Qur’anic Translation

Due to the ambiguity, complexity, and context-sensitiveness of discourse markers, their presentation becomes more comprehensive in the process of translation. Additionally, Qur’anic discourse markers enjoy a special delicacy. This article thus investigated the translations of the Qur’anic elaborative discourse marker <em>wæ</em> in two Persian and English translations by Ali Maleki and Tahereh Saffarzadeh, respectively. To this end, 1475 examples of this discourse marker from six randomly selected ajzā of the Qur’an were analyzed using a descriptive and qualitative method. The results show that in numerous cases this discourse marker has not been translated literally but the translators have translated it communicatively, dynamically, and constructively by appealing to different linguistic procedures and by applying 118 different categories and combinations of various contrastive, inferential, temporal, and elaborative Persian and English discourse markers. The translators' approaches affirmed that translation is a dynamic and innovative discourse construction and structuration process influenced by the context of the natural processing of language in social contexts. It is so because of the versatility and dynamicity of interlocutors’ mental conditions and world knowledge as well as the situational circumstances that have bearings on the interpretation and application of meta-communicative elements by translators.

Rhetorical questions in the Holy Qur’ān serve as powerful devices in argumentation and persuasion. This study investigates the translation strategies employed by Arberry and Asad in translating rhetorical questions from the Holy Qur’ān into English, utilizing the techniques suggested by Molina and Albir. The research adopts a descriptive-analytical method and is based on library research. The sample includes thirteen rhetorical questions selected from different Surahs, analyzed for their rhetorical functions as identified by classical Arabic rhetoric, including refutation, reproach, explanation, negation, astonishment, encouragement, reconciliation, unlikeliness, and magnification. The analysis reveals that both translators employ a range of techniques, with Asad favoring adaptation (42%) and amplification (33%), and Arberry showing a higher frequency of literal translation (50%) and modulation (25%). While both translators effectively convey the rhetorical functions of the questions, Asad’s translations often include additional explanatory phrases, making them more interpretive and accessible to readers unfamiliar with the original context. In contrast, Arberry’s translations maintain closer adherence to the original structure and wording, which can require more interpretive effort from the reader. The study concludes that while both translators succeed in maintaining the rhetorical essence of the questions, their approaches differ significantly, highlighting the complexities and nuances involved in translating the rhetorical questions in the Qur’ān.

Discourse markers play a crucial role in textual cohesion and coherence. By identifying patterns of discourse marker usage, valuable insights can be gained into the underlying communicative strategies employed by text producers. Qur’anic discourse markers are of particular significance for several reasons, making their translation a critical area of study. Accordingly, this article aims to examine the second most frequent, complex, ambiguous, and multifaceted Qur’anic discourse marker, fa, in a Persian and English Qur’anic parallel corpus from a pragmatic perspective. To this end, six ajzā (parts) of the Holy Qur’an were randomly selected as the research sample and served as the source text of the corpus. The Persian translation by Ali Maleki and the English translation by Tahereh Saffarzadeh were chosen as the target texts through purposive sampling. The bilingual parallel corpus was designed to facilitate the investigation of variations and trends across the two languages, thereby providing a more in-depth understanding of the translation process. The analysis of this corpus revealed that translators rendered this Qur’anic meta-discursive component figuratively, communicatively, and dynamically by employing four different types and 81 unique discourse markers to establish various logical relationships between discourse units. These discourse markers conveyed discursive functions of contrast, elaboration, inference, and temporality. This figurative and communicative system, adopted and adapted in the construction of discourse, is substantiated through different theoretical perspectives in discourse analysis and pragmatics. Beyond its contribution to discourse analysis by highlighting the complexities of language use and the interpretation of sacred texts across languages, the study’s findings offer valuable insights for translators in general, and for Qur’an translators in particular, by shedding light on the intricate yet subtle process of discourse construction and its crucial role in facilitating more effective communication.