مطالب

The conflict between form and meaning is not a new phenomenon, especially in the translation of sacred texts . The Quran's fusion of style and content, as well as the unparalleled quality of its structure, have made its translation an arduous task for translators. The aim of this descriptive study was to investigate the adjustments to form and meaning in three translations of Az Zariyat surah (by Arberry, Pickthall, and Shakir). The English and Arabic versions of this surah were contrasted based on the semantic and structural adjustments applied by Nida and Taber in the translation of the Bible. The results revealed that more than three-quarters of the adjustments were concerned with semantic adjustments, with lexical expansions being the most common. Furthermore, structural adjustments and reductions were made to a lesser extent compared to other modifications. Translators mostly chose to stick to the source text, describing only ambiguous or abstract words in the source text and avoiding significant reductions. This behavior can be explained by the sensitivity of the Quranic verses and the translators' willingness to remain faithful to the original text . The adjustment framework introduced in the present study may offer promising avenues for tackling the dilemmas in the way of rendering the style and content of the Quranic verses.

Sustainability reporting is an important tool for decreasing information asymmetry, according to the stakeholders' demands for transparency. On the other hand, increasing transparency allows investors to have more appropriate evaluations of firms' activities and direct their investments to companies with more enthusiasm. In the organizational context, information asymmetry creates conflict between owners and managers. Managers tend to reduce the gap between themselves and stakeholders, particularly shareholders, by producing and delivering reports. Companies use sustainability reports to connect with their society and environment, as well as a way to manage interactions with various stakeholders for societal approval and activity continuation. The primary purpose of this study is to provide a model for measuring the quality of sustainability reporting and the determinants. In terms of methodology, the current study is qualitative, deductive, cross-sectional, applied, and exploratory. The criteria were identified and extracted, then evaluated and prioritized using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making approaches including Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process and Fuzzy Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory Analytic Network Process-based. The FAHP test revealed that of the six indicators, the GRI's reporting guidelines for sustainability Checklist were placed highest. Internal Controls Reporting, Sustainability Innovation Performance, and Earnings Quality rated first to third, respectively, among the 25 criteria affecting the quality of sustainability reporting, according to the FDANP.