Theoretical and Practical Dimensions of Equivalence in the Arabic Translation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63939/ajts.yjq9km85الكلمات المفتاحية:
Arabic، French، Target Text، Functional Equivalence، Universal Declaration of Human Rightsالملخص
This study investigates the critical role of the concept of equivalence in translation, especially in legal contexts. It addresses the theoretical and practical implications of translation equivalence, highlighting the lack of consensus among scholars regarding its definition. The research examines the types of equivalence prevalent in legal translation, explicitly using the Arabic version of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights UDHR, adopted by the United Nations in 1948. Legal translation involves translating legal texts, such as the UDHR, from one language, such as French, to another, such as Arabic. This process is intricate due to the complex nature of legal texts, multifaceted legal concepts, and the distinct meanings embedded in legal language. The study highlights that equivalence, a heavily debated term in translation studies, is interpreted differently across theoretical perspectives, including linguistic, functional, and interpretive approaches. In the context of legal translation, functional equivalence is the most relevant type, particularly in the Arabic translation of the UDHR, as it aligns well with legal translation components such as text nature, legal discourse, and system compatibility (Sarcevic, 1997). The notion of equivalence takes several forms; however, linguistic and grammatical equivalence is less attainable due to significant language differences. For this reason, the study primarily focuses on functional equivalence from a Sarcevic perspective, facilitating measurement through criteria such as equivalent juridical force, contextual adaptation to target legal norms, terminological fidelity, and pragmatic effect, without assessing overall translation correctness, as the UN recognizes this version. It employs qualitative methods, discourse analysis, and content analysis to explore equivalence in the UDHR's Arabic translation, aiming to clarify the relationship between the source and target texts by applying these operational criteria to judge realization.
التنزيلات
المراجع
Agi, M. (1998). René Cassin : Prix Nobel de la Paix (1887–1976) : Père de la Déclaration universelle des droits de l’homme. Perrin
Bolaños Cuéllar, S. (2002). Equivalence revisited: A key concept in modern translation theory. Forma y Función, (15), 60-88. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/219/21901504.pdf
Briant, P. (2002). From Cyrus to Alexander: A history of the Persian Empire (P. T. Daniels, Trans.). Eisenbrauns. (Original work published 1996) DOI: https://doi.org/10.5325/j.ctv1bxgwdk
Catford, J. C. (1965). A linguistic theory of translation: An essay in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press
Catford, J. C. (2004). Formal correspondence. In B. Hatim & J. Munday (Eds.), Translation: An advanced resource book. (pp. 27-28). Routledge
David, R. (1974). Les grands systèmes de droit contemporain. Presses Universitaires de France
Donnelly, J. (2013). Universal human rights in theory and practice (3rd Ed.). Cornell University Press DOI: https://doi.org/10.7591/9780801467493
Cornu, G. (1990). Linguistique juridique. Presses Universitaires de France
Gonzalez, G. (2005). L’équivalence en traduction juridique : Analyse des traductions au sein de l’Accord de libre-échange nord-américain (ALENA). Université Laval. http://www.lli.ulaval.ca/memoires.theses.htm
Guillaume, A. (1955). The life of Muhammad: A translation of Ibn Isḥāq’s Sirat Rasul Allah. Oxford University Press
Hatim, B., & Munday, J. (2004). Translation: An advanced resource book. Routledge
House, J. (1997). Translation quality assessment: A model revisited. Gunter Narr Verlag
Leonardi, V. (2000, October). Equivalence in translation: Between myth and reality. Translation Journal, 4(4). https://translationjournal.net/journal/14equiv.htm
Jacobson, R. (2003). On linguistic aspects of translation. In M. Oustinoff (Ed.), La traduction (Qué sais-je?; pp. 53-64). Presses Universitaires de France
Kenny, D. (2001). Lexis and creativity in translation: A corpus-based approach. St. Jerome Publishing
Hatim, B., & Munday, J. (2004). Translation: An advanced resource book. Routledge
Lauren, P. G. (2011). The evolution of international human rights: Visions seen (3rd Ed.). University of Pennsylvania Press DOI: https://doi.org/10.9783/9780812209914
Lings, M. (1983). Muhammad: His life based on the earliest sources. Islamic Texts Society
Munday, J. (2009). The Routledge companion to translation studies. Oxon: Routledge DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203879450
Nida, E. A. (1995). Dynamic equivalence in translating. In S.-W. Chan & D. E. Pollard (Eds.), An encyclopaedia of translation: Chinese-English, English-Chinese (pp. 225-230). The Chinese University Press
Nida, E. A. (1964). Toward a science of translating. Brill DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004495746
Pelage, J. (2007). La traduction juridique: Problématique et méthodes. France: Auto-édité
Sarcevic, S. (1997). New approach to legal translation. Kluwer Law International
Snell-Hornby, M. (2006). Translation studies: An integrated approach (Reprint of the 1995 rev. ed.). John Benjamins DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.2
Soutou, G. H. (1998). La France et la déclaration universelle des droits de l’homme. Revue d’histoire diplomatique, 112(1), 1-28
Terré, F. (1996). Introduction générale au droit (3rd Ed.). Dalloz
United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
Venuti, L. (Ed.). (2004). The translation studies reader (2nd Ed.). Routledge
Wilss, W. (2002). Equivalence revisited: A key concept in modern translation theory. In S. Bolaños Cuéllar (Ed.), Forma y función, (15), 60-88
Yoda, L. (2005). La pertinence de la théorie du skopos dans la traduction médicale: L’exemple du français vers le bisâ. In M. Grosman, C. Krull, & M. Schwarz (Eds.), La traduction: De la théorie à la pratique et retour (pp. 147-156). Presses Universitaires de Rennes
التنزيلات
منشور
إصدار
القسم
الرخصة
هذا العمل مرخص بموجب Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
يتأطرُ نَشَاطَا النشر والتوزيع الخَاصَّيْنِ بمقالات المجلة برخصة المشاع الإبداعي اللاتجارية والحافظة للنسب CC BY-NC 4.0، والتي تنص على الآتي:
- لك كقارئ أو زائر مُطْلَقُ الحرية في:
- المشاركة: نسخ وتوزيع ونقل العمل لأي مكان أو تحويله لأي شكل.
- التعديل:المزج، التحويل، والإضافة على العمل.
لا يمكن لنا كجهة مُرَخِّصَة إلغاء هذه الصلاحيات طالما اتبعتَ شروط الرخصة.
- يتوجب عليك في المقابل احترام الشروط التالية:
- نَسب المُصنَّف (المقالة):يجب عليك نَسب العمل لصاحبه بطريقة مناسبة، وتوفير رابط للترخيص، وبيانُ إذا ما قد أُجريت أي تعديلات على العمل. يُمْكِنُكَ القيام بهذا بأي طريقة مناسبة، ولكن على ألا يتم ذلك بطريقة توحي بأن المُؤَلِّف أو المُرَخِّص مُؤَيِّد لك أو لعملك.
- غير تجاري:لا يمكنك استخدام هذا العمل لأغراض تجارية.
- منع القيود الإضافية: يجب عليك ألا تُطَبِّقَ أي شروط قانونية أو تدابير تكنولوجية تقيد الآخرين من ممارسة الصلاحيات التي تَسْمَحُ بها الرخصة.
كيفية الاقتباس
