ترجمة قرآن به عنوان حساسترین متن مقدس، نیاز به ارزیابیِ دقیق دارد. ارزیابیِ نظاممند باید بر پایة نظریهها و الگوهای علمی صورت بگیرد. نظریهپردازانِ ترجمه الگوهای مختلفی برای ارزیابی ترجمه ارائه دادهاند. در این میان الگوی ارزیابی ترجمة آنتوان برمن که بر حفظ اصالت متن مبدأ و اجتناب از ایجاد تغییر در ترجمه تأکید دارد، برای ارزیابی ترجمة مبدأمدار رضایی اصفهانی از قرآن کریم انتخاب شده است. برمن با بیان سیزده گرایش ریختشکنانه در ترجمه به تحلیل منفی ترجمههای آزاد و قوممدار میپردازد و تأکید میکند که این الگو باید با تحلیل مثبت از سوی سایر مترجمان تکمیل شود. مقاله حاضر به قصد مطالعة میزان کارآمدی الگوی برمن در ارزیابی ترجمة قرآن، گرایش منطقیسازی را در ترجمة رضایی مورد بررسی قرار میدهد. این بررسی نشان میدهد که منطقیسازی در ترجمه گاه اجباری و گاه اختیاری است. منطقیسازی اختیاری در تحلیل منفی و اجتناب از آن در تحلیل مثبت جای میگیرد. اما منطقیسازی اجباری باید به عنوان تبصرهای در بهکارگیری الگوی برمن در ارزیابی ترجمة قرآن مد نظر قرار گیرد. عامل منطقیسازی اجباری را میتوان در ناخوشساخت شدن ترجمة فارسی، تفاوت در چگونگی نشانداری سازههای دو زبان و خدمت لفظ به معنا در زبان قرآن جستجو کرد.
عنوان مقاله [English]
A Study of the Efficiency of Berman's Model in the Assessment of Qur'an Translation; A case study of Rationalization tendency
The translation of the Qur'an as the most sensitive text needs to be accurately assessed. Reviewing and evaluation of Holy Qur'an's translation have been a subject to different books and articles for many years, but these reviews are often empirical and do not follow any special theoretical basis or pattern. Translation theorists have presented different models for evaluating translation, but there has not been a rigorous scientific model for evaluating translation from Arabic to Persian, and in particular, translating the Holy Qur'an so far. Systematic evaluation should be based on scientific theories and models. The concentration of the presented paper for evaluating Rezaee Isfahani’s ST-oriented translation is on five surahs of Holy Qur'an, based on Antoine Bremen's translation assessment model, which emphasizes the maintenance of the nobility of the ST and avoidance of alteration in translation.
According to Berman's explanation, translation is the “trial of the foreign”. To create a sense of familiarity with the foreign text, it will construct a relationship between the “self-same” and the foreign. Again, it is a trial of the foreign since the root of the foreign work is its language ground. In Berman's word, this trial, often an exile, can also exhibit the most singular power of the translating act: to reveal the foreign work’s most original kernel, its most deeply buried, most self-same, but equally the most ‘distant’ from itself. Therefore he attends to inspect the system of textual deformation that operates in all translations to prevent them from being a “trial of the foreign” and called this the analytic of translation. As he claims the analysis to be provisional, he strongly believes that it requires additional inputs from other “domains”. Deforming tendencies interfere in the domain of literary prose. Language-based cosmos is in some aspects shapeless, which has generally been described negatively. Negative analytic should be considered through its positive counterpart.
By presenting thirteen deforming tendencies in translation, Burman proposes the negative analytic for ethnocentric, annexationist and hypertextual translations. He also stresses that this analysis should be extended by a positive counterpart by other translators. To study the effectiveness of Berman's model in the evaluation of the Qur'an translation, this paper renders an analysis to the rationalism of Rezaee Isfahani’s translation. Rezaee Isfahani introduces his method of translation as “the sentence for the sentence” rather than “word for word” and free. The priority in his translation is precision and it follows certain interpretive, theological, lexical, and literary principles. Another important notion, which we faced with, is rationalization that is concerned with syntactical structures of the original, starting with punctuation. Rationalization recomposes sentences and the sequence of sentences, rearranging them according to a certain idea of discursive order and destroys the element of the drive towards concreteness in prose. Generally, rationalization deforms the original by reversing its basic tendency.
This paper attends to the positive and negative analytic of data. In positive analytic, the translator's success and failure in the case of avoiding rationalization will be evaluated against other translators. According to Berman, positive analytic will construct a kind of anti-system which its purpose is to impoverishment or limiting the deformation of negative tendencies. In negative analytic, on the other hand, the cases in which the translator had been used rationalization will be studied and it will be determined if it is possible to avoid rationalization or not after comparing the translation toward other translations and text analytics.
This study also shows that rationalization is both compulsory and optional. Optional rationalization should be used in negative analytic while it should be avoided in positive analytic. Optional is referred to unnecessary changes that are related to the translator's style and preferences. Compulsory rationalization, on the other hand, should be considered as a supplement in using the Bremen’s model to evaluate the translation of the Qur'an. Compulsory is referred to the change of grammatical categories and meaning when it is necessary, and it is related to the differences between two languages.
The cause of compulsory rationalization in the translation of the Qur'an can be searched in three sources: First, the probable oddness of the translated text owing to the lack of similar structures in TL, which lead to literal translation. Although the absolute avoidance of rationalization in translation from Arabic to Persian is not possible due to infrastructure differences between the two languages, this problem is minimized in the languages of the same family. The second factor, rooted in the Qur'an's language. The Arabic language is much more widespread than the Arabic grammar, and the Quran is revealed in the Arabic language, not Arabic grammar. On the other hand, some Qur'anic scholars believe that the language of the Qur'an uses the word for the sake of meaning and rationalization is in conflict with these principles. The third point is to pay attention to the cause of displacement in recognizing the necessity or unnecessary maintenance of displacement of Quranic expressions. The displacements caused by the differences between the two languages constitute unmarked information structure and do not harm the translation. However, the stylistic and rhetorical displacements that constitute the marked information structures must be preserved in translation.