1. Introduction
The field of translation studies
has undergone significant evolution over recent decades, shifting from
prescriptive approaches that focus primarily on linguistic equivalence to more
descriptive models that consider the complex interplay of linguistic, cultural,
and pragmatic factors in translation. [1-4] At the heart of this evolution is
the concept of translation strategy—a systematic framework that guides
translators' decisions when transferring meaning across linguistic and cultural
boundaries. [5-7].
This paper aims to examine
translation strategies, with particular focus on Juliane House's functionalist
model and its core dichotomy: overt and covert translation approaches. Her TQA
model offers a comprehensive framework for analysing translations by considering
both the textual profile of source texts and the cultural and situational
contexts in which translations operate.
By examining both overt and
covert translation strategies in practice, this research addresses several key
questions: How do translators decide on the suitable strategy for different
types of texts? What factors influence the choice between overt and covert
approaches? How can House's model be utilised to assess translation quality?
What specific challenges emerge when translating between linguistic systems and
cultural traditions such as English, French, and Arabic?
This paper closely examines the
theoretical and practical dimensions of translation strategy, focusing on
Juliane House's dichotomy between overt (visible, source-text-oriented) and
covert (invisible, target-audience-oriented) translation. While overt translation
preserves the foreignness of the original text (such as sacred or literary
works), covert translation adapts the content to function independently within
the target culture (e.g., advertisements or technical manuals).
This paper applies House's
Translation Quality Assessment (TQA) model to analyse parallel texts,
evaluating lexical, syntactic, and pragmatic choices in French-Arabic-English
translations. Through a contrastive analysis, the research identifies patterns of
fidelity (conceptual accuracy and structural parallelism) and common pitfalls
(e.g., erroneous lexical substitutions, poetic compression).
The significance of this study
lies in its potential to bridge theoretical frameworks with practical
applications, offering translators systematic approaches to strategic
decision-making while contributing to the ongoing theoretical discourse in
translation studies. As global communication continues to gain importance,
understanding the complex processes involved in effective translation becomes
increasingly vital for facilitating meaningful cross-cultural exchange.
2. Translation Strategy
2.1. Mainstream Conception of Translation Strategy
The conventional view of translation strategy has long
been narrow, proposing that a translation should be either word-for-word or
sense-for-sense (literal or free) throughout the entire process. In the late
1970s, German linguist and translation scholar Juliana House offered a
different perspective. According to House, a translation strategy should adapt
to the linguistic (structural, semantic, and textual) and functional nuances of
the source text, rather than forcing pre-existing frameworks to fit a particular
ideology, creed, or theory. Therefore, the choice of translation strategy
should depend not on the translator's mood but on the structure and function of
the source text. When the source text’s tendencies favour localness, holiness,
or frankness, an overt translation strategy is best suited for conveying the
relevant words or ideas. Conversely, when the function of the source text takes
precedence over its form, a covert translation approach is appropriate.
Nonetheless, in both cases, the selected translation strategy is not set in
advance or imposed upon the project.
2.2. Juliane House's Contribution
Conceptualised by Juliana House in her pioneering work,
"A Model for Translation Quality Assessment," overt and covert
translations are presented as two distinct and opposing poles of translation
strategy. Throughout history, these two poles have been referred to by various
terms, yet their core meaning has remained largely consistent. In other words,
Juliana House's concept of overt and covert translation strategy aligns with
the terminology used by other scholars in the field.
In the fifth century, Saint Jerome coined the terms
"word-for-word translation" and "sense-for-sense
translation." In 1813, Friedrich Schleiermacher introduced the concepts of
"alienating translation" and "naturalising translation." In
1958, Jean-Paul Vinay and Jean Darbelnet coined the phrases "direct
translation" and "oblique translation." In 1977, Juliane House
coined the terms "overt translation" and "covert translation."
In 1980, Gideon Toury introduced the concepts of "source-text oriented
translation" and "target-text oriented translation." In 1995,
Lawrence Venuti coined the terms "foreignisation" and
"domestication."
3. Covert & Overt Translation
3.1. Overt Translation Strategy: Some Precisions
The overt translation strategy prioritises the source
text over the target text. It is both source-oriented and author-oriented,
aiming for faithfulness to the cultural context and the original author's
voice. It emphasises the source text, remaining closely tied to the original
context. It aligns more with linguistic mention than with linguistic use, as it
employs language structurally. This strategy is based on the idea that the
source text belongs to its original author. In this approach, the source text
is often regarded as a central reference; the translated text or speech is overtly
presented as a pure translation in the target language, without any pretension
of being an original. This effort, undertaken during the translation process,
is usually accompanied by an awareness among target readers that they are not
reading the original directly.
An overt translation strategy aims to preserve the
linguistic features of the source text while maintaining its cultural context,
striving for precision. It emphasises accuracy, the retention of historical
contexts, and respect for sanctity and truth. This approach recognises its
foreign origins by keeping cultural markers from the source text, avoiding the
use of cultural filters or adapting references to suit the target audience.
Consequently, the translator's mediation is apparent, and the translated text
retains a foreign quality. This sense of foreignness helps create the cultural
transparency characteristic of an overt translation strategy.
Equivalence in overt
translation strategies is mainly formal and concentrates on denotation,
emphasising direct, literal meaning over other levels. Functional equivalence
plays a secondary role when overt translation cannot continue. Concerning the
cultural filter, it is minimised in overt translation strategies, being either
turned down or switched off.
3.2. Fields of Overt Translation Strategy
Typical uses of overt translation strategies include
historical narratives, political speeches, religious scriptures, sacred texts,
legal documents, academic papers, literary classics, treaties, and contracts.
These are the documents that maintain strong cultural connections to the
original context.
3.3. Example of
Overt Translation Strategy: Shakespeare's Soliloquy
Table 1. Shakespeare's Soliloquy Face-to-Face with Its Arabic
Translation.
|
The English Translation |
Romanisation of the Original Arabic Text |
|
“To be, or not to be: that is the question: |
Akūn
aw lā akūn? Tilka hiya al-Masʼalah, Ayuu alḥālatayn amthalu binnafs? Ataḥammulu
al-Rajm bilmaqālyʻ wtalaqqy Sihām alḥazẓi alʼankadi, Amm
alnuhūḍu limukāfaḥati al-maṣāʼib wa-law kānat baḥran ʻujājan wa-baʻda Jahdi al-sṣirāʻ iqāmatu ḥaddin dūnahā ? Al-mawt, nawm,
thumma lā Shayʼ [10] |
3.3.1. Analysis of ST & TT, Using House's Dimensions
Table 2. Analysis of Source Text and Target Text of Shakespeare's
Soliloquy.
|
Dimension |
ST (Arabic
Back-Trans.) |
TT (Original English) |
Mismatches? |
|
Field |
Philosophical
dilemma on existence |
Same
existential theme |
No
mismatches |
|
Tenor |
Meditative, despairing tone |
Same contemplative tone |
No mismatches |
|
Mode |
Poetic dramatic monologue |
Identical dramatic verse |
No mismatches |
|
Social Attitude |
Solemn, introspective |
Same gravity |
No mismatches |
|
Participant Relationship |
Self-debate (internal) |
Same soliloquy style |
No mismatches |
|
Province |
Classical literature |
Shakespearean drama |
No (same domain) |
|
Genre |
Poetic soliloquy |
Poetic soliloquy |
No mismatches |
|
Function |
Expressive
(existential crisis) |
Identical
function |
No
mismatches |
At the level of register category, it is necessary to
analyse three dimensions that constitute the register of the text: Field,
tenor, and mode.
Field (subject matter and
social action): A philosophical reflection on life, death, and suffering. The
style is elevated, poetic, and rich in metaphor.
Tenor (relationship between
writer and reader): Introspective and monologic; the speaker reflects on a
personal, existential dilemma. The tone is formal, poetic, and philosophical.
Emotion is heightened, characterised by deep introspection and a lyrical quality.
The relationship is reflective, dramatic, direct, yet contemplative.
Mode (medium/channel of communication): Written to be spoken;
poetic form with rhetorical devices.
In terms of
language category, the analysis centres on syntax, lexis, and style.
Firstly, syntax is characterised by highly compressed,
metaphor-rich Early Modern English.
Regarding lexis, the wording used is archaic but poetic:
"slings and arrows,"
"sea of troubles".
Regarding style, the imagery utilised employs original
and more concise, suggestive metaphors.
Well-utilised poetic devices, including metaphor,
rhetorical question, and meter (iambic pentameter).
Regarding ambiguity, it remains a central feature of
Shakespeare's style.
After ST analysis, the extraction of the ST function
proceeds. At this stage, the analysis will concentrate on three metafunctions:
ideational, interpersonal, and textual metafunctions (although Juliane House
does not assign much importance to the latter metafunction).
The Ideational Function
demonstrates Hamlet's internal conflict regarding the fundamental question of
existence, weighing the suffering of life against the mystery of death, and
contemplating possible actions and their consequences within his mind. The character
in the play explores complex abstract ideas (existence, death, etc.). Content,
imagery, metaphor, and clarity of experience effectively convey themes of
suffering, alienation, and resilience. It reflects Hamlet's internal debate on
the vital choice between enduring life's pain and confronting the unknown of
death, thereby examining the potential relief and dangers of each.
The Interpersonal Function
reveals Hamlet's inner state of deep doubt and suffering, marked by profound
uncertainty, sadness, and vulnerability. This encourages audience empathy and
helps them understand his isolated and burdened situation, enabling them to
witness his fragile contemplation of life and death and fostering empathy for
his existential crisis. Tone and emotion, voice and stance, along with
stylistic intensity, show intimacy and compassion. Emotional depth is evident,
with notable intensity. The rhetorical strength of Hamlet's voice is
significant. The interpersonal function conveys inner turmoil and appeals to
the audience's empathy.
Textual Function creates a
coherent and impactful dramatic monologue in Arabic that appeals to an
Arabic-speaking audience using a formal and literary style, employing
appropriate linguistic structures and rhetorical devices to express the central
theme and its exploration within the translated play. Cohesion, repetition,
poetic rhythm, and lexical density act as strong cohesive devices that maintain
flow and organisation.
In simple terms, the soliloquy provides an essential
insight into Hamlet's mind, allowing the audience to grasp the depth of his
internal conflict and the philosophical significance of his situation, which
influences his subsequent actions (or inaction).
Following the initial axis, ST analysis, the second
axis, TT analysis, follows the same steps as the previous analysis by examining
the three categories: genre, field, and language.
The genre is literary—dramatic poetry, specifically
monologue. It is fully preserved. The form and purpose (inner reflection in a
play) remain intact. The Arabic upholds the genre as a philosophical soliloquy
that expresses internal conflict, existential dread, and moral reasoning.
At the stage of the register category, the three
dimensions that constitute the register of the text should be analysed: field,
tenor, and mode.
Field (Subject matter and
social action): Human suffering, decision-making, moral reasoning, death. The
style remains elevated, formal, and slightly explanatory. Subject matter and
conceptual depth are preserved.
The tenor (relationship
between the writer and reader) is introspective and monologic. The speaker
reflects on a personal, existential dilemma. Relationships are contemplative,
distant yet formal, addressing either oneself or the audience. The tone is formal,
literary, and philosophical. Emotionality is moderate and slightly explanatory
in translation.
Mode (Medium/channel of
communication): Written to be spoken or performed. It employs poetic form
alongside rhetorical devices and comprises monologic, stylised speech.
In the language category phase, the analysis focuses on
syntax, lexis, and style.
In this soliloquy, the syntax is elevated, more
explanatory, and prosaic.
From a lexical perspective, the language employed is
formal and literary, incorporating Arabic equivalents (e.g., "الرجم بالمقاليع").
On the stylistic side, translated imagery remains
faithful but is slightly more literal or clarified.
Regarding poetic devices, there is effective use of
repetition, parallelism, and metaphor.
In terms of ambiguity, it is somewhat reduced in the
Arabic translation, which clarifies certain abstract elements.
3.3.2. Assessment of the Arabic Translation
The
strengths of the translation lie in its conceptual fidelity, confirmed by the
extent to which the overall logic of the simulation is believable and makes
sense to the learner.
"الرجم بالمقاليع"
→ "slings and arrows"
(metaphor preserved).
"بحرًا عجاجًا"
→ "sea of troubles"
(image kept intact).
In terms of structural parallelism, it upholds
rhetorical questions and rhythmic pauses.
Concerning
the philosophical nuances that involve subtle distinctions, complexities, and
shades of meaning within philosophical concepts, ideas, and arguments, and
moving beyond simplistic, black-and-white interpretations to appreciate the
intricate layers of thought inherent in philosophical inquiry: the translation
recognises these subtle distinctions, acknowledges the shades of meaning,
understands the complexity and depth of the original, while transcending
dichotomies and avoiding all forms of oversimplification.
"أمْثَلُ بالنفس"
→ "nobler for the soul"
(captures "nobler in the mind").
However,
minor deviations are observed in the realm of lexical choices:
"الحظِ الأنكد"
→ "outrageous fortune"
(Arabic adds "misfortune,"
but meaning aligns).
"جهد الصراع"
→ "by opposing" (Arabic expands "struggle's effort" vs. English brevity).
In
terms of poetic condensation, Arabic employs more words ("ولو
كانت بحرًا عجاجًا" versus "sea of troubles"),
but this is a natural characteristic of Arabic poetic style.
Regarding the critical errors, or erroneous errors,
there are no overt erroneous
errors at the level of (grammar/syntax). All the choices are intentional and have clear interpretations.
Likewise, there are no covert erroneous errors or subtle mismatches affecting text
function:
(1)
The metaphorical load of "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" is partially
altered by choosing "الرجم
بالمقاليع"
(stoning), which carries religious and punitive connotations.
(2)
The concise existentialism of "to sleep: no more" becomes more
elaborated, losing some terse ambiguity.
These are not mistakes, but cultural and stylistic
compromises. Still, they may affect the emotional rhythm and philosophical
neutrality of the original.
3.3.2. Statement of Translation Quality
Translation Type: Khalil
Mutran's translation is overt. The Arabic text is identified as a translation
of a culturally specific, highly canonical English literary work. The original
is deeply rooted in the English literary tradition, and the translation is
intended to be recognised as a rendering of Shakespeare's famous lines, rather
than a naturally occurring Arabic text.
Critical errors or
mismatches: No overt or covert errors. No grammatical, lexical, or pragmatic
mismatches.
Overall Assessment: An
excellent literary rendering with cultural accommodation; minor tonal shifts.
4. Covert Translation Strategy
4.1. Covert Translation Strategy: Some Precisions
Covert translation is a target-oriented strategy that
prioritises the communicative function of the source text in the target
language and culture. It focuses on the target audience and is, accordingly,
function-oriented. It favours fluency, naturalness, acceptability, and
readability in both the target language and culture. It is more similar to
linguistic use than to linguistic mention, as it employs language functionally.
[11]
In covert translation
strategy, function is more important than form, and the reader's experience
takes priority over faithfulness to the source text. This is because the source
text is deliberately adapted to conform to the norms of the target text and to
meet the expectations of the target audience, aiming for universality and
international appeal. The type of faithfulness sought in covert translation
differs from that in overt translation. Covert translation's faithfulness
focuses on the cultural context, the interpersonal relationships among the
participants within the text, and the original author's voice.
A covert translation strategy is based on the idea that
once a text is produced, it ceases to be the original author's property.
Instead, it becomes everyone's—belonging to the reader and, consequently, the
translator. Therefore, the source text can be naturalised within any culture to
which the translation is adapted. It also subtly presents the translated text
as if it were an original or a secondary original in the target language. In
this approach, the translator's presence is meant to be invisible, and the
target reader may or may not realise whether what they are reading is a
translation or an original.
Regarding the cultural filter, it is often applied
extensively, serving as a distinctive feature of this strategy. In this
context, cultural filtering involves adapting both the form and content of the
source text to suit the target audience within the specific context. Once
applied, the source text is rewritten to align with the cultural norms of the
target audience, meet their expectations, and fulfil the intended function of
the entities behind the translational project (e.g., agent, publisher).
4.2. Fields of Covert Translation Strategy &
Cultural Filtering
4.2.1. Fields of Covert Translation Strategy
Common examples of covert translation strategies
encompass television programmes, advertisements, children's literature, films,
popular culture, marketing materials, instruction manuals, and business
correspondence.
4.2.2. Covert Translation Strategy & Culture
Filtering
In the late 1970s of the
twentieth century, a new concept was introduced into translation studies:
cultural filtering. This concept, known as the cultural filter, was designed
from the outset to account for the adaptation of a source text to the norms and
expectations of the target culture. The pioneering idea behind its creation was
to incorporate linguistic and cultural elements, making the translation both
more acceptable and more familiar to the target audience, while potentially
altering the original's cultural specificity. The scholar behind this invention
was the German linguist and translator Juliane House, who in 1977 launched the
first version of her translation quality assessment model (TQA). This model was
revisited in 1997 and 2015, with further advancements in the field of
translation studies.
House incorporates the cultural
filter into her TQA model, along with her distinction between two translation
strategies—overt and covert translation—and two categories of errors arising
from the chosen approach: overt erroneous errors and covert erroneous errors.
In the overt translation strategy, the translation is transparent, source-text
oriented, foreignised, and faithful to the original. Conversely, in covert
translation, the source text is adapted to the target environment (target
culture, readership, norms, etc.) to such an extent that it seems as if it were
originally written in the target language, nurtured within the target culture,
and requires the application of a cultural filter to refine its cultural,
social, and pragmatic aspects before being regarded as a second original.
To House, the cultural filter is
"a means of capturing socio-cultural differences in expectation norms and
stylistic conventions between source and target linguacultures.".[12] It
allows translators to "adapt the source text to target cultural
norms".[13] Sometimes leads to shifts that may alter the original's
function. However, many other scholars argue that excessive cultural filtering
can result in domestication and a loss of the source text's foreignness. House
acknowledges this, but she asserts that some degree of filtering is necessary
for functional equivalence in covert translations.[14] Otherwise, it will come
across as colourless and tasteless, having been uprooted from its original
culture and left to perish.
4.3. Example of Covert Translation Strategy: Darwish's
Poem
Table 3. Darwish's Poem Face-to-Face with
Its English Translation.
|
Romanisation of the Original Arabic Text |
|
|
“How alone you were, son
of my mother, Son of more than one father, How alone you were. The wheat is bitter in the fields of others, The water is salty, The cloud is steel, this star is wounding, And upon you is to live, and to live, and to give your skin in exchange for a single olive. How alone you were."[1] |
“Kam kunta waḥdak, yā bna ummī, Yā bna akthara min abi, Kam kunta waḥdak Alqamḥu murrun fī ḥuqūli alʼākharyn Wālmāʼu māliḥ Wālghaymu fūlādhun. wa-hādhā annajmu jāriḥ Waʻalayka an taḥyā wa-ann taḥyā Wa-Ann toʻṭy muqābila ḥabbati al-zaytūn jildak Kam kunta waḥdak.” [15] |
4.3.1. Analysis
of ST & TT, Using House's Dimensions
Table 4. Analysis of Source Text
and Target Text of Darwish's Poem.
|
Dimension |
ST Analysis |
TT Analysis |
Mismatches? |
|
Field
(Topic) |
Poetic lament on isolation, suffering, and
endurance |
Same theme preserved |
No mismatches |
|
Tenor (Tone) |
Intimate, melancholic,
lyrical |
Same emotional tone |
No mismatches |
|
Mode (Medium) |
Poetic verse (free
verse) |
Poetic verse (free
verse) |
No mismatches |
|
Social Attitude |
Deeply personal,
sorrowful |
Same emotional weight |
No mismatches |
|
Participant Relationship |
Speaker → "son" (familial, tragic) |
Same implied bond |
No mismatches |
|
Province (Domain) |
Lyrical poetry |
Lyrical poetry |
No mismatches |
|
Genre |
Free-verse lament |
Free-verse lament |
No mismatches |
|
Function |
Expressive (emotional outpouring) |
Expressive (same effect) |
No mismatches |
Source text analysis, as described in Juliane House's
TQA model, marks a step towards developing the source-text profile. It
concentrates on examining genre, register, and language categories. From a
genre perspective, the text is categorised as modern free verse poetry, likely
with political or existential themes. It is highly expressive, metaphorical,
and personal.
At the stage of the register category, a thorough
analysis will focus on the three dimensions that constitute the register of the
text: Field, tenor, and mode.
Field: Portrays alienation,
hardship, struggle, sacrifice, and existential loneliness in a hostile world.
It probably refers to the Palestinian experience but is expressed in symbolic,
personal terms. The speaker addresses "you" as both a specific
(Palestinian identity) and universal (the solitary struggler) figure. The
imagery (“bitter wheat”, "salty water", "steel clouds",
"wounding stars”) illustrates a world that is unfriendly and unwelcoming.
Tenor: Intimate, emotive,
evocative, lamenting, and empathetic. It is directed toward a "you"
who is closely related — "son of my mother," which implies personal
or national closeness and shared suffering. The speaker addresses someone
(perhaps himself or a collective identity) in the second person. There is a
sense of solidarity between the speaker and addressee but also a feeling of
distance and helplessness, along with a recognition of the other's isolation.
Mode: Written
to be read. It is poetic and highly metaphorical with rich imagery and
repetition. The repetition and fragmentation give it an
oral, chant-like quality.
1.
"كَمْ كُنْتَ
وحدك" is
translated as "How alone you were,"
capturing the sense of solitude.
2.
"يا ابن
أُمِّي" as
"son of my mother" and "يا ابنَ
أكثر من أبٍ" as
"Son of more than one father"
maintain the direct address and the intriguing notion of multiple father
figures (which could carry cultural or symbolic weight).
3.
The descriptions of the wheat,
water, cloud, and star are translated relatively directly, preserving the harsh
imagery.
4.
"وعليك أن
تحيا وأن تحيا" is rendered as "And upon you is to live, and to live," conveying the sense
of obligation and repetition.
5.
"وأن تعطي
مقابلَ حبَّةِ الزيتون جِلْدَكْ" is
translated as "and to give your skin in exchange for a single olive,"
retaining the powerful metaphor of sacrifice.
On the other hand, potential
weaknesses are identified in word choices, rhythm, sound, and figurative
meaning. Word Choice and Connotation: While the denotative meanings are mainly
maintained, the connotations of the English words may differ slightly from
those in Arabic. For example, the specific emotional weight carried by "جارحْ"
(wounding) might not be fully conveyed by the term "wounding."g."
1.
Rhythm
and Sound: Poetry relies heavily on rhythm and sound patterns, which can be challenging
to replicate in translation. The musicality and flow of the original Arabic are
likely altered in the English version. This can affect the emotional resonance
and the overall "feel" of the poem.em.
2.
Figurative
Language Nuances: The interpretation and impact of the metaphors ("bitter
wheat," "salty water," "steel cloud," "wounding
star," "giving your skin for an olive") may shift slightly for
an English-speaking audience due to different cultural associations or
linguistic structures. The starkness of the imagery may be perceived in
different ways.
3.
"وعليك أن تحيا وأن تحيا": While "And upon you is to live, and to live"
conveys the literal meaning, it may lack the same sense of urgent necessity or
perhaps even a quiet determination that the Arabic conveys through its
grammatical structure and the repetition of the verb.
Ideational Function: Mahmoud
Darwish's poem is mainly ideational. It expresses the harshness of life under
oppression (“bitter wheat", "salty water", "steel clouds”),
a profound emotional landscape of solitude and endurance ("How alone you
were"), and the sacrifice demanded by existence in this context (“and to
give your skin in exchange for a single olive”). These images evoke internal
pain and external struggle, layered with national and existential significance.
The Ideational Function in this poem conveys suffering, alienation, and the
bitterness of living in foreign or hostile conditions, as well as the
psychological and existential burden borne by an individual (or people) forced
to survive in an unwelcoming world.
Interpersonal Function: The
poem expresses a deep emotional connection with the addressee (shared
experience, mourning, empathy), emotionally engaging the reader to share in the
burden and testify to suffering. It is an internal monologue where the sender
is also the addressee, revealing existential loss. Although not directed at
another character, it engages the audience both intellectually and emotionally.
This is conveyed through the speaker's empathetic, accusatory tone. The
repetition of "How alone you were” frames the addressee as isolated,
possibly even abandoned, invoking pathos in the reader.
Textual Function: Darwish's
poem, In Praise
of the High Shadow, demonstrates high cohesion
through repetition ("How alone you were") to foster emotional
resonance, the use of parallel structures and logical progression, and strong
imagery chains (“bitter wheat”, “salty water”, “steel clouds”) that create poetic
unity and enhance the passage.
Analysing the source text and drawing a profile of it
requires examining the genre, register, and language category. Regarding the
genre category, the target text is maintained as a poem. The translation
retains the free verse style.
At the register category level, the field remains
unchanged. It continues to emphasise alienation, bitterness, and struggle.
The tenor upholds a personal, mournful tone.
The mode is written
to be read. It is poetic. The repetition and metaphors in the source text are
mostly retained.
At the level of language category, very striking
linguistic choices contributed to highlighting the strengths of the English
translation, including lexical accuracy:
1)
"يا ابن
أُمِّي" → "Son of my mother" (preserves intimacy, though
unusual in English, it fits the poetic tone).
2)
"القمحُ
مُرُّ" → "The wheat is bitter" (maintains metaphor).
3)
"هذا النجمُ
جارح" → "This star is
wounding" (strong
poetic choice).
Moreover,
syntactic and rhythmic faithfulness are also strong points of the English
translation:n:
1)
The
repetition "وأن تحيا وأن تحيا" → "and to live, and to
live" effectively
conveys despair.
2)
The
final line, "كم
كُنْتَ وحدك"
→ "How alone you were,"
retains the lament's circular structure.
On
its part, the ST figurative language is retained:
1)
"الغيم فولاذ" →
"The cloud is steel" (retains the harsh, metallic imagery).
2)
"تعطي مقابلَ
حبَّةِ الزيتون جِلْدَك" → "give your skin in
exchange for a single olive"
(powerful metaphor intact).
Hunting for erroneous errors in the translation, no
overt or covert erroneous errors are spotted. There are only some minor
deviations:
"ابن أكثر من
أب" → "Son of more than
one father"
Possible alternative: "Son of many fathers" (more poetic, but current
choice is still valid).
"عليك أن
تحيا" → "Upon you is to live"
Slightly archaic phrasing; "You must live"
might sound more natural, yet the current choice aligns with the solemn tone.
4.3.2.
Statement of Translation Quality
The English translation of Mahmoud Darwish's poem can be
considered a high-quality covert translation, faithfully capturing core
meanings with no major errors. However, it does encounter some minor covert
mismatches. The translation successfully maintains the ideational,
interpersonal, and textual functions of the original Arabic poem.
Ideational Function (content,
imagery and metaphor), clarity of experience…): The core semantic content
remains intact: the themes of isolation, harsh environments, and sacrifice
necessary for survival are all communicated. These metaphors are primarily preserved,
although some have lost their cultural significance. For instance,
"olive" maintains symbolic value but might not evoke the same
nationalist and agrarian connotations. It is more straightforward and
accessible, yet less nuanced. Some semantic depth has been simplified for
better understanding.
Interpersonal Function (tone
and emotion, voice and position, stylistic intensity…): The personal tone is
maintained, especially through direct address (“son of my mother”), although it
feels somewhat more detached. The rhythm of Arabic expresses urgency and
heartbreak more powerfully. The voice remains empathetic, but the emotional
intensity is somewhat reduced, partly due to the rhythm and partly because of
the simpler emotional language. Repetition is kept, but the emotional pacing
appears flatter. Some lines like "to live, and to live" still echo
the sense of struggle.
Textual Function (cohesion
and repetition, poetic rhythm, lexical density): The structure is largely
mirrored, particularly through the repetition of "How alone you were"
and the listing of harsh conditions. Although the poetic rhythm lacks the same
auditory quality, it is compensated for through the use of line breaks and word
choice. It remains poetic, though less musically evocative. The use of literal
translation preserves meaning, yet some poetic compression becomes diluted. "Give
your skin in exchange for a single olive" is powerful, but more overt than
metaphorical.
Fully functional equivalence:
The target text perfectly reflects the source text's ideational, interpersonal,
and textual functions.
Translation type: The
translation is covert. The poem does not require cultural adaptation; the
target text flows naturally in English.
Critical errors or
mismatches: No overt or covert erroneous discrepancies. No grammatical,
lexical, or pragmatic mismatches.
Overall Assessment: The
English translation of Mahmoud Darwish’s poem is flawless. It exemplifies
literary translation that conforms to House’s 2015 TQA model standards,
maintaining both meaning and emotional impact.
5. Conclusion
This paper,
"Application of Juliane House's Translation Quality Assessment Model on
Two Poems," aims to evaluate the quality of two translations of excerpts
from different languages and diverse cultural contexts. The first excerpt is
the renowned Shakespearean soliloquy from Hamlet, translated into Arabic
by the Egyptian-Lebanese poet Khalil Mutran. At the same time, the second is
the Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish's In Praise of the High Shadow,
translated into English. The analysis in this paper follows the steps outlined
in Juliane House's 2015 TQA Model.
The initial
step in Juliane House's model involves identifying the profile of the source
text, analysing its genre (such as poem or play), register (including field,
tenor, and mode), and extracting the three-dimensional source text function.
The first key aspect of the text function is the ideational function, which
covers content, ideas, emotions, events, and what the text communicates about
the external or internal world. The second key aspect is the interpersonal
function, manifested through the relationships the author establishes with
readers via tone and emotion, voice and position, stylistic intensity, and
other means. The third key aspect is the textual function, related to how the
text is organised (including cohesion, coherence, repetition, poetic rhythm,
lexical density, etc.). However, Juliane House seems to overlook the third
aspect, the textual or organisational function.
The second
step in Juliane House's model is inherently comparative. Its primary aim is to
identify the target text profile and compare it with the source text profile
established in the previous step to assess the suitability of the chosen
translation strategy (overt texts requiring the preservation of foreignness or
covert texts needing cultural adaptation) against the intended function of the
source text. This involves pinpointing overt and covert errors (clear mistakes)
and dimensional mismatches (subtle discrepancies in function or cultural
adaptation) while comparing the function of the source text with that of the
target text, commonly known as "translation quality," and developing
a statement on translation quality.
Juliane
House's 2015 TQA model, as applied in this paper, demonstrated high-fidelity
sensitivity in reading and understanding the text, and exhibited high-quality
efficiency in addressing the context by deconstructing it into its minor
categories (cultural context and context of situation), dimensions (genre,
register, language), and variables. This analysis explores the active
relationships within its sphere, making them measurable, analysable,
understandable, and translatable simultaneously. Most importantly, it preserves
the source-text metafunctions (ideational, interpersonal, textual).
All these
elements contributed to developing a clear understanding of the two texts and
producing a good translation that conveyed the same cultural nuances to the
target language and culture, as well as the emotional impact embedded in the
source text.
[1] Munday, Jeremy: Introducing
Translation Studies: Theories and Applications. 4th Edition.
(London/New York: Routledge, 2016). pp. 8-12.
[2] Pym, Anthony: Exploring
Translation Theories. 2nd Edition. (London/New York: Routledge,
2014). pp. 6-15.
[3] Toury, Gideon: Descriptive
Translation Studies – and Beyond (revised edition). (Amsterdam: John
Benjamins Publishing Company, 2012). pp. 24-35.
[4] Baker, Mona (Ed.): Routledge
Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. (London/New York: Routledge, 2001). pp.
77-80.
[5] Nord, Christiane: Translating
as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained. 2nd
edition. (London/New York: Routledge, 2018). pp. 62-78.
[6] Venuti, Lawrence: The
Translator's Invisibility: A History of Translation. 2nd
edition. London/New York: Routledge, 2017). pp. 240-250.
[7] Jean-Paul Vinay &
Jean Darbelnet: Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology
for Translation. (Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1995). pp. 30-45.
[8] House, Juliane: Translation
Quality Assessment: A Model Revisited. (Tübingen: Gunter Narr., 1997). pp. 66-69.
[9] Shakespeare, William:
Hamlet. 1st edition. (London: Penguin Popular Classics,
1994). p. 81.
[10] Shiksbīr, Wilyām: Hamlet.
Tarjamat Khalīl Muṭrān..(Al-Qāhirah: Muʼassasat Hindāwī lil-taʻlīm
wa-al-Thaqāfah, 2012).
[11] House, Juliane: A
Model for Translation Quality Assessment. (Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 1981). pp.
94–195.
[12] House, Juliane: Translation
Quality Assessment: Past and Present. (London: Routledge, 2015). p. 90.
[13] House, Juliane: Translation
Quality Assessment: A Model Revisited. (Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag,
1997). p. 70.
[14] House, Juliane: Translation
as Communication Across Cultures. (London/New York: Routledge, 2016). p.
82.
[15] Darwish, Mahmoud: Madīḥ
al-ẓill al-ʻĀlī (= In Praise of the High Shadow). (Bayrūt: Dār al-ʻAwdah,
1983).
[16] Raïhani, Mohamed Saïd: Assessment of the
Quality of the Arabic Translation of English Literature. 1st
edition. 2025. pp. 35-64.
