نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشیار گروه زبان و ادبیات عربی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه قم، قم، ایران
2 سطح سه حوزوی، جامعه الزهرا (سلام الله علیها)، قم، ایران
3 سطح سه حوزوی، جامعه الزهرا (سلام الله علیها)، قم، ایران
4 سطح دو حوزوی، جامعه الزهرا (سلام الله علیها)، قم، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Objective: This study evaluates the Persian translations of tamyiz constructions in Nahj al-Balagha by Maadi-Khah and Zamani through Ladmiral’s framework of translation criticism. As a collection of Imam Ali’s sermons, letters, and aphorisms, Nahj al-Balagha occupies an important position in Islamic cultural heritage. Its linguistic richness provides scope for translation assessment through approaches compatible with the nature of religious discourse. The study examines how the translators convey these constructions and how their choices reflect their understanding of the sermons’ meanings and contexts.
Method: The research adopts a comparative approach and an inductive method, restricting its analysis to tamyiz as a single grammatical variable in the sermons. The corpus comprises fifteen sermons containing 128 instances of tamyiz, from which twenty-seven examples were selected for evaluation within Ladmiral’s theoretical framework. The analysis compares the two translations in relation to analysis and disambiguation, connotation, the unity of style and meaning, the translator’s freedom of choice, and the evocation of textual atmosphere.
Results: The findings indicate that Maadi-Khah’s translation demonstrates greater correspondence with the framework, whereas Zamani’s translation displays less correspondence in relation to its intended readership. Both translators adopt a target-oriented approach, prioritizing the sermons’ message and recreating expressions in Persian. The principles examined are observable in both translations, although their application differs. Maadi-Khah conveys the textual context more effectively through attention to the evocation of atmosphere and more frequently reconstructs meaning through connotation. Zamani, in contrast, makes greater use of the translator’s freedom of choice.
Conclusion: The comparison shows that a shared orientation toward the target language does not entail identical strategies for rendering tamyiz. Differences emerge particularly in the reconstruction of implied meaning, the representation of context, and the exercise of translational choice. Within the selected examples, Maadi-Khah’s closer correspondence with Ladmiral’s framework is associated with greater attention to context and connotative meaning. These findings clarify how the two translators recreate the sermons’ message while adopting distinct approaches to the relationship between linguistic expression and meaning.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)