14 - 20 February 2002
Issue No.573
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 14 - 20 February 2002 Issue No.573 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
Translating the untranslatable?
-Towards Understanding the Ever-glorious Qur'an, Dr Muhammad Mahmoud Ghali, Cairo: Publishing House for Universities, 2001;
-An interpretation of the Qur'an: English Translation of the Meanings, Majid Fakhri, London: Garnet Publishing, 2001;
-The Noble Qur'an: A New Rendering of its Meaning in English, Abdalhaqq and Aisha Bewley, Norwich, England: Bookwork, 2001
While it has always been stressed that translations of the Qur'an are essentially translations of the meanings of the Holy Book and can in no way substitute for it, it was nevertheless recognised from earliest times, with the spread of Islam and with non-Arab Muslims outnumbering those having Arabic as their native tongue, that translations of the Qur'an were both permissible and required.
Miniature of the Archangel Gabriel, Egypt or Syria, 14th century
In Europe many of the first translations were carried out not for the benefit of Muslims without a knowledge of Arabic but with the object of excoriating Islam and showing to Christians the dangers of the "new" religion with which they were being threatened, both spiritually and militarily. A Latin translation by the Italian monk Louis Marracci appeared in 1691. Around 1720 an Englishman named George Sale, who was studying law in London, began to study Arabic with a Syrian from Damascus and a Greek from Aleppo who were engaged on making a translation of the New Testament into Arabic. Sale then set about producing the first translation of the Qur'an into English. This was published in 1734 with Sale receiving nothing but condemnation for his efforts from his fellow countrymen, in particular the clergy. Only with time was Europe to come to a more reasonable attitude towards Islam and its Prophet through the writings of such men as Carlyle and Goethe.
After Sale published his translation many other attempts have been made at rendering the Qur'an into English. Among the most well-known is that of N J Dawood, the translation available in Penguin paperback. Other translations include that of A J Arberry, late professor of Arabic at Cambridge, the one of Marmaduke Pickthall, an Englishman who converted to Islam, and the translation of Muhammad Asad, an Austrian Jew who had converted to Islam. Translations made by two eminent Indian scholars are also widely employed. Some of these translations are held to be more accurate than others, while of some it is said that they "read" better. It is, however, generally accepted that the prime criterion for judging a translation of the Qur'an is accuracy. The translation of Muhammad Asad, though not generally available and then only in an edition that includes the Arabic text as well as copious footnotes referring to the numerous commentaries on the Holy Book that have been written in Arabic, is widely held as being "too Sufi" in its interpretations. Nevertheless, from a scholarly point of view, Asad's rendering has much to commend it.
Of all the translations made into English none had until recently been made by scholars whose native language was Arabic. Now, however, two such translations have been made, one by an Egyptian at Al-Azhar University and another by a distinguished Lebanese scholar. The third translation under review here was made by a husband and wife team who are members of a Sufi community in the town of Norwich in England.
The translation by Dr Ghali shows clearly that its translator has gone to the trouble of consulting the well-known Arabic commentaries. The result is therefore a translation which has all the appearance of accuracy but is marred by infelicities in English which suggest that the translator's knowledge of the language has been derived too predominantly from books. His translation is often obscure or contains phrases that take one by surprise so that one is forced to refer to the original Arabic to fathom the meaning.
In the Chapter of Joseph the women are described as "cutting their hands up" where merely "cutting" would suffice. In Sura 113 the word "spittle" is used as a verb. At other times the translator attempts to emulate the Arabic construction so that we get sentences like "they schemed a scheme" (27.50) and the translation abounds with phrases like "beholdings shall glaze over", "prisoners interlinked in the fetters", "you shall be overcome, and mustered to Hell -- and miserable is the cradling!" There are many such instances where the translation would have benefitted from being submitted to someone -- a native English-speaker -- equipped with a more workaday knowledge of English though not necessarily with a knowledge of Arabic. For some reason the translator has preferred to retain the Arabic word for the names of people and places, e.g. Musa instead of Moses; Isa for Jesus, Fir'awn for Pharaoh and Adn for Eden. Though he gives a few footnotes, he also provides one with the surely unnecessary information when a word in the original Arabic has been used just that one time. The printing is not particularly attractive and some pages of the English text, from page 535, suddenly appear in a smaller type.
The second translation has been undertaken by a Lebanese who now lives in the United States. He has had a distinguished and varied career as an academic and has published numerous books in English. Despite all his qualifications for carrying out such a work, Professor Fakhri's translation also suffers here and there from faults similar to those in Dr Ghali's. We find the sentence "We would have deformed them upon their own seats' as a translation of 36.67, and 107.2 is translated as "pushes the orphan around", which is too colloquial in the context, and in 24.31 the word "bossom" makes its appearance. In 21.5 the English reads "he has rather forged it; he is rather a poet," which is not the same as "rather has he forged it; rather is he a poet."
The first verse of Surat Al-Fil (The Elephant), India 19th century
Surat Al-Fatiha (The Opening Chapter of the Qur'an), Kashmir, 18th century
Once again the translation would have benefitted from being read through by a native speaker of English. The text has been well proof- read, though the name of the Prophet is spelt Muhammad on page 320 and Mohammad on the page opposite; also on page 321 "Messengers" is spelt "Massengers". The book, printed in Lebanon, is attractively produced. The front cover makes reference to the fact that it is approved by Al-Azhar and at the back of the volume are photostats of letters from Al-Azhar in English and Arabic granting their approval; these would be more effective with a letter-heading the English of which did not contain errors.
The translation made by Abdalhaqq and Aisha Bewley has much in its favour. The English is fluent and the manner in which the verses are laid out makes for easy reading. There are the very minimum of notes to the translation which is in some ways an advantage, especially in a translation where the original text of the Qur'an has not been included. One aspect of the translation which I found disturbing, though the translators have attempted to justify it in their Preface, is their insistence on retaining many Arabic words rather than translating them. A glossary of three and a half pages at the end of the book gives explanations of these terms. In the meantime, for someone not familiar with Arabic, the reader cannot but be puzzled to come across, on every page, such sentences as: "We gave him his reward in the dunya and in the akhira he will be among the salihun." The book has been well printed in Dubai.
The translation of the Qur'an is a major task that will inevitably take years. One hesitates, therefore, to criticise the work of anyone who has embarked upon such an awesome undertaking. But having completed such a task, presumably in the belief that extant translations are not adequate, the finished manuscript should surely be gone through over and over and be submitted to friends and colleagues before being sent to the printers? Is it not also time that an "authorised" translation of the Qur'an be produced?
Reviewed by Denys Johnson-Davies
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page