ترجمة أسماء الأعلام في القرآن الكريم أسماء الأنبياء أنموذجا

Abstract

When reading the numerous translations of The Holy Quran, we find that translators have dealt with the proper nouns mentioned therein in two ways. Some of them, refusing to translate the Koranic names, took these over unchanged from the ST to the TT. Thus, (ى( ,)داوودѧى( ,)عیسѧ )موسand (ىѧ ,)یحیfor instance, become (or rather remain), respectively, Dâwûd, 'Issa, Mûssa and Yahyâ. This literal approach to translating proper names tends to preserve their exotic character and empower them with the ability of keeping their connotations. Other translators have chosen methods pertaining to dynamic equivalence, such as cultural transplantation or phonological adaptation. For them ( )داوودis David, ( )عیسىbecomes Jesus, ( )موسىis the equivalent of Moses and ( )یحيis the equivalent of John. The purpose of this study is to review those methods, compare them and determine the complications created by each one of them and the implications it carries in the TT. Confronted by a proper name, the translator is often confused, helpless, and do not know what to do. Is translating this peculiar kind of noun the right thing to do? Or is keeping it as it is? This confusion is actually not unjustified. We usually translate a word that carries a meaning, while proper names, as widely believed, are meaningless; they are considered to be mere designators for individual objects, simple signifiers that serve the only purpose of indicating a referent. But then, why do we sometimes have this impetuous desire to translate some names? Why do some of them give us the impression that they have a function way more complicated than simply denoting? Then again, what exactly is the meaning? Our study aims at a first stage to answer these questions. According to Nida, there are three types of meaning: grammatical meaning, referential meaning and connotative meaning. In our study, we are not interested in grammatical meaning for it does not, at least not in a tangible way, influence the translation of Koranic proper names. A proper noun's main function is to denote, hence it necessarily has a referential meaning. Its referent could be an object, an event or an abstract. A first classification of proper nouns divides them into three categories: names of people; geographical names; and finally, the names of cultural referents. There may of course exist other subclassifications depending on the language and culture involved. What makes a proper name different than a common noun is the nature of its referential meaning. The way a proper name refers is unique; its relationship with its designate is direct, rigid and exclusive. A common name's is general since a common noun indirectly indicates an indefinite number of referents. But is it possible that, in addition to being a rigid indicator, a proper name can also have a connotative function? A connotation or emotional charge that a word can carry is determined by sociocultural factors. The society and culture of the ST decide if a word is familiar, offensive, derogatory or vulgar. A dictionary confirms these connotations. Some proper nouns also have connotative meanings. Several men named Osama were victims of racist comments in many western countries, mainly in the United States, for no other reason than having the same first name as Osama Bin Laden.