practical and convenient scope. In this regard, Chesterman (1997: 87-93) proposes six characterizing parameters pertaining to translation strategies: a translation strategy is a process, a form of textual manipulation, goal-oriented, problem-centered, potentially conscious and intersubjective. Understandably, the various parameters of translation strategy stated above entail the existence of numerous classification criteria. The criterion of consciousness in utilizing a translation strategy, for example, gives weight to the classification of 'domesticating' and 'foreignizing' strategies based upon the cultural and linguistic orientation of the translator. However, it is worth noting here that they are by no means exclusive and in fact commonly overlap. A further observation is that while some strategies of different classifications may overlap, different reviews of them were provided nonetheless in most cases as to produce a multifaceted extensive review of the strategies in question in addition to incorporating the various points of view regarding them which are not necessarily identical. The researcher is going to survey these general strategies though two of them are more relevant to the current study, namely foreignization and domestication. These two strategies are closely pertinent to allegory as it is further explained below.
4.1.1. Textual Strategies vs. Procedural Strategies The classification of translation strategies as textual and procedural stems in fact from the different approaches of translation studies to the process of translation. The linguistic approach is associated with the textual translation strategies which are practical production operations that aim at achieving equivalence and conforming to translation norms. Such strategies are intersubjective as they are often observable and recognizable by the target reader. The psycholinguistic approach gives great weight to the cognitive aspect of translation and introduces procedural strategies of translation as mental operations for comprehension. These strategies are concerned with the pre-production stage of translation and as such are unobservable by the target reader.
4.1.2. Global Strategies vs. Local Strategies The classification of translation strategies into global and local is the most prominent classification of translation strategies. It stems from the consideration of translation strategies as problem oriented. Lörscher defines translation strategy as "a potentially conscious procedure for the solution of a problem which an individual is faced with when translating a text segment from one language into another"(1991:76). The most straightforward criteria to distinguish between such problems would be the unit of translation, i.e. dealing with the whole text (global) or dealing with a segment of it (local) (Bell, 1998:188). As stated above, global strategies deal with the text as a whole; they "are applied in more than one part of a text and amount to a particular approach followed by the translator in consistently solving problems encountered throughout an ST" (Palumbo, 2009: 132). This
71 includes choosing the text to be translated, deciding upon the purposes of the translation and ultimately adopting a method of translation. Local strategies deal with a segment of the text. They "concern shorter textual segments; they have variously been characterized as transfer operations, shifts or translation techniques" (Palumbo, 2009: 132); this includes problems at word and sentence levels. This largely has to do with equivalence, or rather near equivalence as achieving total equivalence is somewhat of a translation myth. Consequently, local translation strategies are utilized in the case of the lack of a direct equivalent in the TL to a translation unit in the SL (Baker, 1992: 20).
4.1.3. Direct vs. Oblique Translation Strategies This is a classification of translation strategies that considers the degree and complexity of textual manipulation employed in the translation process. Direct strategies are utilized in transposing the elements of the SL into the TL directly, while oblique strategies are utilized in dealing with the more complex segments of the text where direct transposing of elements is unachievable. In this sense, direct translation strategies are more or less seen as variations of literal translation as the default translation strategy, while oblique strategies represent a subsequent course of action that is only to be employed when the option of direct translation is exhausted (Vinay & Darbelnet, 1995: 31-40).
4.1.4. Syntactic, Semantic and Pragmatic Strategies Chesterman proposes a conceptual framework based on the aspect of textual manipulation; he investigates translation strategies as forms of explicitly textual manipulations (1997: 93-112). Chesterman's framework
72 largely views translation strategies as heuristic linguistic tools that are utilized by translators in formulating the TT. As such, his categorization of translation strategies is largely based on the linguistic level on which textual manipulation is carried out. Three primary groups of translation strategies are introduced; syntactic strategies which pertain to manipulating form, semantic strategies which pertain to manipulating meaning and finally pragmatic strategies which pertain to manipulating the message.
4.1.5. Domesticating vs. Foreignizing Strategies Proposed by Venuti in connection to the terms of domestication and foreignization, these strategies are employed depending on the mostly conscious orientation of the translator towards the SL or the TL culture. A translator may "conform to values currently dominating the target- language culture, taking a conservative and openly assimilationist approach to the foreign text" (Venuti, 1998: 240), thus employing a domesticating strategy throughout the text, or he could conversely "resist and aim to reverse the dominant by drawing on the marginal" (1998: 240), thus employing a foreignizing strategy throughout the text. Hence, perceiving allegory as a conceptual vehicle which can transfer interactive value-systems and dynamic frames of reference within and across the political discourses of the ST and the TT makes these two strategies the most relevant to allegory transference. Needless to say, the issue of domestication and foreignization is a much complex issue of cultural aspects. Both strategies could be considered as global strategies as they involve choosing the text to be translated, deciding upon the purposes of the translation and ultimately choosing a course of action in the translation.
4.2. Rendering Allegory Componential Analysis (CA) can be of great use to translators. Newmark (1981:30) mentions eight uses for the translator. Later, he re- mentions them giving seven uses (1988:117-123) of CA as a means to bridge lexical gaps linguistically and culturally between languages. CA in translation is based on universals and cultural overlaps, and if it is seen by some as no more than a common sense, one cannot deny the various approaches and techniques used (ibid:124). One of the main uses of CA is to reduce allegory in which two or more sense-components are present. CA is a translation procedure for closeness of meaning (1991:3) and it can be used also to translate words that have no one-to-one equivalence (ibid:152). In this case, CA is used in the rendition of allegory as shown in the following examples. "اؾٌشق Diana Moukalled in the Arabic London-based newspaper Issue no. 12725 dated 30 September ‖األسٍِخ اٌج١عبء― in her article األٚعػ" and in its translation ―A Tangled Web of ‖األسٍِخ اٌج١عبء― mentions ,2013 Falsehoods‖ dated Tuesday, 1 Oct, 2013 she refers to what she calls ‗White Widow‘. The criterion of distinguishing between an original and a translated text by the same author-translator is based on the dates of publication of the article which indicate that the earlier text is the original and the date that comes after is associated with the target text. In the following surveyed cases, Arabic is the original and English is the translation.
It is worth mentioning here that Diana Moukalled started her career in 1993 as a general news reporter at Future TV covering news, political ثب١ؼٌٓ ― and social issues, working in 1999 on documentary series called By Naked Eye) that deal with hot political and social topics in) ‖اٌّغشدح conflict zones. The documentaries have shed light on issues that have
74 rarely been raised by Arab media especially issues related to women, minorities and democracy. The series cover issues such as Iraq under Saddam, Women under Taliban, Iran and the Islamic Revolution, Chechen Conflict, The Algerian Crisis, Jews of Yemen, Crimes of Honor, BerBer, Kurds, Sufism in Ingushetia, International Students in the US post Sept. 11, etc. Diana is one of the first female roving reporters and documentary producers in the Middle East. She has reported several wars in Lebanon, Afghanistan and Iraq. She is currently the web and social media editor at Future TV, besides being also a freelance documentary producer for independent TVs and production houses. Diana is as well a weekly She is .اؾٌشق األٚعcolumnist on media issues in the pan Arab daily ػ equally fluent in both Arabic and English as reflected in her articles.
Example 1: »األسٍِخ اٌج١عبء«، ٟ٘ٚ اٌجشؽ٠ب١ٔخ »عبِبٔضب ٛ١ٌصٛا٠ذ« British national Samantha Lewthwaite… dubbed the “White Widow.” In order to understand this allegory, the expressions „white widow‟ or „Samantha Lewthwaite‟ should not be taken in terms of their full extensional meanings. Two prototypes should be constructed, one for „white widow‟ and another for „Samantha Lewthwaite‟ that represent composites of the attributes with each expression as follows:
White Widow (a spider) Samantha Lewthwaite (Proper name) عبِبٔضب ٛ١ٌصٛا٠ذ األسٍِخ اٌج١عبء +female +female +definite +definite +countable -countable -human +human
-speaking +speaking +treacherous +treacherous +sneaky +sneaky +killer +killer +cunning +cunning Allegorically speaking, just as the spider emits the thread (of the web) out of itself and again withdraws it into itself, likewise the Western media projects the world out of itself and again resolves it into itself. In this case, on the one hand, it can also be deduced that a black widow spider cannibalistically devours her mate after seducing him into mating or brings an elaborately mesmerizing web outside of itself in order to entice her victims into visiting it to fulfill her murderous aim. On the other hand, this can be symbolically perceived as a similarly parallel allegorical narration to what the Western media does to its targeted audience. It creates ‗a tangled web of falsehoods‟, in this case, about ‗Samantha Lewthwaite‟ in order to entice the audience into trusting its narration and believing it. Consequently, people‘s opinion ends up misled, manipulated and trapped into passively trusting Western media‘s narration without double checking its validity or accuracy.
4.3. Allegory and Translation (اٌّغبصاٌشِضJustifying the use of the Arabic equivalent to allegory (ٞ in the title of the study: allegory is used here in this study as a superordinate term, subsuming all figures of rhetoric in language, including mainly metaphor, simile, pun, metonym, personification, wordplay, symbolism, irony, synecdoche, etc. In this direction, according to Honig (1959: 53) it is the translative use of narrative method and cultural ideal which characterizes the concept of allegory a particular kind of thinking in myth, literature, philosophy,
76 history and political discourse whose purpose requires translation (to preserve an old truth, to renew a forgotten one). There is a conspicuous difference between the literal translation which misses the point of the original and the inspired translation which may even improve upon the original. He goes on to argue that the difference is between a mere rendering and a thorough re-creation in another form (1959: 54). The main vehicles used for conveying material between speculative thought in political discourse and imaginative thought in literature are the figurative elements of metaphor, irony, symbol and allegory. Allegory serves more comprehensively than the other tropes in structuring the design of a fiction. Being more schematic and more flexible than is usually supposed, allegory is also the literary type that engages, more fully than any other, the symbolic uses of language whether in literature or the political discourse. The implications of such uses, like those involving the commerce between literature and ideas, lead into an area where the practices of allegory must be seen in a wider perspective to include the workings of ideology, rhetoric and media in the political discourse (ibid: 54). The translator should realize that no allegory exists without fully grasping its semantic components. Due to the fundamental importance of these elements the translator should ask himself/herself the crucial question: How many of these components have been transferred from SL into TL? This consequently means that in some cases at least one of these elements (or more) has not been inferred correctly in the translator‘s product. The Allegory Transference Spectrum ranges from 100% to 0% and can be realized after the translator asks himself/herself the following question: Have the previously mentioned components of allegory been transferred from ST into TT:
1. Fully 2. Partially 3. Zero Transference If the percentage of transference is below 50% then it is to be considered problematic and, in this case, the translator is expected to carefully detect and scrutinize what allegorical elements have been missed in the transference process, and why? In order to reach an answer for this question the translator should keep in mind that sometimes allegory undergoes one of the following processes: 1. Monitoring: this process is utilized when allegory is being transferred literally. 2. Managing: this process is made use of when allegory is being changed in order to be suitable for the TL culture. 3. Censoring: this process is useful when allegory is being entirely blocked for it might be perceived as a taboo in the target culture.
4.4. Transference Strategies of Allegory Noting that the selection and application of the transference strategies of allegory are hugely and directly affected by the cultural filtering processes under which allegory goes is of the essence. In the following subsections, these strategies are discussed more elaborately and the dynamic interactions between them and the related processes that accompany them are more clarified. In discussing strategies of transference, the researcher has adopted three strategies proposed by As- Safi. The strategy of acculturation, which is subcategorized under the strategy of partial transference, together with other strategies discussed above such as domestication, which involves some relevance to achieving the aim of naturalness.
Since naturalness gives preference to idiomatic language, it implies that wherever established formulas – allegory, fable, parable, exemplum, proverb, metaphor, metonymy, irony, symbolism, iconism – exist in a language, they should be used rather than free word combinations. The translation is thereby made more intelligible, acceptable and effective. Our categorization rests on the number of allegorical components met; in other words, if all of them are met the strategy would be full transference; if some, the strategy would be partial transference; and finally if none the strategy would be zero transference. For the purpose of recapitulation, the seven components of allegory can be reasonably explained as follows:
1. Symbolism Allegory (as mentioned earlier in chapter two) can be described as a multiple sustained symbol, in which a number of different symbols, with their individual interpretations, are joined together to make a total interpretation. Hence, the allegorical text has a gap between the literal and the figurative which can be bridged by the reader‘s rationalistic and intellectual allegorical reading. In form, allegory is a complete and self-sufficient narrative, but it also signifies another series of events or conditions. While some texts are allegories from beginning to end, many texts that are not totally allegories may nevertheless contain brief sections or episodes that are allegorical.
2. Iconism Iconism (as previously mentioned in chapter two) denotes representations of persons and events intended to have allegorical or symbolic significance in parallel situations (Abrams and Harpham, 1999:133). Icon functions as a sign by means of inherent similarities, or
79 shared features, with what it signifies (ibid: 280). It usually needs figurative language for the description of a person or thing, namely using allegorical language. In this case, meanings are as infinite as the author‘s imaginative power over the allegorical expressiveness of language, and as the reader‘s capacity to see allegorical connections. In this respect, iconicity has a power like that of allegory: it rests on the intuitive recognition of parallel similarities between one field of possible situations and another within a cognitive mental blended space. It creates non-literal allegorical meaning which is similar to iconicity; such semantic meaning is to be accounted for in terms of a model of blended interpretation. In other words, iconicity enables the creation of various similarity considerations essential to allegorical meaning.
3. Pluri-narrative (Narrative Background) Allegory has a narrative in which the details of the presented world possess plurisignificance. It represents characters, settings and events insisting that audiences map them back to another parallel narrative background which manifests an allegorical state of affairs. Hence, such parallelism entails that these detailed maps are ordered not only to make sense in themselves but also to signify a correlated, second order of events or concepts. The narration of one coherent set of circumstances implicitly carries forward that other level of comprehension. In the same direction, certain figures and ideas are ranged against one another in the manner of the polarities such as light and darkness, day and night or life and death…etc; in other words positive and negative. Hence, the nature and range of the oppositional relationships that are set up in the political allegorical field define the particular area of narrative concern.
4. Pluri-significant (Plurisignification or Double-meaningness) In this case, through allegory, use is made of an expression to convey multiple meanings at the same time. Allegory‘s double- meaningness can be a conceptual sign with extra-systemic parallel resemblances to the persons, thing or idea signified by it. Thus, we find a process where abstract features are fused with concrete objects and, conversely, ideas appear to be objectified within the narrative.
5. Conspiratorial Allegory on this basis must be a kind of conspiratorial agreement to employ secret meanings for public or semipublic meanings and communications. This conspiracy of silence entails an agreement not to talk publically about such meanings unless they are suitably codified by the author.
6. Figurative Allegorical language is used in a way that is different from the usual meaning in order to create a particular mental image or effect.
7. Inferential This allegorical component occurs when a particular meaning that the reader can find out indirectly from what is already known in the receiver‘s mind. This involves the act of forming an opinion, based on what the reader already knows within his/her schemata.
4.4.1. Strategy of Full Transference At certain times allegory undergoes the process of monitoring which entails that it is being literally transferred. This process limits the translator to utilize the strategy of full transference. It is found to
81 be most useful by translators when all the components of allegory are available to be fully transferred from ST into TT, as exemplified below. Some excerpts have been taken from the whole articles which are given in full in the appendix. The Arabic original (depending on the date of publication), as indicated before, both ST and TT are produced by the same author-translator.
Example 1: إطاٌح اٌٍساْ Extending the tongue إطاٌح اٌٍساْ
وٕذ أػزمذ أْ رؼج١ش »إطاٌح اٌٍساْ« ٚ ٛ٘صف ٠مزصش اعزخذاِٗ ٍٝػ عٍغبد اٌضشصشح فٟ ِغزؼّبرٕب أ١ؽ ٚٓ ٠مشع أً٘ أٚالدُ٘ ئرا ُ٘ رغبٚصٚا أصٛي اٌزخبؼت فؾ١زسُٙٔٚ ِٓ ِغجخ رىشاس األِش.
ألش ثمصٛس ؼِشفزٟ.
ٌمذ اوزؾفذ خالي األ٠بَ األخ١شح أْ »طٛي اٌٍساْ« ٛ٘ ئدأخ لب١ٔٛٔخ سع١ّخ ٠ضطّ ثبٌّز١ّٙٓ ثٙب فٟ اٌغغْٛ فٟ أوضش ِٓ ِىبْ فٟ ثالدٔب. ِضال، اٌغؽٍبد اٌفٍغ١ٕ١ؽخ فٟ ساَ اهلل اػزمٍذ صؾبف١خ ثزّٙخ »إطاٌح اٌٍساْ ؾٔٚش أخجبس وبرثخ ٚاٌزؾش٠ط ٍٝػ ا١ٕؼٌٛخ ٚوزبثخ ر١ٍؼمبد رذٛػ ئؽ ًٌّٝ اٌغؽٍخ«. ٘زٖ اٌزّٙخ ؽٍّذ ِذ١ٔٚٓ ٚٔب١ؽؽٓ »أطاٌٛا ٌساُٙٔ« ِٓ خالي ر١ٍؼمبد ٚأزمبداد ٌٍغؽٍخ ٍٝػ صفؾبرُٙ فِٛ ٟالغ اٌزٛاصً االعزّبٟػ.
رضآِ ِغ اإلدأخ اٌفٍغ١ٕ١ؽخ ؽىُ ِّبصً ثبدسد ئ١ٌٗ اٌغؽٍبد األسد١ٔخ اٌزٟ ارّٙذ 31 ؽخصب ثـ»إطاٌح اٌٍساْ« أ٠عب العزخذاُِٙ رؼج١شاد ٔمذ٠خ ٚسثّب عبخشح خالي اػزصبَ فٟ ئؽذؾِ ٜبفظبد األسدْ.
ئرْ، إطاٌح اٌٍساْ ٘زٖ ٟ٘ رّٙخ ِٛعٛدح فؼال.
Extending the tongue
I used to think that the Arab term ―extending the tongue‖ [i.e. criticism] was a description confined to use in the gossip sessions of our communities, or when people chastise their children if they say a bad word, and warn them of the consequences of repeatedly doing so.
I now admit the limitations of my knowledge.
I have discovered in recent days that ―extending the tongue‖ is a formal legal conviction whereby the accused are thrown in prison, and this applies to more than one region of the Arab world. For example, the Palestinian authorities in Ramallah recently arrested a journalist under the charges of: ―extending her tongue [against the Palestinian leadership], publishing false news, inciting the nation and writing comments calling for the Palestinian Authority to be dissolved‖. This charge also covered bloggers and activists who ―extended their tongues‖ through comments and criticisms of the Palestinian Authority posted on their personal pages on social networking sites.
This coincided with Palestinian condemnation of a similar provision initiated by the Jordanian authorities, who also accused 13 individuals of ―extending their tongues‖, for using critical and perhaps ironic expressions during a protest staged in one of Jordan‘s governorates.
So, extending the tongue is an actual criminal charge.
A componential analysis of the allegorical components of example (1) shows that the TL has identical allegorical components with the SL. The example is [+Symbolic], [+Figurative], [+Iconic], [+Inferential], [+Pluri-significant], [+Conspiratorial], [+Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)]. In the above example, the TT of the article is not totally allegorical. Nevertheless, it contains a number of sections and episodes that are allegorical. It reflects a number of sustained multiple symbols while displaying a connection between the literal and the figurative depending on the reader‘s deciphering capacity and allegorical reading. The allegorical instances in the TT create semantic functions through similarities and shared features with what they signify. As a result, the narrativity of the text contains details that can be traced back and related to another narrative background representing an allegorically dynamic textual state. In this case, the legal, social, political and symbolic
83 narrative backgrounds are mutually interacting with one another in order to produce an engaging and a hyper dynamic TT. The interaction between these multiple narrative backgrounds, in turn, produces a textual world rich of plurisignificance or doublemeaningness. Thus creating a textual atmosphere where the abstract and the concrete are fused into each other in order to objectify mental ideas. Another allegorical dimension of the TT is indicating what is conspiratorially perceived by the oppressive State as categorically inappropriate, unacceptable and even incriminating, namely publicly criticizing its poor performance. Hence, through reversing this allegorical component the TT breaks the wall of conspiratorial silence, yet at the same time it makes use of the codified meaning in the process. In addition to that, the TT reflects figurative richness through creating particular images and effects in the reader‘s mind. This, in turn, leads to enliven the conceptual diversity of the TT. As a result, this diversity can be vividly noticed in the TT by recognizing the newly constructed ideas and the established connections between them in the mind of the reader. All the previous allegorical components can only be fulfilled by means of inferential effort whether being exerted consciously or subconsciously within the reader‘s mental schemata and experiential storage.
Example 2: اسرشاذ١ج١ح اٌشث١حح The Shabiha strategy
ِٕز ثذء االؽزغبعبد اؼؾٌج١خ فٟ عٛس٠ب اػزّذ إٌظبَ ٙٔظ اٌّغبثٙخ ثبٌمٛح ٚاٌشدع ٌمّغ اؾٌّزغ١ٓ ِّٙب وبٔذ رىٍفخ ٘زٖ اٌمٛح ِشرفؼخ ئٔغب١ٔب ٚع١بع١ب. أؽذ أسوبْ ع١بعخ اٌمٛح اٌّفشؼخ ٘زٖ ِب ٠ّىٓ رؼش٠فٗ ةاسرشاذ١ج١ح »اٌشث١حح«، أٞ اعزخذاَ ؼشف صبٌش غ١ش ٔظبِٟ ٌٍجٚ ؼؽاٌمزً ثبعُ اٌٛالء ٌٍٕظبَ ِٓ دْٚ أْ ٠ىْٛ إٌظبَ ٔفغٗ ِجبؽشح.
The Shabiha strategy
Since the beginning of the popular unrest in Syria, the al-Assad regime has relied on a policy of confrontation and violence to suppress the protesters, no matter how high the human and political cost. One of the main pillars of this strategy of utilizing excessive violence is the pro-regime Shabiha militia. In other words, the use of a third party to assault and kill the protesters in the name of the regime, without the regime being directly involved.
In this case, a componential analysis of the components of example (2) shows that the TT has identical allegorical components with the ST. The example is [+Symbolic], [+Figurative], [+Iconic], [+Inferential], [+Pluri-significant], [+Conspiratorial], [+Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)]. For more details, see subsection 3.6.2. The allegory of the Syrian Shabeeha in chapter three.
Example 3: أرشٔد..حالي Halal Internet إٔرشٔد.. حالي
ٚصفذ ئ٠شاْ عٛٙد اٌٛال٠بد اٌّزؾذح إلؾٔبء ؽجىبد ئٔزشٔذ ٛ٘ٚارف عش٠خ فٟ اٌذٚي اٌزٟ رؼزجش٘ب ٚاؽٕؽٓ ل١ؼّخ ثأٙٔب »ؽشة ٔبػّخ« ٚأْ ٕ٘بن ِإاِشح ؾٌشة ئٌىزش١ٔٚخ ظذ٘ب..
ٌىٓ فٟ اؾٌم١مخ ١ؽٓ ٠زُ اؾٌذ٠ش ػٓ »ِإاِشاد« فٙزا ٟٕؼ٠ ثجغبؼخ أْ خٛؽاد ل١ؼّخ سلبث١خ رزمذَ ثغشػخ، ٚ٘زا رّبِب ِب ر١ٕؼٗ اٌغٛٙد اٌزٟ رؼىف ٙ١ٍػب ئ٠شاْ إلؾٔبء ِب رؼبسف ٍٝػ رغ١ّزٗ »إٔرشٔد حالي«، أؽ ٞجىخ ئٌىزش١ٔٚخ خبظؼخ ٌٕظبَ سلبثٟ صبسَ فزؾغت ِٛالغ رمٛي ئٙٔب ِٕب٘عخ ٌإلعالَ ِٛٚالغ رٕٝؼ ثؾمٛق اٌّشأح ؽٚمٛق اإلٔغبْ ٚاإلصالػ اٌغ١بعٟ..
٠غشٞ اٛ١ٌَ فٟ ئ٠شاْ داخً اٌز١بس اؾٌّبفظ ِب ال رمجٍٗ ػمٛي فز١خ »ف١ظ ثٛن«. إٌضاع ث١ٓ ؾِبفظ ٚأؽذ ؾِبفظخ، ث١ٓ اؾٌشط اٌضٛسٚ ٞث١ٓ ِٓ ر٘ت ئٌٝ أوضش ِٓ اؾٌشط فٟ رؾذدٖ.
ٔمً اٌّٛاعٙخ ئٌٝ ِٕبصػخ ث١ٓ اٌخ١بس اٌز٠ٕٛشٚ ٞث١ٓ ظالَ إٌظبَ ع١صجؼ أعًٙ ثؼذ رصذع اٌغجٙخ األٌٝٚ..
اإلٔرشٔد اٌحالي ٌٓ رغٕت إٌظبَ ٘زٖ اٌّٛاعٙخ.
Iran described the efforts of the United States, to establish secret internet and telephone networks in countries that Washington regards as oppressive, as being a ―soft war‖, saying that this was part of a conspiracy to wage ―digital warfare‖ against it.
But in fact whenever there is talk of a conspiracy it simply means that repressive, regulatory steps are being quickly put into place, and this is exactly what we see with the Iranian efforts to establish what it is describing as ―Halal Internet‖. This will be an electronic network subject to the regime‘s strict regulations, blocking websites it deems anti-Islamic, which in practice will mean the blocking of websites that deal with women‘s rights, human rights and political reform.
Within the conservative trend in Iran today, there are those who do not accept ―Facebook.‖ Indeed there is a conflict taking place between the conservatives and the even-more conservatives; between the Revolutionary Guards and those who are even more extreme.
This confrontation has become a dispute between those who want more openness, and those who are calling for further restrictions to be enforced [with regard to the internet].
Whatever happens, this ―Halal internet‖ will not allow the regime to avoid this confrontation.
A componential analysis of the allegorical components of example (3)‘s TL text shows that it reflects the full spectrum of allegorical components in the ST as follows: [+Symbolic], [+Figurative], [+Iconic], [+Inferential], [+Pluri-significant], [+Conspiratorial], [+Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)].
A translation procedure that has been found to be made use of by the author-translator through reviewing the TT of this article is transliteration of Arabic and English cultural bound terms. It is worth mentioning here that one of the most challenging tasks that may face the translator is translating culture-specific words, since they may have different allegorical significance in different cultures.
Transliteration relates to the convention of different alphabets; for example, on the one hand, the convention of English alphabets with ؽ" into Englishالي" Arabic alphabets in the transliteration of Arabic Halal. In this case, the word Halal in English becomes a "loan word" while simultaneously, on the other hand, the convention of Arabic alphabets with English alphabets in the transliteration of English in Arabic أزشٔذ In this case, the word .أزشٔذ Internet" into Arabic" becomes a "loan word".
Hence, this procedure functions as a catalyst in creating a certain kind of formulaic unity between the two expressions ―Halal‖ and ―Internet‖ which might seem at first glance as being somehow unnaturally juxtaposed, yet a deeper and more informed insight into the TT facilitates the relevance of validating such an attempt. In this case, the allegorical conceptual image is rather gloomy, pessimistic and critical bringing back to the reader‘s mind the Orwellian kind of ―Thought Police‖ from Nineteen Eighty-Four whose job is to uncover and punish ―thought crimes‖ and ―thought criminals‖. Consequently, in the TT‘s context any opinion which is not in total conformity with the government‘s official apparatus including its political and moral frame of reference is considered to be politically incorrect, morally unacceptable and sometimes even being perceived as a high treason which can be radically dealt with by the capital punishment.
Example 4: أٚتاِا ٛ٠لظ تٓ الدْ Obama awakens Bin Laden!
أٚتاِا ٛ٠لظ تٓ الدْ
ِش ػبَ ٍٝػ لزً اٌغؼ١ األ١ِشوٟ ص١ػُ »اٌمبػذح« أعبِخ ثٓ الدْ ٚئٌمبء عضزٗ فٟ اٌجؾش..
ٕٙ١ؽب ٌُ رؼؾش ٚاؽٕؽٓ ثأٙٔب ١ٕؼِخ ثؾٍّخ االٔزمبداد ٌّجذأ اٌمزً ِٓ دؾِ ْٚبوّخ، ٚال ٌغبثمخ ئٌمبء ١ِذ فٟ اػ١ؾٌّ، فبٌُّٙ ثبٌٕغجخ ٌٛاؽٕؽٓ آٔزان وبْ االٔزمبَ ٌٍعؾب٠ب اٌضالصخ آالف اٌز٠ٓ عمٛؽا فٟ ٘غّبد ٛ٠ٛ١ٔسن ٚٚاؽٕؽٓ.
أػادخ اإلداسج األ١ِشو١ح تؼث اٌٛالؼح فٟ اٌزوشٜ األٌٙ ٌٝٚا، فجؼٍرٙا فٟ صٍة إٔجاصاخ اٌشئ١س تاسان أٚتاِا. ٘زا ِب ٠غشٞ اعزضّبسٖ أللصؽ ٝذ ِٓ خالي ئدخبي اٌصؾبفخ ئٌٝ غشفخ اؾٌشة اٌغش٠خ اٌزٟ عشد فٙ١ب ئداسح ا١ٍّؼٌخ، ِٚٓ خالي ؽشػ٠ دػبئٟ ٙ٠ذف ٌٍمٛي ئْ أٚتاِا فٍٙؼا ٚلرً تٓ الدْ، ٚئْ خصّٗ اٌغّٛٙسٞ ١ِذ سِٟٕٚ ِب وبْ ١ٌزخز اٌمشاس.
ؼًٌ تٓ الدْ ِٓ ح١ث ٛ٘ فٟ لؼش اٌّح١ط ٠ثرسُ اٛ١ٌَ تؼذ أْ جؼٍٕا جؼ١ّا ِثٍٗ، لرٍح ِحرشف١ٓ ٔرثاٝ٘ تاٌمرً ٚٔضحه ٌٍىا١ِشا تؼذ أْ ٕٔجض رٌه!
Obama awakens Bin Laden!
A year has passed since the US Army killed Osama Bin Laden, leader of al-Qaeda, and dumped his body in the sea.
At the time, Washington was not concerned by the campaign of criticism launched against it, regarding the principle of state sponsored assassination without trial, or throwing the dead body into the ocean. What was important for Washington at the time was revenge for the 3,000 victims who were killed in the September 11th terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.
The US Administration has now restored interest in the incident on its first anniversary, by placing it at the heart of President Barack Obama’s achievements. It is investing in this to the fullest extent by allowing journalists into the secret war room where the operation was carried out, and through propaganda videos aiming to say that Obama did it and killed Bin Laden, and that his republican rival Mitt Romney would not have taken the decision.
Perhaps Bin Laden is smiling today at the bottom of the ocean after we have all become like him, professional killers who boast of murder and laugh at the camera after doing so!
A componential analysis of the allegorical semantic components of example (4) shows that it is [+Symbolic], [+Figurative], [+Iconic], [+Inferential], [+Pluri-significant], [+Conspiratorial], [+Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)]. In the above example, the English text of the article vividly arouses the conceptual allegorical imagery of the Nietzschean aphorism: ―He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you‖ (Nietzsche, 1886, 1966: 146). On the one hand, this age-old human inner struggle between good and evil and their definitions through time and space, history and geography is a difficult one on the personal level that only the strongest are adequately equipped to cope with. Moreover, when such a struggle is externalized on a global level and is being intermediated by collective national influences, political gain, propaganda maneuvers and self interest such an eternal moral and existential dilemma becomes increasingly thorny, controversial and at many times misleading.
Example 5: أضاللح ِغشت١ح A Moroccan slip-up
ِب وبْ ِغىٛرب ػٕٗ لجً سث١غ اٌضٛساد ثبد ِغز١ؾال ثؼذ٘ب.
فٙزٖ اٌضٛساد أخشعذ ا٢ساء ٚاٌّٛالف ِٓ ػمبي اٌخٛف ٚاٌغش٠خ ئٌٝ دائشح اؼٌٍٓ..
٘زا أِش ؽ٠بي اٌذٚي اٌزٟ ٔغؾذ صٛسارٙب ٚرٍه اٌزٟ رىبثذ ٛؼؽثٙب ٌٍٛصٛي ئؽ ٌٝش٠زٙب أٚ اٌذٚي اٌزٟ رؾبٚي أْ رزغٕت س٠بػ اٌزغ١١ش ػجش خٛؽاد ئصال١ؽخ ؾِذٚدح ٚعشؼ٠خ.
ؼُٔ، ئْ ؽبدصخ ٚاؽذح ٠ّىٓ ٌٙب أْ رىْٛ ِإؽشا ٙ٠ض، ٚعٙ١ض، ِصذال١خ ِب ألذَ ١ٍػٗ اٌٍّه اٌّغشثٟ ِٓ ئصالؽبد ثذد ٌضّب١ٔخ ٚرغ١ؼٓ فٟ اٌّبئخ ِٓ اٌّغبسثخ أٙٔب عذ٠خ.
اٌٛص٠ش اٌّغشثٟ أصبة اؾٌم١م١ٓ، ٚ٘زا أِش ؼف١ف ئرا ِب لٛسْ ثاصبثزٗ ٌشصِخ ئصالؽبد وج١شح فٟ اٌّغشة؛ ئر ِب ٕٝؼِ اإلصالؽبد ئرا ٌُ رعّٓ ٘زٖ اإلصالؽبد ػذَ رذخً اٌغ١بعخ فؽ ٟإْٚ اٌصؾبفخ، ٚ٘زٖ ػٍخ ِضِٕخ ِٓ اإلٔصبف اٌمٛي ئْ اٌّغشة ١ٌظ اٌجٍذ اؼٌشثٟ ا١ؽٌٛذ اٌّصبة ثٙب، ٌىٓ لذ رىْٛ ِشؽٍخ اإلصالؽبد ٚرؼذ٠ً اٌذعزٛس فشصخ ٌٍخشٚط ِٓ رشاس اعزغالي إٌفٛر اٌّضِٓ فؽِٕ ٟمزٕب.
A Moroccan slip-up
What was previously tolerated prior to the Arab Spring is now no longer acceptable.
Such revolutions have taken brought opinions and viewpoints into the public domain, outside of the framework of fear and security.
This is something that has happened in the Arab countries where revolutions successfully took place, as well as in other nations that are striving to obtain their freedoms, and even in countries that are striving to stand firm against the winds of change by carrying out a quick but limited reform.
Indeed the impact of this single incident can, and will, shake the credibility of the constitutional reforms undertaken by the Moroccan King, which 98 percent of the people of Morocco had voted in favour of.
The Moroccan Minister of Information has harmed these two brothers, which is something that pales in comparison to the harm that he has inflicted on the package of reforms to be undertaken in Morocco. For what do such reforms mean if they do not include an end to politicians intervening in the media? It is fair to say that this is a chronic problem that not only affects Morocco, but the entire Arab world. However the forthcoming Moroccan constitutional reforms may be an opportunity to put an end to this practise in the country.
A componential analysis of the allegorical semantic components of example (5) shows that it is [+Symbolic], [+Figurative], [+Iconic], [+Inferential], [+Pluri-significant], [+Conspiratorial], [+Pluri- narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)].
In example (5), the target version of the article comprises the whole range of allegorical components which have been fully transferred from the ST. Furthermore, the author-translator makes use of the combinational dynamic totality of these components and mutually interactive relations that connect them together in order to produce the narrative background of pre-revolution Arab countries and of post-revolution Arab countries. Consequently, these two narrativities are opposed to one another. Hence, according to the author-translator, through setting up this oppositional order of conceptual maps the natural and reasonable result is that slipping into what used to be acceptable in the old political narrativity leads to ultimately unavoidable repercussions in the present one.
4.4.2. Strategy of Partial Transference This strategy involves that allegory can undergo the process of managing which entails that it is being appropriately changed in order to fit within the culture of TL. This process gives the translator enough space and freedom to utilize the strategy of partial transference. It is found to be most useful by translators when some components of allegory are available to be partially transferred from ST into TT.
188.8.131.52. Acculturation: Cultural Transference This strategy falls within the strategy of partial transference; for allegory may sometimes undergo a higher level of the process of managing which entails that it is being carefully changed in order to be acculturated to the TL. This process gives the translator more space and freedom to utilize the strategy of partial transference to a certain extent. It is found to be most useful by translators when some
components of allegory are available to be relatively transferred from ST into TT.
Example 6: سٍفٛ١ْ »ال٠د« Salafism “Lite” سٍفٛ١ْ »ال٠د«
فٟ عٍغخ اٌجشٌّبْ اٌّصشٞ اٌزٟ اؼٔمذد ثؼذ أؽذاس ثٛسع١ؼذ اٌذا١ِخ، اٌزٚ ٟلؼذ اٙؾٌش اٌّبظٚ ٟساػ ظ١ؾزٙب اؾؼٌشاد، ٚلف إٌبئت اٌسٍفٟ أٛٔس اٌجٍىّٟ١ ٠زؾذس ثصٛد ِزٙذط وبد ف١ٗ ٠جىٛ٘ٚ ٟ ؼ٠جش ػٓ ِخبٚفٗ ِٓ ٚلٛع فزٕخ فٟ ِصش صبثّب عبَ غعجٗ ٍٝػ اإلػالَ اٌّصشؾِ ّٞال ئ٠بٖ ِغإ١ٌٚخ ِب عشٜ.
ئٙٔب اٌسٍف١ح ١ؽٓ رصجؼ »ال٠د« ِٓ دْٚ دعُ اٌمذاعخ ِٚٓ دْٚ صمً ا٠٢ذٌٛٛ٠ع١بد.
During the Egyptian parliamentary session that took place after the bloody Port Said events last month, which claimed dozens of lives, the Salafi MP Anwar al-Bulkimy stood up to speak in a quavering voice – almost at the point of tears – expressing his concerns over the recent incidents of strife in Egypt, inflicting scorn upon the Egyptian media and blaming it for what happened.
Now there is a need for Salafism ―Lite‖, without the full-fat of piety, and without the weight of ideologies.
A componential analysis of the allegorical semantic components of example (6) shows that three components have been transferred out of seven which is approximately equivalent to the percentage of 43% as follows: [+Symbolic], [+Figurative], [-Iconic], [+Inferential], [-Pluri- narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)], [-Pluri-significant], [-Conspiratorial].
In this example the English version of the article is partially allegorical in the sense that not all the allegorical components have been fully transferred into it from the ST, which is the case in the previous five examples. Hence, in this example allegorically speaking, there are instances of complete and self-sufficient symbolic structures. On the
92 other hand, the TT reveals that allegorical language is being uniquely utilized in a way that is different from the common meanings usually associated with everyday use. Furthermore, conceptually speaking the TT is creating in the mind of the reader the imagery of commercial skimmed low fat milk and connecting it with Salafi political figures which are otherwise known for their aggressive background within the Egyptian political scene. This, in turn, functions as a catalyst of the inferential process in the reader‘s mind. Consequently, the receiver of the TT will infer the consumers‘ lack of appreciation and the tastelessness of the products flooding our markets that are deprived of their malignant substance or properties, such as decaffeinated coffee, cake without fat or chocolate without sugar…etc and automatically connecting these conceptual imageries with the sensitive, fragile and vulnerable Salafi MP member deprived from the usual aggressive or violent substance even to the extent of having a cosmetic or aesthetic surgery.
Example 7: أتٛ غش٠ة.. سٛس٠ا Abu Ghraib…In Syria أتٛ غش٠ة.. سٛس٠ا
ِٕز ثذء اٌضٛسح اٌغٛس٠خ وبٔذ رزغشة أٚ رغشَة صٛس سعبي أِٓ ٠ٕىٍْٛ ثّٛلٛف١ٓ ؼِٚزم١ٍٓ..
وبٔذ دالٌخ رٍه اٌصٛس رخزٍف وض١شا ػٓ صٛس اٌغضش إٌّىً ثأصؾبثٙب اٌزٟ اٌزمؽذ ثؼذ ِٛرٚ ُٙثؼذ أْ أغؾت ِٓ اٙؾٌّذ اٌمزٍخ ٚاؼٌّزثْٛ..
ٌىٕٕب فٟ صٛس اٌزٕى١ً اٌّجبؽش ٚاٟؾٌ أِبَ أ١ػٕٕب ١ؽبي ّٛٔرط ِخزٍف..
اٌّخبؼَت فٙؾِ ٟذ أتٛ غش٠ة صمبفخ ػٕف غشث١خ، ٌىٓ اٌّخبؼَت فٟ صٛسح »ؽجؾ١خ عٛس٠ب« ٠جؼش ٍٝػ ا١ؾٌشح فؼال. فاٌٝ ِٓ ٠زٛعٗ ٘إالء فٙؾِ ٟذُ٘؟..
Abu Ghraib…In Syria
Since the beginning of the Syrian revolution, images have leaked out showing security officers abusing those arrested and detained. The intentions behind such images are very different from the photos of maimed bodies taken by the victim‘s relatives, after they died, and after the torturers and killers had fled from the scene. In the [security officers‘] images, the abuse is direct and lives in front of our eyes, and serves a different purpose.
The Abu Ghraib scenes were blamed on a Western culture of violence, but the rationale behind the images filmed by the Syrian Shabiha is puzzling indeed. What prompts these people to film and photograph these scenes?
A componential analysis of the allegorical semantic components of example (7) shows that it is [-Symbolic], [-Figurative], [-Iconic], [+Inferential], [+Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)], [-Pluri- significant], [-Conspiratorial].
In example (7) the TT reveals certain parallelism that includes the process of cognitive mapping within the mind of the reader in order to signify the correlations of one set of interactive circumstances with another system of mutually connected signs. On the other hand, the previous allegorical semantic component can only be achieved through inferential effort done by the reader. So, the receiver, in this case, infers the relation between the narration of one coherent set of circumstances or events and another parallel level of comprehension. Consequently, the reader of the TT connects between the brutalities of violence being exercised by US soldiers in Abu Ghraib prison which includes torturing and abusing prisoners, and the atrocities of mascaras that are being systematically executed against innocent civilians by the regime‘s lethal tool of destruction, namely the Syrian Shabeeha.
Example 8: اٌجضِح اؼٌسىش٠ح Lebanon’s army puts the boot in
غٕذ ف١شٚص لذ٠ّب أغ١ٕخ ٌٍغؼ١ اٌٍجٕبٟٔ وبْ ٙؼٍؽِب »خجؽخ لذِىٓ ع األسض ٘ذاسح«.
ئٔٗ ؽٍِغ صعٍٟ ِٓ ٌغخ ػب١ِخ ٠زٕبلٍٙب إٌبط ٠ٚشددٙٔٚب وٍّب ظشثذ فٟ ٌجٕبْ ؽشة أؼِ ٚشوخ. اعز١ؼذد وض١شا فٟ ٌجٕبْ ٘زٖ األغ١ٕخ األعجٛع اٌّبظ١ؽ ،ٟش ساعذ فٟ اٌجالد ٘زبفبد ؼؽٚبساد ؽٍٚمبد ٛؽاس داػّخ ٌٍّإعغخ اؼٌغىش٠خ، فؽفب ٍٝػ اٙؾٌّذ اإلػالِٟ خؽبة دػبئٟ اعزخذَ ف١ٗ اٌجؼط ػٍٕب رؼبث١ش رزؼٍك ثـ»اٌجضِح اؼٌسىش٠ح« ٚرمذِٙب ٍٝػ أٝؽؼِ ٞ آخش، ٍٝػ ِب لبي فٕبْ ٌجٕبٍٝػ ٟٔ ئؽذٜ اٌمٕٛاد.
Lebanon’s army puts the boot in Lebanese singer Fairouz has in the past sung about the Lebanese army. The song in question starts with the line ―your footsteps on the ground roar.‖
It‘s a line which people repeat every time war or conflict strikes Lebanon. This song was remembered a lot in Lebanon in the past week as there were many chants and slogans in support of the military. Propaganda reigned over the media scene as some outlets used terms linked to the ―military boots,‖ as a Lebanese artist once said on one of the channels.
A componential analysis of the allegorical components of example (8) shows that it is [+Symbolic], [+Figurative], [-Iconic], [-Inferential], [- Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)], [-Pluri-significant], [- Conspiratorial].
In example (8) the article‘s English version reflects two allegorical components. One of them is the symbolic component. This component is manifested in the TT through the sustained symbol of ―the military boot‖ while displaying a connection between the literal and the figurative relying on the reader‘s allegorical reading.
Another allegorical component is the TT‘s figurativeness. It can be clearly realized through the TT‘s role in producing certain images in the mind of the receiver. This also leads to a process where abstract features are fused with concrete objects and, conversely, ideas appear to be objectified within the narrative. Hence, according to the author-translator, the idea of the regime‘s oppressiveness is objectified into ―the military boot.‖
In addition, it is worth noting that the author-translator‘s unique attempt is to make use of the zoomorphic representation of expressions in the political discourse such as connecting the lyrics that the Lebanese singer Fairouz melodiously sings ―your footsteps on the ground roar‖ with her expression ―their military boots ‗roaring‘ on the man‘s back‖ in order to sarcastically describe the brutality of the scene.
Example 9: ح١ٓ ٠ٍرمٟ األسذ ضحا٠اٖ Assad, Face-to-Face with his Victims ح١ٓ ٠ٍرمٟ األسذ ضحا٠اٖ
عزثذ اٌغذح ٠ذ اؽٌفٍخ اٌصغ١شح اٌجبو١خ صائغخ إٌظشاد أِبَ اٌشئ١ظ اٌغٛسٞ ثؾبس األعذ، فغؼّٕب اٌفزبح ٟ٘ٚ رٕزؾت رمٛي ئٙٔب ال رؼشف ١ؽئب ػٓ أِٙب ٚئخٛرٙب. ٌُ ؼٔشف ِٓ اٌصغ١شح ِٚٓ أٍٙ٘ب أٚ و١ف فمذٚا.. والَ ل١ًٍ غ١ش ِفَٛٙ عشٜ رجبدٌٗ، ٌىٓ أزٝٙ اٙؾٌّذ ٕ٘ب ٌزٍٛؼ فٟ اٌخٍف١خ أغ١ٕخ »خٍٟ ئ٠ذن ثا٠ذٚ ،ٞاهلل ِب ثزخػ ٍٕٝه ٌٛ ٠مٛؼؽا ٚس٠ذٞ«.
ٌمبء األعذ ثبٌٕبص١ؽٓ ٛ٘ اٌّمٍت ا٢خش ٌزٍه اٌصٛسح.. ئٔٗ ٌمبء سئ١ظ »ٕٛؽْ« ثؼؾت ػزثٗ ؽٚشدٖ »اٌّغٛؾٍْ«..
ً٘ رصذلْٛ أْ األسذ حْٕٛ!!
Assad, Face-to-Face with his Victims
The grandmother pulled the hand of the crying little girl who stood staring in front of Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad. We
heard the girl say she did not know anything about the fate of her mother and siblings as she wept. We did not know who the little girl was, who her family were, or how she lost them.
Some inaudible words were exchanged and the scene ended there to the sound of a song with the lyrics: ―Put your hand in my hand, I will not abandon you even if they slit my throat.‖
The meeting of Assad with the refugees is the other side of that image; the meeting of a caring president with a people displaced by ―insurgents.‖ Do you believe Assad truly cares?
A componential analysis of the allegorical components of example (9) shows that it is [-Symbolic], [+Figurative], [-Iconic], [-Inferential], [+Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)], [+Pluri-significant], [- Conspiratorial].
In example (9), the TT of the article produces three allegorical semantic components. The first component is the TT‘s figurativeness in the sense that allegorical language is being used in a certain way that is not the same as the usual meanings commonly rendered to it, but instead it is used in order to create a particular mental image or effect.
The second one is the TT‘s parallel narrativity. This allegorical component can be realized through the TT‘s representation of characters, settings and events while insisting that the audience must map these elements back to another parallel narrative background which manifests an allegorical state of affairs.
This, in turn, leads to revealing the third allegorical semantic component, namely plurisignification or doublemeaningness. Hence, through allegory use is made of a word to convey multiple meanings at the same time. In this case, the author-translator chooses to reverse the usual anthropomorphic style. Consequently, instead of personifying human characteristics through attributing them to anything other than a
97 human being, the author-translator uses the Orwellian stylistic technique of zoomorphism. In other words, the author-translator from her own perspective, attributes non-human characteristics, in this case the lion‘s ruthless brutality to the Syrian President through setting the scene of a vicious killer in a face-to-face confrontation with his helpless feeble victims.
Example 10: إسدٚغاْ ٠صاسع «ذ٠ٛرش» ! Erdoğan versus Twitter إسدٚغاْ ٠صاسع »ذ٠ٛرش« !
ِب اٌزٞ أصبة سعت ١ؼت ئسدٚغبْ؟ ٌّبرا ٠زصشف اٌشعً ٚوأْ ثٗ ِغّب ِب؟ ٘ذد ثـ»سحك« ِٛلغ »ذ٠ٛرش«، ؼٍِٕب أٔٗ ٌٓ ٠ىزشس ألٞ سد فٍٟؾِ ًؼ أٚ غشثٚ .ٟفؼال رغؼٍ ثمشاس ؾِىّخ ؽٚغت اٌّٛلغ ػٓ األرشان. ألشْ حشتٗ ٍٝػ »ذ٠ٛرش« ترػٛذ ِٛلٟؼ »ف١سثٛن« ٚ»ٛ٠ذٛ١ب«، ؾِزسا ِّب عّبٖ ثبٌغعت اٌزشوٟ، ألْ اٌشأٞ اؼٌبَ ٠زذاٚي فعبئؼ فغبد رؽبٌٗ، ٚألٔٗ غ١ش لبدس ٍٝػ ِٕغ رغش٠ت رٍه اٌفعبئػ ؼجش ِٛالغ اٌزٛاصً االعزّبٟػ ثؼذ أْ رّىٓ ِٓ ظجٙؽب ػجش اإلػالَ اٌزم١ٍذٞ.
Erdoğan versus Twitter
What has happened to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan? Why is he behaving like a man possessed? He threatened to ―wipe out‖ Twitter and declared that he would not pay attention to any domestic or Western reaction. He went ahead and implemented a court order, and blocked Twitter from the Turkish public.
He then followed up his war on Twitter by threatening two other websites, Facebook and YouTube, warning of what he called ―Turkish anger,‖ because the public was discussing corruption scandals that affected him, and because he was unable to prevent the leak of damaging recordings on social media after he had succeeded in controlling them in the traditional media.
A componential analysis of the allegorical semantic components of example (10) shows that it is [-Symbolic], [+Figurative], [+Iconic],
[+Inferential], [-Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)], [-Pluri- significant], [-Conspiratorial].
In the above example, the article‘s TT apparently produces the allegorical component of the figurativeness of the TT. In other words, the TT reflects figurative wealth by means of manifesting certain imageries and effects in the mind of the reader, namely the figures of the slogans of Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. Consequently, that leads to the perception of these figures as iconic ones representing the rapid, immediate and transparent, though in many occasions deceptive, influence on the masses of Internet users. In this fashion the iconic allegorical component is most vividly recognized.
This, in turn, leads to perceiving another allegorical component which is the inferential one. It means that the previous two allegorical components can only be achieved by means of inferential effort made by the reader in order to comprehend the scale of iconic figurativeness of the TT whether consciously or subconsciously.
As a result, the receiver can infer the comic rivalry which is being created between the Turkish Prime Minister and the personified iconic figures of Twitter, Facebook and YouTube through examining his aggressive political discourse and quoting him using expressions such as: to ―wipe‖ them ―out‖ of the face of the earth, waging ―war‖ on them or threatening to destroy them.
Also, this brings back to the mind of the reader the comic confrontations between protagonistic comic figures such as Superman, Batman or Spiderman…etc and their antagonistic counterpart roles such as the Joker or Mr. Freeze…etc, fighting-videogames such as (Street
Fighter) or even the pretentious, mindless, tacky and artificial confrontations between wrestlers on Wrestle-mania television shows.
Example 11: ِالال.. ٚأخش٠اخ Malala is Not Alone
Malala is Not Alone
Many people find the fame and global media attention that surrounds young Pakistani activist Malala Yousafzai unpleasant. There are a variety of reasons for this, and whilst some should be ignored, others prompt discussion.
Of course it is difficult to understand the reasons behind the Taliban‘s barbarism and the group‘s continuing threats to kill Malala. Some people are just angry that she is receiving this much attention at a time when there are other high profile issues. Many consider the suffering of Syrian, Yemeni, and Egyptian women, for example, far more demanding of global attention. Others feel anger due to a perceived Arab-Islamic inferiority complex towards the West.
Indeed, Malala has become an icon, as have many others who fight for their causes. They may not have achieved miracles but they have inspired the masses, instilling hope in society. If Malala had not received as much attention would she have died of her wounds? Would she have fled her home in Pakistan out of fear of retribution for surviving the attack?
A componential analysis of the allegorical semantic components of example (11) shows that it is [-Symbolic], [-Figurative], [+Iconic], [- Inferential], [+Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)], [-Pluri-significant], [-Conspiratorial].
In this example the article‘s target version reveals two allegorical components. The first one is the iconicity of the TT‘s treatment of its subject matter. This allegorical component arises from the capacity of the allegorical instances in the TT in order to create semantic functions through similarities and shared characteristics with what they signify.
As a result, the reader can clearly indentify Malala‘s face as an iconic figure which represents her struggle for education, human rights and freedom from the back-warded, dogmatic and misogynistic oppression that she used to endure in her home-country and many others like her who are still facing the same threats all over the world.
Hence, Malala‘s story, on the other hand, as a narrative background that is parallel to other narrativities, functions as an iconic narrativity which represents many other girls just like her who fight for their own cuases.
Example 12: ست١غ ذٛٔس.. أَ خش٠فٙا؟ The Tunisian Autumn
ست١غ ذٛٔس.. أَ خش٠فٙا؟
١ؽٓ ٔغٝؼ ٌشصذ أزىبعبد ؼبٌذ دٚي اٌثٛساخ اؼٌشت١ح ِٚغزؼّبرٙب فغززؼجٕب وضشح اٚ ًٍؼٌعزمٍمٕب دالالرٙب.
فجؼذ أ٠بَ ِٓ روشٜ ِشٚس عٕخ ٍٝػ أزٙبء اٌذ٠ىزبرٛس٠خ فٟ رٛٔظ، أصذس سئ١ظ اٌٛصساء اإلعالؽ ،ِّٟبدٞ اٌغجبٌٟ، لشاسا ثز١١ؼٓ ِغإ١ٌٚٓ فٚ ٟعبئً ئػالَ ١ِّٛػخ ثٕٙ١ب اٌزٍفضٛ٠ْ اٌشعّٟ.
فًٙ حً اٌخش٠ف ١ٌطٞٛ ٔسّاخ اٌشت١غ اؼٌشت٠ٚ ٟحٍٙ١ا س٠حا تاسدج، أَ ٛ٘ فصً آخش ؼ٠صف تٕا لثً أْ ٠ض٘ش اٌشت١غ ِشج أخشٜ؟
The Tunisian Autumn
Although we are seeking to monitor the setbacks that have afflicted the Arab Spring states and their societies, the sheer number of problems that have been encountered are wearying, whilst the implications of these problems represents a major source of concern.
Just days before the one year anniversary of the end of dictatorship in Tunisia, the Islamist Prime Minister, Hamadi Jebali, issued a decision unilaterally appointing senior figures in the public media, including state television.
Has the Arab Spring breeze intensified into a chilling gale? Will we be carried away by another season, only for the spring to bloom once more?
A componential analysis of the allegorical semantic components of example (12) shows that it is [+Symbolic], [+Figurative], [-Iconic], [- Inferential], [+Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)], [-Pluri-significant], [-Conspiratorial].
In example (12) the English version of the article reflects three allegorical components. The first one is the symbolic allegorical component. The TT manifests this component through a number of sustained multiple symbols while revealing a connection between the actual literal aspect of language and its potential figurative possibilities depending on the reader‘s capacity to decipher them.
Moreover, there is the figurative allegorical component. It is noticed in the TT through the author-translator‘s use of allegorical language in a way that is different from the usual meaning in order to create a mental image of a particular effect.
The third allegorical component is revealed by means of the parallel narrativity of the allegorical instances within the TT. Concerning this component in particular, it is worth mentioning that it involves producing images and ideas which are being ranged against each other in the manner of light and darkness, a bright sunny day and a cloudy rainy night, life and death or rejuvenation and decay…etc; in other words positive and negative.
Hence, the nature and range of the oppositional relationships that are set up in the TT by the author-translator concerning the Tunisian allegorical political field between the positive ―Spring‖ and the negative ―Autumn‖ define the particular essential area of the narrative message which is being delivered to the reader.
Example 13: اؼٌشاق.. ٠ثرٍغ اٌسٛس١٠ٓ Iraq overshadowing Syria’s cries for help اؼٌشاق.. ٠ثرٍغ اٌسٛس١٠ٓ
فؼٍذ اٌزغشثخ اؼٌشال١خ فٍٙؼب..
ِٕز اٛ١ٌَ األٚي ٌٍضٛسح اٌغٛس٠خ ١ؽٓ وبٔذ ؽشاوب ع١ٍّب ِٚغ صٛس عمٛغ رّبص١ً ؽبفظ األعذ ٚثؾبس األعذ، اعزؾعشد راوشح ئعمبغ ؼبغ١خ اؼٌشاق صذاَ ؽغ١ٓ ٙؾِٚذ٠خ ر١ؽؾُ رّبص١ٍٗ..
اترؼٍد ذجشتح اؼٌشاق أٌُ اٌسٛس١٠ٓ ٟ٘ٚ سرثرٍغ اٌّض٠ذ إرا تمٟ ٘زا اؼٌجض لاتضا ١ٍػٕا..
Iraq overshadowing Syria’s cries for help
The consequences of the Iraqi experience are what they are.
Since day one of the Syrian revolution, images of Syrians defacing statues of Hafez and Bashar Al-Assad immediately brought to mind the toppling of Saddam Hussein and scenes of Iraqis pulling down statues of the dictator.
The Iraqi experience has overshadowed the Syrian crisis and it will continue to overshadow it as the death toll rises and the international community remains hesitant and cautious.
A componential analysis of the allegorical semantic components of example (13) shows that it is [-Symbolic], [+Figurative], [-Iconic], [- Inferential], [+Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)], [-Pluri-significant], [-Conspiratorial]. In example (13) the article‘s target version reveals two allegorical components. One of these components is the figurative one. The author- translator uses allegorical language differently from its usual denotative meaning so that it creates distinctive imageries or influences. It is worth mentioning here the textual conceptual dimension, which involves an idea, message, meaning or principle that is connected with another concept. It concerns the process of forming a conceptual frame of reference depending on or associated with other concepts and entails also the formulation of novel ideas in the mind of the reader.
Another allegorical component is the parallel narrativity of the TT. Allegory here has a narrative in which the details of the presented conceptual world possess parallelism. As a result of parallelism these details are ordered not only to make sense in themselves but also to signify a correlated, second order of events or concepts. Consequently, the narration of one coherent set of circumstances implicitly carries forward that other level of comprehension. Hence, the author-translator connects the correlated parallel narrative backgrounds of the two war stricken countries which are torn by internal conflict; namely Iraq and Syria, initially through anthropomorphization in the ST. Iraq is personified by attributing a human characteristic to it in the ST; namely the characteristic of ―gulping‖. However, personification has been only partially transferred into the TT through transmitting its implication by explicitly clarifying the intended message and hidden meaning of this process. In this case, the message is that the atrocities happening in Iraq outweighs on all levels these of Syria in reality as much as in high rank political analysis bureaus and newsrooms.
4.4.3. Strategy of Zero Transference In some critical situations, allegory undergoes the process of censoring which entails that it is being entirely blocked for it might be perceived as a taboo in the target culture. This process gives the translator the license to opt for drastic measures being called for by critical times through utilizing the strategy of zero transference. It is found to be most useful strategy by translators when none of the components of allegory are appropriate to be transferred from ST into TT. Hence, the components of allegory are not transferred at all from ST into TT.
Example 14: اسرٙذف ِذ١١ٔٓ...ال حضب اهلل Their identities were taken with their lives اسرُٙذف ِذ١١ٔٓ… ال حضب اهلل
»رفغ١ش فؽِٕ ٟمخ ثئش اؼٌجذ فٟ اٌعب١ؽخ اٌغٕٛث١خ ؼِمً ؽضة اهلل«.
ٌُ ٠غذ ثؼط ئػالِٕب أٞ غعبظخ فٟ اخزصبس ِٛد صالص١ٓ ؽخصب ٚعشػ أوضش ِٓ ِبئز١ٓ ثٙزا إٛؼٌاْ.
ضاػد حىا٠اخ األشالء اٌرٟ ٌُ ؼ٠شف أصحاتٙا ٚاألب اٌزٞ فمذ وً أثش ٌٗ ٚ ٛ٘اتٕراٖ ٚوً ِٓ سمط ١ِرا ألٔٗ ِش فٟ ذٍه اٌٍحظح اٌّجٕٛٔح اٌرٚ ٟلغ فٙ١ا االٔفجاس.
الزشة اإلػالَ أوضش ٘زٖ اٌّشح ِٓ ٚعٖٛ اٌعؾب٠ب فٟ اٌعب١ؽخ اٌغٕٛث١خ ٌىٕٗ ثمٟ أع١ش االٔمغبَ.
Their identities were taken with their lives
―Hezbollah Stronghold in Bir Al-Abed, southern Beirut, bombarded.‖
Some media outlets thought nothing of summing up an attack that killed 30 people and injured more than 200 under that title.
Many stories have been neglected: The story of the limbs torn off unidentified people, the missing remains of a father and his two daughters, and the stories of others who were killed just because they were passing by at the moment of the attack.
The media this time came closer to showing the true faces of victims in the southern district, yet it remains a prisoner of political divisions.
A componential analysis of the allegorical semantic components of example (14) shows that it is [-Symbolic], [-Figurative], [-Iconic], [-Inferential], [-Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)], [-Pluri- significant], [-Conspiratorial].
In the above example, the TT of the article does not reflect any of the allegorical components which have been mentioned and
discussed earlier in the present study. As a result of that, it is clearly evident that this is a case of zero transference.
Example 15: اٌٛالدج ِٓ اٌخاصشج.. اٌشخٛج Syria’s pain is absent from its screens
اٌٛالدج ِٓ اٌخاصشج.. اٌشخٛج
عمػ فٟ األعج١ػٛٓ األ١ٌٚٓ فمٙؽ ِٓ ػش سِعبْ اؾٌبٌٟ أوضش ِٓ أٌفٟ عٛسٞ ٚعٛس٠خ. ِٓ ٘إالء ِٓ لعٝ رؾذ اٌمصف ٚآخشْٚ فٟ اٌّغبصس أٚ فٟ اٌمزبي.
ِجذدا ٠ٕجح إٌظاَ فٟ اٌرسًٍ إٌٝ اٌشأٞ اؼٌاَ ػثش خاصشج اٌذساِا اٌشخٛج.
Syria’s pain is absent from its screens
In only the first two weeks of Ramadan, more than two thousand Syrians fell, some as victims of bombardment and others in massacres or during fighting.
Once again, the regime succeeds in infiltrating the public via the loose realm of drama.
A componential analysis of the allegorical components of example (15) shows that it is [-Symbolic], [-Figurative], [-Iconic], [- Inferential], [-Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)], [-Pluri- significant], [-Conspiratorial].
In example (15), the TT of the article does not reveal any of the allegorical dimensions which have been discussed and analyzed earlier in the present research. As a result of that, it is explicitly evident that this is a case of zero transference.
Example 16: فراج »اٌشلح« An Injustice to the Unseen and Unheard
»٠ا سبّ أصشٔا ٙ١ٍػُ«، ٘رفد اٌفراج اٌّحٌّٛح ٍٝػ األوراف لثً أْ ذحٟٕ سأسٙا ل١ٍال ف١رذٌٝ شؼش٘ا ٚذخزٌٙا دٙػِٛا فرثىٟ ح١ٕا ثُ ذرّاسه ٌرٙرف ح١ٕا آخش. سثك أْ ٘رفد ٘زٖ اٌصغ١شج ضذ ٔظاَ تشاس األسذ ٌىٕٙا فٟ اٌّظا٘شج األخ١شج وأد ذٙرف ضذ ظٍَّح آخش٠ٓ..
وأد اٌفراج ذثىٚ ٟذٙرف ضذ جثٙح »إٌصشج«..
لادخ ٘زٖ اٌصغ١شج اٌسٛس٠ح ِظا٘شج أ٘اٌٟ تٍذج اٌشلح اٌسٛس٠ح ضذ اٌجثٙح اٌّرطشفح اٌرٟ ششػد ِٕز اخرشالٙا ٌحشان اٌثٛسج اٌسٛس٠ح ترٕف١ز أجٕذج ِرشذدج ٚد٠ِٛح فٟ ذؼاٍِٙا ِغ اٌسىاْ فٟ إٌّاطك اٌرٟ ذرٛاجذ فٙ١ا. اٌجثٙح اػرمٍد ٚاٌذ اٌفراج اٌرٟ ذصذسخ اٌّظا٘شج دْٚ أسثاب ٚاضحح ٚذشفض اإلفشاج ػٚ ٕٗػٓ آخش٠ٓ تاذٛا فٟ سجٙٔٛا ٠رٍمْٛ جٍذاذٙا ٚسصاصاذٙا ٚسىاوٕٙ١ا أ٠ضا.
أِب اإلػالَ اٌزٞ ٠ذٟػ دػُ اٌضٛسح ف١ٍظ ألً ظٍّب ٌٍغٛس١٠ٓ ٠ٚشوض ٍٝػ األ٠ٌٛخ اإلعال١ِخ ِزغب٘ال ػ ٓػّذ أؽ ٞشان ِذ٠ٚ ،ٟٔشدد ٔبٛؽؽْ صشاؽخ أْ فعبئ١خ ئخجبس٠خ وجشٜ رمٛي ٌُٙ ثٛظػٛ ئٙٔب غ١ش ِٙزّخ ثّضً ٘زٖ اٌزؾشوبد اٌّذ١ٔخ ف١ّب رفشد ِغبؽبد ٘بئٍخ ِٓ رغ١ؽزٙب ٌىً ِب ٛ٘ ئعالٍٝػ ِٟ غشاس »إٌصشح« ؾِبٌٚخ رظ١ٙشُ٘ ٍٝػ أُٙٔ سافؼخ اؾٌشان اٌغٛسٞ..
ِشح أخشٜ، لزً أثٛ صمبس اٌّبئخ أٌف لز١ً عٛسٞ ثؼذ أْ وبْ ثؾبس لذ لزٍُٙ لجٍٗ. ٘زا ِب ٠ش٠ذٔب ِذٛػ ا١ؾٌبد رصذ٠مٗ عب١ٍػٓ ِٓ أثٛ صمبس صٛسح ٠خزجئْٛ خٍفٙب ِزٕبع١ٓ دِبء غض٠شح عبٌذ ٚغبظ١ٓ اؽٌشف ؼ ٓػفٍخ ؽغبػخ ِضً فراج اٌشلح..
An Injustice to the Unseen and Unheard
“God help us triumph over them,” chanted the girl carried on someone’s shoulders, before she tilted her head a little, cried, and then pulled herself together to chant again. This young girl has previously chanted against the regime of Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad, but now she protests against the unjust treatment of others.
This girl was chanting against the Al-Nusra Front. This young Syrian girl led the residents of Al-Raqqah in protest against the extremist front that has implemented radical, bloody methods in dealing with residents in areas where they are deployed, ever since it infiltrated the Syrian revolution. The front arrested the girl’s father for no clear reason, and refuses to release him or others who are now in jail suffering from lashes, bullets and knives.
The media that claims it supports the revolution is no less unjust towards the Syrians. It focuses on the Islamic brigades, intentionally ignoring any civil society activity. Activists have frankly stated that a satellite channel clearly told them it is not
interested in such activity. Such channels dedicate plenty of their coverage to everything Islamic, such as the actions of the Al- Nusra Front, in an attempt to show their role in the Syrian crisis.
Once again, Abu Saqqar and Bashar are both killers, and between them they have killed 100,000 people. This is what those who claim to be neutral want us to believe. They use Abu Saqqar as an image to hide behind, forgetting the blood of the people that was shed and overlooking brave youths like the little girl from Al- Raqqah.
A componential analysis of the allegorical semantic components of example (16) shows that it is [-Symbolic], [-Figurative], [-Iconic], [-Inferential], [-Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)], [-Pluri- significant], [-Conspiratorial].
In the above example, the target version of the article lacks all of the allegorical components which have been elaborately discussed and carefully scrutinized earlier in the present research. Consequently, this is a crystal clear textual situation within which the author- translator cannot successfully manage to transfer any of the allegorical aspects of the ST. Hence, the TT represents a case of zero transference.
Example 17: أجاصاخ ٚفضائح »سّٛ١س ١٘شش« A Mixed Record إٔجاصاخ ٚفضائح »سّٛ١س ١٘شش«
٠فزشض ؽغٓ اٌزمذ٠ش أٔٗ ١ؽٓ ٠ىزت اٌصؾبفٟ االعزمصبئٚ ٟاٌىبرت األ١ِشوٟ »عّٛ١س ١٘شػ« ِمبال ٠زُٙ ف١ٗ اٌّخبثشاد اٌزشو١خ ثبٌعٍٛع فٟ اٌٙغَٛ اٌى١ّبٞٚ ٍٝػ اٌغؼٛخ اؾٌشل١خ فٟ عٛس٠ب اٌص١ف اٌّبظٟ أٔٗ ١ٍػٕب اٌزٛلف ١ٍِب ٚئػبدح إٌظش فٟ االرٙبِبد اٌغبثمخ اٌزٚ ٟعٙذ ئٌٝ إٌظبَ اٌغٛسٞ ثبٌزٛسغ فٟ اٌغش٠ّخ.
فبؽٌّٕك اؼٌمالٟٔ ٌم١بط األِٛس ٠معٟ ثأْ ٘زا اٌصؾبفٟ ٌٗ سجً حافً، فٛٙ عجك أْ وؾف أٚاخش اٌغز١ٕبد رٛسغ ػٕبصش ِٓ اٌغؼ١ األ١ِشوٟ فٟ ِغبصس فٟ ف١زٕبَ، وّب وزت ػٓ اٌفعؾ١خ األٙؽش فٟ ربس٠خ اٌشؤعبء األ١ِشو١١ٓ »ٚٚرشغ١ذ« ٚلجً ؾػشح أٛػاَ وبْ ٚساء فعؼ رؼز٠ت عٕٛد أ١ِشو١١ٓ ٌّٛلٛف١ٓ ػشال١١ٓ فٟ عغٓ »أثٛ غش٠ت«.
أ١ٌظ ٘زا اٌزغٍغً فٟ اإلٔغبصاد ٛ٘ ِب اعزٕذ ٌٗ وً ِٓ اؽزفٝ ثّب وزجٗ »١٘شػ« ثؾأْ اٌى١ّبٞٚ اٌغٛسٚ !ٞ٘ب ٛ٘ اإلػالَ اٌّّبٔغ ٛؽّي ِمبي »١٘شػ« ثٙزا اؾٌأْ ئٌٝ اؽزفب١ٌخ. ٠ىفٟ أْ ٔجؾش ػٓ اعُ »عّٛ١س ١٘شػ« ِضال ػجش »ر٠ٛزش« ِضال ٌٕغذ رغش٠ذاد وض١شح ٌّمبٌٗ ػٓ اٌى١ّبٞٚ اٌغٛسٚ ٞلذ أسفك ثغٍّخ عشؼ٠خ ثأْ اٌشعً عجك أْ وؾف »أثٛ غش٠ت« ِٚغضسح »ِبٌٟ ٞ« فٟ ف١زٕبَ. ٚاإلظبفخ اٌغشؼ٠خ فٟ ٘زٖ اٌزغش٠ذاد وبف١خ إللٕبع وض١ش٠ٓ ثأْ ِٓ لزً اٌغٛس١٠ٓ فٟ اٌغؼٛخ ُ٘ اٌّخبثشاد اٌزشو١خ ١ٌٚظ إٌظبَ اٌغٛسٞ فال ؽبعخ ٌٍزذل١ك فٟ ِمبي اٌشعً ئرْ..
ٌىٓ اٌزذل١ك فؽ ٟبٌخ »عّٛ١س ١٘شػ« رؾذ٠ذا ثبد ؾٍِب ٚأٞ رجٓ ٌّمبٌٗ األخ١ش ِٓ دْٚ رؼّٓ، ف١ٗ لفض ؽ ٓػمبئك ٠شغت اٌجؼط أْ ٙ٠شة ِٕٙب. ؼُٔ ٌـ»١٘شػ« أوضش ِٓ عجك صؾبفٟ أوغجٗ عٛائض ػب١ٌّخ ٌىٓ ٘زٖ ١ٌغذ اؾٌم١مخ ا١ؽٌٛذح ػٓ اٌشعً. فبالعزٕبد ئٌٝ ِصذال١خ ِب ٠مٛي ٠مزعٟ أ٠عب االٔزجبٖ ئٌٝ سجٍٗ ا٢خش ِٓ اإلخفالاخ ٛ٘ٚ ٌٍحم١مح ال ٠مً أ١ّ٘ح ػٓ إٔجاصاذٗ.
ٌمذ سفعذ صؾف وجشٟ٘ ٜ »اٌغبسد٠بْ« ٚ»ٛ٠ٛ١ٔسن رب٠ّض« ٚ«ٚاؽٕؽٓ ثٛعذ« ؾٔش ِمبي »١٘شػ« األخ١ش ألٔٗ ال ٠غزٛفٟ اؾٌشٚغ اٌصؾبف١خ اٍٛؽٌّثخ وّب أغفٍٗ اٌىض١ش ِٓ اإلػالَ اٌغشثٟ ف١ّب الزصش االؽزفبء ثٗ ٍٝػ ِغػّٛبد ِٓ ا١ٌغبس أغشا٘ب أْ فٟ اٌّمبي ارٙبِب ئٌٝ اإلداسح األ١ِشو١خ. ثبٌٕغجخ ئٌٝ اٌغٛس١٠ٓ فُٙ ١ٌغٛا ثبٔزظبس ِمبي »١٘شػ« ؼ١ٌشفٛا ِٓ لزٍُٙ ثبٌى١ّبٞٚ، فُٙ ؼ٠شفٛٔٗ رّبِب ٌىؾِ ُٕٙغٌْٛٛ ا٢ْ ثبٌٙشة ِٓ ثشا١ٍِٗ اٌّزفغشح..
A Mixed Record
When US investigative journalist and author Seymour Hersh writes an article accusing Turkish intelligence of involvement in the chemical attack in Syria‘s suburb of Ghouta last summer, we must pause, and reconsider previous accusations made against the Syrian regime of being involved in the crime.
Hersh has a record of great journalistic achievements: in the late 1960s, he exposed US troops‘ involvement in massacres in Vietnam. He also wrote about one of the most famous scandals in US history: Watergate. Ten years ago, he helped expose the torture of Iraqi detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison by US soldiers.
Hasn‘t everyone who read Hersh‘s latest article judged it on the basis of his previous record? And now media outlets in support of the regime of Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad are celebrating it.
It‘s enough to search for Hersh‘s name online to find tweets relating to the article saying he exposed the Abu Ghraib scandal in Iraq and the My Lai massacre in Vietnam. Such tweets are enough to convince many people that Turkish intelligence killed the Syrians in Ghouta and not the Syrian regime. So why the need to double-check the man‘s article?
However, double-checking, in Hersh‘s case in particular, is nevertheless necessary, and accepting his claims in his recent article without thoroughly researching them puts one in danger of ignoring facts that some would prefer to conceal. Yes, Hersh has had more than one scoop that has gained him great recognition, but there‘s more to the man than this. The credibility of what he says also calls for the need to consider his record of failures—a record that’s actually as important as that of his achievements.
Prominent newspapers such as The Guardian, The New York Times and the Washington Post refused to publish Hersh‘s recent report because it did not meet required journalistic standards. Many Western media outlets ignored it as well. The report was, however, celebrated by leftist groups tempted by the idea that the article included an accusation against the US administration. As for the Syrians, they are not waiting for Hersh‘s article to find out who killed them using chemicals. They know the murderer very well. They are currently busy dodging his barrel bombs.
A componential analysis of the allegorical semantic components of example (17) shows that it is [-Symbolic], [-Figurative], [-Iconic], [-Inferential], [-Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)], [-Pluri- significant], [-Conspiratorial].
In the above example, the TT of the article does not reveal any of the allegorical components which have been elaborately discussed and carefully examined earlier in the present research. Consequently, this is clearly a textual case within which the author-translator has not managed to transfer any of the allegorical elements of the ST. Hence, the TT is a case of zero transference.
Example 18: إػذاَ شاػش Rouhani’s Not-So-Sweet Tweets إػذاَ شاػش
ٛ٠اظت اٌشئ١ظ اإل٠شاؽ ٟٔغٓ سؽٚبٟٔ، أٚ سثّب ِٛظفػ ْٕٛذٖ، ٍٝػ ئدساط رغش٠ذاد ٌٗ ػجش »ر٠ٛزش« ٚٚ ٛ٘ص٠ش خبسع١زٗ ؾِّذ عٛاد ظش٠ف. ٠فؼالْ رٌه ٍٝػ اٌشغُ ِٓ
اعزّشاس ِٕغ اٌغؽٍبد اإل٠شا١ٔخ ِٛاٙ١ٕؼب ِٓ اعزخذاَ ٘زا اٌّٛلغ ِٛٚالغ اٌزٛاصً االعزّبّٛػ ٟػِب، ٌىٓ ١ٌظ ٘زا ثزفص١ً ١ٌزٛلف إٌظبَ اإل٠شاػ ٟٕٔذٖ.
ٚ٘بؽ ٛ٘ ُؽبػش ٚأعزبر ػشثؽ ٟبة أعظ ِغٍخ ؼؽش٠خ، ٚوزت ٔصٛصب ٔمذ٠خ ٌٍٕظبَ ٚرؼغفٗ ١ؽبي األل١ٍخ اؼٌشث١خ فٟ األٛ٘اص، فبرُُٙ ثأٔٗ ؾ٠بسة اهلل.. أػُذَ ثغش٠خ ٚفٟ عبػخ ِغٌٛٙخ. ٚاٌّفبسلخ ٕ٘ب أ٠عب أْ اٌشئ١ظ »اؼٌّزذي« سؽٚبٟٔ صاس ؽِٕمخ األٛ٘اص لج١ً اإلػذاَ ثفزشح ل١ٍٍخ، ٚرؾذس ٕ٘بن ؽ ٓػمٛق األل١ٍبد اؼٌشل١خ.
ٌٍٚحم١مح، ١ٌسد إ٠شاْ ٚحذ٘ا اٌرٟ ذخاف ِٓ شاػش، ١ٌٚسد إ٠شاْ ٚحذ٘ا ِٓ ذشػة ٔظاِٙا اٌىٍّح ٚاٌفىشج، ٌىٓ ؽٕك ٘بؼؽ ُؽجبٟٔ ٠خجشٔب اٌىض١ش ػٓ ئ٠شاْ؛ فغٟؼ اؾٌىِٛخ اإل٠شا١ٔخ ئٌٝ رظ١ٙش صٛسح ِخزٍفخ ػٓ صٛسرٙب فٟ أ٠بَ اٌشئ١ظ أؽّذٞ ٔغبد ِب صاي ؽزٝ ا٢ْ افزشاظ١ب، ف١ؽ ٟٓ أْ صٛسرٙب اٌمجؾ١خ وؾىُ اعزجذادٞ ِب صاٌذ ٟ٘ اؾٌم١مخ ٍٝػ ِغزٜٛ اٌّّبسعخ.. فإػذاَ شاػش ٠شىً اخرصاسا ٌجٛ٘ش ٘زا إٌظاَ، ٚرغغ١ً اػزشافبرٗ ػجش ؽشػ٠ ف١ذٛ٠ أزمبؿ ِٓ اؼٌذاٌخ، ٚاعزؼبظخ ٕٙػب ثبٌزم١ٕخ ٕٙ١ػب، أٞ أْ اٌف١ذٛ٘ ٛ٠ لش٠ٕخ ر١ٍؼك اؾٌّٕمخ، ٛ٘ٚ اعزؼبظخ ػٓ اٌّفَٛٙ اؾٌذ٠ش ؼٌٍذاٌخ، أٞ اؾٌّبوّخ ا١ٍٕؼٌخ ٚاؾٌفبفخ.
إػذاَ شاػش ػثاسج ذخرصش إٌظاَ فٟ إ٠شاْ.
Rouhani’s Not-So-Sweet Tweets
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, or possibly employees of his, continue to tweet on his official account, as does Iran‘s foreign affairs minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif. Rouhani and Zarif are active on Twitter even though the Iranian authorities still ban their citizens from using it and other social networking websites. But this is just a minor detail for the Iranian regime.
It is true that Iran is not the only country that is afraid of poets, and it’s not the only country whose regime is terrified by words and ideas, but the hanging of Shaabani tells us a lot about Iran. The Iranian government‘s attempt to change its image from the era of former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is hypothetical at best. When it comes to practice, not theory, the unpleasant reality of Iran as a tyrannical regime still holds true. Shaabani‘s forced confession was a derogation of justice, and took the place of a just, public and transparent trial.
The execution of a poet sums up the Iranian regime.
A componential analysis of the allegorical semantic components of example (18) shows that it is [-Symbolic], [-Figurative], [-Iconic], [-Inferential], [-Pluri-narrative: (Parallel Narrativity)], [-Pluri- significant], [-Conspiratorial].
In the above example, the article‘s English version lacks the ability to produce any of the allegorical components which have been discussed and examined earlier in the present study. As a result of that, this is evidently a textual situation within which the author-translator has not managed to transfer any of the allegorical dimensions of the ST. Hence, the TT represents a case of zero transference. By way of recapitulation, this chapter involves the discussion and analysis of the selected examples that bear an allegorical sense as well as evaluating their translation and the role of the author-translator in carrying out her task with regard to rendering accurately the allegorical sense of political ideas besides their denotative meaning. Moreover, all the previously examined and analysed examples based on componential analysis of their allegorical components evince the magnitude of transference of these components whether full, partial or none. Furthermore, the transference strategies are mainly governed by the major textual political atmospherics surrounding the bilingual articles manifested by means of the processes of monitoring, managing and censoring.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The present study has come to the following conclusions:
5.1.1. While scholars like Lyons, Jackson, Nida and Newmark among others have given three highly general semantic components in their componential analysis, the present research, has stressed that the components can be further extended into seven essential allegorical components which are particularly obligatory for the realization of allegory, namely symbolic, figurative, iconic, inferential, narrative background (parallel narrativity), double meaningness and conspiratorial. 5.1.2. The analyzed translations support the hypotheses in the introductory chapter which are: allegory is sometimes mechanically or automatically transferred in translated corpora because of contextual cultural specificity. The vivacity of allegory has not always been readily conceived by translators, particularly in the political discourse, which leads to misperceiving and mis-capturing its figurative transformative spirit and consequently being mistranslated. Allegory is an evolutionary diachronic textual phenomenon that needs to be tackled by translators through a dynamic holistic approach to translation. Mistranslating allegory does not only create a cultural and ideological gap between the TL reader and the translated text but also deprives him/her from recognizing and appreciating its potential aesthetic merit.
5.1.3. The mistransference of allegorical sense, whether deliberate or not, undermines the intentionality of the ST. There seems to be a general consensus that a good translation should keep the original meaning of the ST. Since allegory is an essential part of meaning in political discourse, it should be transferred to the TT to ensure that the ST message is delivered to the TT reader as accurately as possible. The risk of ignoring the allegorical sense in political discourse translation is too high to ignore; it may lead to different problems and misunderstandings. Thus, it is recommended that a translator ought to pay utmost attention to this matter. 5.1.4. Transferring the allegorical sense is in many cases a challenging task for the translator, especially between two different languages such as English and Arabic since allegory is related to culture, and by corollary it is one of the thorny cultural problems in translation. Suggested solutions for the problem of rendering allegorical senses in the ST can be through finding componential allegorical formulaic theme which functions as an interactive and dynamic counterpart in the TT. If finding an allegorical counterpart that covers the allegorical components over and above the denotative meaning is unattainable, then a suggested solution can be paraphrasing the essential inferential allegorical semantic content of these components. 5.1.5. Associations added to allegorical expressions may be attributed to social, cultural and political factors as well as the way in which political journalism employs language to interpret facts and scoop events. A case in point is how the language that has been used to interpret the contemporary political situation during the past three years of what is widely known as the “Arab Spring” in the Middle East and the Arab
countries in particular and the global community in general. Furthermore, loan expressions tend to acquire a negative sense because they may reflect our attitude toward foreign nations from which we took the word, . حالل انترنت : e.g. Halal Internet 5.1.6. The present study has highlighted the function of allegory in political discourse as a rhetorical means exemplified in various political notions such as Fourth Estate, Fifth Column, Fifth Estate and Social Media as a Fifth Estate, the national allegorical iconicity of Bouazizi in Tunisia, the international allegory represented by Nelson Mandela in South Africa and in the allegories of the Syrian Shabeeha and the Egyptian Baltagiya. 5.1.7. In the present study, all the examined and analysed examples based on componential analysis of their allegorical components, evince the scale of transference of these components whether full, partial or none. Furthermore, these transference strategies are chiefly guided by the main major political circumstances surrounding the bilingual articles and their textual repercussions which can be reflected through the processes of monitoring, managing and censoring. 5.1.8. In the present study, the researcher has found out the essential role played by allegory in the political discourse. It functions as a rhetorical device within the political discourse which, in its turn, relies heavily on a plethora of other figurative expressions such as metaphor, metonymy, hyperbole, irony, etc. In the political context, allegorical senses are made use of in order to illicit and mediate cultural, political and ideological meanings, ideas and concepts across mental and linguistic barriers through engaging the TT reader’s mental capacity into comprehending newly constructed conceptual frames of reference. While enumerating some of these newly formulated conceptual structures such as:
allegorization of the networked fourth estate, symbolizing the press, the fifth column, the fifth estate, iconicity of national allegories, Arab Spring, Syrian Shabeeha, Egyptian Baltagiya, etc; it can be realized that these conceptual amalgamations have their ontological origins deeply rooted in human history; however, they reveal their influential zest upon contemporary political topics ranging from US presidential elections 2012, Iranian presidential elections 2013 to the Arab Spring and its local and global influential dynamics throughout the international community. 5.1.9. The researcher has found out in the present study through briefly surveying the classificational conceptual scale of general translation strategies, namely: textual strategies vs. procedural strategies, global strategies vs. local strategies, direct vs. oblique translation strategies, syntactic, semantic and pragmatic strategies and finally domesticating vs. foreignizing strategies, that the last dichotomy between domestication and foreignization is the most pertinent one to allegory. 5.1.10. It has been found out in the present study that the theoretical background and the practical implications of componential analysis can serve as a solid foundation for effectively rendering allegory as it is exemplified in chapter four. Furthermore, the research evinces that the Allegory Transference Spectrum which has been carefully formulated, has proven to be a highly useful and a reasonably accurate criterion in the process of examining to which extent the allegorical components have been transferred from the ST into the TT. Consequently, this has lead to the creation of three main translation strategies, namely: 1. The Strategy of Full Transference, 2. The Strategy of Partial Transference including its subcategory of Acculturation: Cultural Transference and finally 3. The Strategy of Zero Transference. These strategies operate respectively and
simultaneously with the governing three processes of monitoring, managing and censoring. 5.1.11. It has been found in the present research that the most crucial elements among the seven components of allegory are the symbolic and the iconic ones. They derive their importance from the essential nature of allegory. In other words, all the other seven allegorical components, in one way or another, generically branch from symbolism and iconism through the unfolding of connections which arise between the literal and the figurative by means of multiple symbols and the creation of semantic functions which reflect iconic similarities with what they signify.
5.2. Recommendations 5.2.1. It is perhaps beyond any dispute that a good research is expected to breed other works prompting researchers to delve within related matters tackled by other researchers. 5.2.2. It is worth mentioning that the corpus is derived from bilingual articles produced by the author-translator, which is Diana Moukalled. This has shown that in many examples TT has not been so close to the origin especially in style. Other studies are recommended to deal with such unique bilingual/bicultural people such as Diana Moukalled and Khalil Gibran among others to highlight the strategies that they follow in their “recreation” of the TT which in many cases is not a replica of the ST. 5.2.3. It is also recommended that other studies can be conducted on rhetorical stylistic devises other than allegory such as metaphor, metonymy, hyperbole, irony…etc, to see how an author-translator has tackled them. 5.2.4. Since sensitivity to allegory is an essential skill, it is recommended that the Arab journalistic political author-translators be trained very well to be
able to grasp and render effectively the full scale of allegorical expressions. The author-translator is bound to exert extra efforts to unfold the implicit aspects and find the hidden allegorical senses of such concepts. Thus, the author-translator should render the allegorical sense to the best of his/her capacity fully and efficiently. 5.2.5. The author-translator’s task of providing allegorical counterparts to allegory-laden expressions which are politically, culturally and semantically complex is considerably challenging, but ignoring the importance of the allegorical sense of such concepts may lead to further misunderstandings and stereotypical misconceptions. Furthermore, accurate transference of allegorical sense enhances the process of bridging political and cultural conceptual gaps between the ST and the TT.
Abrams, M. H., and Harpham, G.G. (1999). A glossary of literary terms. 7th ed. Boston, Mass: Thomson Wadsworth.
Damascus: Mamdouh .(حيونة االنسان) Adwan, M. (2007). Haywanat al-Insan
Albright, M. (2012). Prague Winter: A Personal Story of Remembrance and
War, 1937-1948. NY: HarperCollins.
al-Haj, Salih Yassin. (2012). “The Syrian Shabiha and Their State.” Heinrich
Böll Stiftung: Middle East Office, April 2012.
Allegory. (2006). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved on 17 October 2013
Al-Rodhan, N. (2007). The Emergence of Blogs as a Fifth Estate and Their
Security Implications. Geneva: Slatkine.
Baker, M. (1992). In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. London:
Bell, R. T. (1998). Psychological/cognitive approaches. In Baker, M. (Ed).
Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies. London and New York:
Benjamin, W. (1985). The Origin of German Tragic Drama. London: Verso Press.
Benkler, Y. “A Free Irresponsible Press: Wikileaks and the Battle Over the
Soul of the Networked Fourth Estate.” Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties
Law Review Vol. 46, 2011, 310 - 397.
Benyei, T. (2001). Acts of Attention: Figure and Narrative in Postwar British.
Frankfort: Peter Lang Pub Inc.
Brent, J. (1998). Charles Sanders Peirce: A Life. 2nd edition, Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
Bunyan, J. (1984). The pilgrim’s progress. New York: Oxford University
Press. (Original work published 1678)
Carlyle, T. (1908). On Heroes, Hero-Worship, & the Heroic in History. Six
Lectures. Reported with emendations and additions. USA: Kessinger
Publishing. (Original work published 1840).
Carlyle, T. (2002). The French Revolution: A History. New York: The Modern Library. (Original work published 1837).
Chesterman, A. (1997). Memes of Translation: The Spread of Ideas in Translation Theory. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Cohen, J. (1993) “The Semantic of Metaphor”. Metaphor and Thought, (Ed).
Ortony, A. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Coleridge, S. T. (1861). “The Statesman’s Manual.” In Adams, H. (Ed)
(1971). Critical Theory Since Plato. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Cousineau, P. (2010). Wordcatcher: An Odyssey into the World of Weird and Wonderful Words. California: Viva Editions.
Crisp, P. “Between extended metaphor and allegory: is blending enough?” Language and Literature. Vol. 17, 2008, 291–308.
Crisp, P. “Allegory, Blending, and Possible Situations”, Metaphor and
Symbol. Vol. 20:2, April, 2005.115 – 131.
Crisp, P. and Oakley, T. ' Honeymoons and Pilgrimages', Metaphor and
Symbol, vol. 26:2, March, 2011.152 – 159. de Man, P. (1971). Blindness and Insight: Essays in the Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. de Man, P. (1979). Allegories of Reading. New Haven: Yale University Press. de Man, P. (1983). Allegories of Reading. New Haven: Yale University Press. de Man, P. (1996). Aesthetic Ideology. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
122 de Man, P. 'The Rhetoric of Temporality'. In Ed. Singleton, C. (1969).
Interpretation: Theory and Practice. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.
Di Pietro, J. R. (1971). Language Structures in Contrast. Massachusetts:
Dolan, F. E. (2000). "Introduction" In Shakespeare, As You Like It. New York:
Fineman, J. (1981). “The Structure of Allegorical Desire.” In Greenblatt, S.
(Ed.): Allegory and Representation, Johns Hopkins University Press.
Fletcher, A. (1964). Allegory: The Theory of a Symbolic Mode. Cornell
University: Ithaca, New York.
Fletcher, A. (2006). Allegory without Ideas boundary2: an International journal of literature and culture. Vol. 33(1). Spring. 2006:77-98.
Fludernik, M. (1993). The ﬁctions of language and the languages of ﬁction:
The linguistic representation of speech and consciousness. London:
Ford, A. (1999). Performing Interpretation: Early Allegorical Exegesis of
Homer. In Beissinger, M. H. et al. (Ed). Epic Traditions in the Contemporary
World: The Poetics of Community. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Gadamer, H. G. (1975). Truth and Method. New York: Seabury Press.
Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Gomel, E. (1995). “The Poetics of Censorship: Allegory as Form and
Ideology in the Novels of Arkady and Boris Strugatsky.” Science Fiction
Studies No.65. Vol. 22, Part 1 March 1995. 87 – 105.
Greene, H. E. A grouping of ﬁgures of speech, based upon the principle of their effectiveness. PMLA, 8 (4), December 1893. 432 – 450.
Heinlein, R. A. (1949). Sixth Column. New York: Gnome Press.
Herman, D. (2002). Story logic: Problems and possibilities of narrative.
Lincoln, NB: University of Nebraska Press.
Herman, D. (1995). Autobiography, allegory, and the construction of self,
British Journal of Aesthetics 35. 4 (October 1995):351.
Hintikka, J. and Sandu, G. (1994). “Metaphor and Other Kinds of Nonliteral meaning.” In Ed. Hintikka, J. (1994). Aspects of Metaphor. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Honig, E. (1959). Dark Conceit: The Making of Allegory. London: Northwestern University Press.
Huizinga, J. (1924). The Waning of the Middle Ages. Trans. F. Hopman. (1971). London: Penguin Books.
Hunter, L. (1989). Modern Allegory and Fantasy: Rhetorical Stances of Contemporary Writing. London: Macmillan.
Miller, H. (1981). The Two Allegories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jackson, H. (1988). Words and Their Meaning. London: Longman.
Jakobson, R. (1971). Word and Language. In Selected Writings (1971–1985). Ed. Rudy, S. The Hague: Mouton.
James, C. (1980). Contrastive analysis. London: Longman.
Jameson, F. (1974). Marxism and Form: Twentieth-Century Dialectical
Theories of Literature. USA: Princeton University Press.
Jameson, F. (2001). From Metaphor to allegory. In Davidson, C. (Ed.).
Anything. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Jameson, F. (1986). “Third-World Literature in the Era of Multinational
Capitalism.” Social Text, No. 15 (Autumn, 1986), Duke University Press pp.
Johnson, D. W., and Johnson, R. T. (2000). “Civil political discourse in a democracy: The contribution of psychology.” Peace and Conflict: Journal of
Peace Psychology. Vol. 6(4), Dec 2000, 291-317.
Johnson, G. (2012). The Vitality of Allegory: Figural Narrative in Modern and Contemporary Fiction. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
Kennedy, X. J. and Gioia, D. (2011) Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry and Drama. 12th ed. London: Longman.
Knowles, M. and Moon, R. (2006). Introducing Metaphor. London and New
Lakoff, G. and Turner, M. (1989). More than Cool Reason. A Field Guide to
Poetic Metaphor. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Lee, M. A. and Solomon, N. (1990). Unreliable Sources. New York: Lyle Stuart Inc.
Leech, G. (1974). Semantics. Harmonds Worth: Penguin.
Leech, G. N. (1969). A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry. London: Longman.
Leech, G. N., and M. H. Short (1981). Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to English Fictional Prose. London: Longman.
Lörscher, W. (1991). Translation performance, translation process, and translation strategies: A psycholinguistic investigation. Tübingen: St. Jerome Publishing.
Lynch, M. (2012). The Arab Uprising: The Unfinished Revolutions of the New Middle East. New York: Public Affairs.
Lyons, J. (1968). Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Lyons, J. (1995). Linguistic Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Macedo-Lamb, S. (2003). From Fine Art to Natural Science through Allegory. Newcastle: University of Northumbria Press.
Macknight, T. (1858). History of the life and times of Edmund Burke. London: Chapman and Hall.
Madsen, D. (1991). The Postmodernist Allegories of Thomas Pynchon. New York: St Martin's Press. McHale, B. (1987). Postmodernist Fiction. New York: Methuen.
Newmark, P. (1981). Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. London: Prentice Hall international (UK) Ltd.
Newmark, P. (1991). About Translation: Multilingual Matters. Clevedon, Philadelphia, Adelaide: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Nida, E. A. (1964). Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Nida, E. A. (1975). Componential Analysis of Meaning: An Introduction to Semantic Structures. The Hague: Mouton.
Nietzsche, F. (1966). Beyond Good and Evil. Trans. Kaufmann, W. New York: Random House. (Original work published 1886).
Northrop Frye, H. (1957). Anatomy of Criticism. New Jersey: Princeton U. Press.
Northrop Frye, H. (1991). Myth and Metaphor: Selected Essays, 1974 – 1988. Virginia: University of Virginia Press.
Orwell, G. (1946). Animal Farm. London: Penguin Group.
Owens, C. (1980). “The Allegorical Impulse: Toward a Theory of
Postmodernism.” JSTOR. Vol. 12. (October, 1980), pp. 67-86.
Palumbo, G. (2009). Key Terms in Translation Studies. London: Continuum.
Pietarinen, A.-V. (2007). Getting Closer to Iconic Logic. In G. Dodig- Crnkovic & S. Stuart (Eds.) Computing, Philosophy, and Cognitive Science: The Nexus and the Liminal. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Pokrivčák, A. and Pokrivčáková, S. (2006). Understanding Literature. Brno:
Quilligan, M. (1979). The Language of Allegory: Defining the Genre: Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
Quintilianus, Marcus Fabius. Institutio Oratoria. Trans. H.E. Butler. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University press.
Richards, I. A. (1936). The philosophy of rhetoric. New York: Oxford University Press.
Roberts, Edgar V., and Henry E. Jacobs. (1992). Literature: an introduction to reading and writing. 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Schiebe, W. M. (2006). Review of G.R. Boys-Stones. In Metaphor, Allegory and the Classical Tradition. Ancient Thought and Modern Revisions. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Schultz, J. (1998). Reviving the fourth estate. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sinding, M. Assembling spaces: The conceptual structure of allegory. Style,
36 (3), Fall, 2002. 503 – 524.
Slemon, S. "Monuments of Empire: Allegory/Counter-Discourse/Post-
Colonial Writing." Kunapipi, vol. IX, 3, 1987, 1-16.
Steele, R. W. (1999). Free Speech in the Good War. New York: St. Martin's
Tr. Butler, E. H. (1922). Quintilian. London: Harvard University Press.
Turner, M. & Fauconnier, G. (1995). “Conceptual integration and formal expression”. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 10, 183-204.
Turner, M. (1996). The Literary Mind: The Origins of Thought and Language.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tuve, R. (1966). Allegorical imagery: some Mediaeval books and their
posterity. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Van Dijk, T. A., and Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse
comprehension. New York: Academic.
Venuti, L. (1998). Strategies of translation. In M. Baker (Ed.), Encyclopedia of translation studies. London and New York: Routledge.
Vinay, J.P. and Darbelnet, J. (1995). Comparative Stylistics of French and
English: a Methodology for Translation, translated by J. C. Sager and M. J.
Hamel, Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Wilson, T. (1962). The arte of rhetorique. Gainesville: Scholars' Facsimiles.
(Original work published 1553).
Źilka, T. (1995). Text a Posttext. Nitra: VŠP.
Dictionaries Oxford English Dictionary (15th Ed.) (1989). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Online references
Asharq Al-Awsat online newspaper http://www.aawsat.com/
الشرق األوسط جريدة العرب الدولية االلكترونية
Diana Moukalled’s STs and TTs in full length arranged in reverse chronological order from April 2014 down to June 2011.