Jordan Journal of Modern Languages and Literature Vol. 3 No.1, 2011, pp.

65-83
JJMLL

Some issues in Translating Nouns in Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s Translation

of the Meanings of the Holy Quran

Adnan Abu-Mahfouz

Department of Humanities, Al–Balqa Applied University, Al Salt, Jordan

Received on Nov., 7, 2010 Accepted on May, 29, 2011

Abstract

This paper highlights the problems and semantic issues related to nouns that Abdullah Yusuf Ali
(undated), in his translation of the meanings of the Holy Quran, could not handle or handled but
unsuccessfully. Although he exerted a great effort and succeeded to a large extent in most of his
translation of the meanings of the Holy Quran, Abdullah Yusuf Ali failed to convey the meaning
pertaining to some nouns. The paper is an attempt to tackle the semantic problems and issues and
make helpful suggestions. It should not, in any way, be looked at as an attempt to undermine the great
job done by Abdullah Yusuf Ali but a modest contribution to improve the translation.
Keywords: Holy Quran, Equivalent, Hyponym, Superordinate, Transliteration, Inconsistency,
Synonymy, Nouns.

Introduction
The assumption that the Holy Quran cannot be translated across languages without
losing the glamorous harmony inherent to verses and sacrificing the emotiveness of cultural
and language-specific terms, among others, has been all-pervasive in the Islamic heritage,
history and literature.

Briefly, the rhetoric and rhythm of the Arabic of the Quran are so characteristic, so
powerful, so highly emotive, that any version whatsoever is bound in the nature of things to
be but a poor copy of the glittering splendour of the original (Arberry 1955, 24).

However, Islamic scholars and professional translators fairly convincingly argue that
only the meanings of the Holy Quran can be conveyed to other languages by means of
translation. Surprisingly, some of them believe that the Holy Quran can not and should not
be translated.
 The Quran cannot be translated. That is the belief of old-fashioned Sheikhs and the
view of the present writer. The Book is here rendered almost literally and every effort has
been made to choose befitting language. But the result is not the Glorious Quran, that
inimitable symphony, the very sounds of which move men to tears and ecstasy. It is only an
attempt to present the meaning of the Quran – and peradventure something of the charm –
in English. It can never take the place of the Quran in Arabic. Nor is it meant to be so.
(Pickthall, iii).

Moreover, in the course of the past one and a half millenniums some of the terms
once considered untranslatable and used to pose an insurmountable problem for both
translators and scholars, are nowadays well-established words in the lexicon of many
languages and can easily be translated. More to the point, in the past, terms like halal
“permitted according to Islamic laws” and imam “the leader of prayers in a mosque” sounded
awkward when transliterated or translated into other languages. These terms, however, can
be found in many good modern dictionaries across languages; the thing that supports the
fact that the meanings of the Holy Quran are by and large translatable in the sense that they
can, in a way or another, be conveyed to other languages.

This, however, does not negate the "untrabslatability" of some aspects of the Quranic
discourse. To put it another way, some characteristics of the Quranic discourse: rhyme,
rhythm, the pronoun of significance, the deletion of the subject, cognate accusatives, etc, are
practically untranslatable. Al-Kharabsheh and Al-azzam (2008, 2) point out that this Arabic
Quran has been translated, and the available translations convey the main meanings of the
Quran but can never be considered the actual Quran.

Al-Salem (2008, 3) argues that some Moslem translators of the Holy Quran have been
very careful to adhere to the Quranic text, maintaining its structure and vocabulary as much
as the target language systems allow it. She points out that this attitude emanates from the
translators' great respect for the Holy Quran and from their belief that they should not take
liberties with the word of God.

Many translators spent a good portion of their life endeavouring to transfer the
message of Islam contained in the Holy Quran; some of them died in the attempt. Ali
(undated) was one of those who did a great job and came up with a respected translation of
the meanings of the Holy Quran which is considered one of the most circulated translations
among Muslims and non-Muslims; yet it has many shortcomings.

66
Problems and Suggested Solutions:
In this paper a close investigation of some semantic issues in Ali’s translation of the
meanings of the Holy Quran will be undertaken, and suggested solutions will be offered to
overcome those issues which include:

1. using a hyponym as an equivalent to a superordinate where the TL has an

equivalent superordinate;
2. using a superordinate as an equivalent to a hyponym where the TL has an
equivalent hyponym;
3. translation by transliteration; and
4. inconsistency.

1. Using a Hyponym as an Equivalent to a Superordinate where the Tl has an

Equivalent Superordinate:

Hyponymy is a sense relation where the more specific entity is termed hyponym and
the more general one is termed superordinate. For example, "cow" is a hyponym of "animal"
and "sparrow" is a hyponym of "bird".

Hyponymy is a transitive relation. If x is a hyponym of y and y is a hyponym of z then x

is a hyponym of z. For example, ‘cow’ is a hyponym of ‘animal’ and mammal is a hyponym of
‘animal’; therefore, ‘cow’ is a hyponym of ‘animal’ (Lyons 1977, 292).

Roughly speaking, one of the techniques that a translator resorts to in cases of non-
equivalence at word level is using a hyponym as an equivalent to a superordinate. This is,
however, unacceptable if the TL has an already well-established word as an equivalent to
the superordinate. The following examples illustrate the idea further:

‫ "وَِإ ْذ ﻗَﺎلَ ﻣُﻮﺳَﻰ ِﻟﻘَ ْﻮ ِﻣ ِﻪ ِإ ﱠن اﻟ ﱠﻠﻪَ ﻳَ ْﺄ ُﻣ ُﺮ ُﻛ ْﻢ أَ ْن ﺗَ ْﺬﺑَﺤُﻮا ﺑَﻘَﺮَةً ﻗَـﺎﻟُﻮا أَﺗَ ﱠﺘﺨِـ ُﺬﻧَﺎ ﻫُـ ُﺰوًا ﻗَـﺎلَ أَﻋُـﻮ ُذ ﺑِﺎﻟﻠﱠـ ِﻪ أَ ْن أَﻛُـﻮنَ ﻣِـﻦَ ا ْﻟﺠَـﺎ ِﻫﻠِﻴﻦَ" )ﺳـﻮرة اﻟﺒﻘـﺮة‬.1

.(67 ‫اﻵﻳﺔ‬

1. “And remember Moses said

To his people: “God commands
That ye sacrifice a heifer.”
They said: “Makest thou
A laughing-stock of us?”
He said: “God save me
From being an ignorant (fool)!”
(Surah 1: 67)

67
َ‫ﺠﺪَ ﱠن أَ ْﻗﺮَﺑَ ُﻬ ْﻢ ﻣَﻮَ ﱠدةً ِﻟ ﱠﻠﺬِﻳﻦَ آَﻣَﻨُﻮا ا ﱠﻟﺬِﻳﻦَ ﻗَﺎﻟُﻮا ِإﻧﱠﺎ ﻧَﺼَﺎرَى ذَﻟِـﻚ‬
ِ َ‫ﺷﺮَﻛُﻮا وَﻟَﺘ‬
ْ َ‫س ﻋَﺪَاوَةً ِﻟ ﱠﻠﺬِﻳﻦَ آَﻣَﻨُﻮا ا ْﻟﻴَﻬُﻮدَ وَا ﱠﻟﺬِﻳﻦَ أ‬ ِ َ‫ "ﻟَﺘ‬.2
ِ ‫ﺠﺪَ ﱠن أَﺷَ ﱠﺪ اﻟﻨﱠﺎ‬

.(82 ‫ﺴﺘَ ْﻜ ِﺒﺮُونَ" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﻤﺎﺋﺪة اﻵﻳﺔ‬

ْ َ‫ِﺑﺄَ ﱠن ِﻣ ْﻨ ُﻬ ْﻢ ِﻗﺴﱢﻴﺴِﻴﻦَ وَ ُر ْﻫﺒَﺎﻧًﺎ وَأَ ﱠﻧ ُﻬ ْﻢ ﻟَﺎ ﻳ‬

2. “Strongest among men in enmity

To the Believers wilt thou
Find the Jews and Pagans;
And nearest among them in love
To the Believers wilt thou
Find those who say,
“We are Christians”:
Because amongst these are
Men devoted to learning.
And men who have renounced
The world, and they
Are not arrogant.”
(Surah 5: 82)

In (1) above, the Arabic word ‘‫ ’ﺑﻘـﺮة‬/baqarah/ in the SL text is a superordinate. It refers

to any cow or to the extension of cow. On the other hand, the equivalent English term that Ali
used is ‘heifer’ which is, in English, a hyponym of cow; it means a cow that has not yet given
birth to a calf. To say the least, this kind of translation is unacceptable and inaccurate simply
because the original text does not mean that.

In (2) above, The Arabic term ‘‫ ’ﻗﺴﻴﺴـﻴﻦ‬/qisiisiin/, which means ‘priests’, has a direct

equivalent in English. The translator chose a more general word postmodified by a reduced
relative clause ‘men devoted to learning’. Further, examples of using a hyponym as an
equivalent to a superordinate where the TL has an equivalent superordinate in Ali's
translation of the Holy Quran can be found in verses including, but not restricted to, (2:259;
2:185).

One might argue that in the interpretation books of the Holy Quran, we find that the
term ‘‫ ’ﻗﺴﻴﺴﻴﻦ‬/qisiisiin/ means "‫( "اﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎء‬scholars) and in this particular context "men of learning"

should be more appropriate than "priests". This argument is valid to a large extent but the
same context of the ayah tells us that the meaning is related to "religion" (And men who
have renounced the world and they are not arrogant). The term "priests" might be closer to
religion than "scholars". A scholar is (according to Cambridge Online Dictionary) a person
who studies a subject in great detail, especially at a university. A priest, on the other hand, is
a person, usually a man, who has been trained to perform religious duties in the Christian
Church, or a person with particular duties in some other religions. "Men of learning" has the

68
same problem as "scholars" in being general and not connected to religion. To put it short, I
think that the term "priests" would serve the purpose in a clearer way.

2. Using a Superordinate as an Equivalent to a Hyponym where the TL has an

Equivalent Hyponym:

Baker (1992, 23) believers that languages tend to have general words (super
ordinates) and lack specific ones (hyponyms) because each language makes only those
distinctions in meaning which seem relevant to its particular environment.

‫ﻒ‬ ُ ‫ " ﻗَﺎﻟُﻮا رَ ﱡﺑ ُﻜ ْﻢ أَ ْﻋﻠَ ُﻢ ِﺑﻤَﺎ ﻟَ ِﺒ ْﺜ ُﺘ ْﻢ ﻓَﺎ ْﺑﻌَﺜُﻮا أَﺣَﺪَ ُﻛ ْﻢ ِﺑﻮَ ِر ِﻗ ُﻜ ْﻢ ﻫَ ِﺬ ِه ِإﻟَﻰ ا ْﻟﻤَﺪِﻳﻨَ ِﺔ ﻓَ ْﻠﻴَ ْﻨ‬.1
ْ ‫ ِﻣﻨْـ ُﻪ وَ ْﻟﻴَﺘَﻠَﻄﱠـ‬‫ﻈ ْﺮ أَ ﱡﻳﻬَﺎ أَ ْزﻛَـﻰ ﻃَﻌَﺎﻣًـﺎ ﻓَ ْﻠﻴَـ ْﺄ ِﺗ ُﻜ ْﻢ ﺑِـ ِﺮ ْزق‬

.(19 ‫" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﻜﻬﻒ اﻵﻳﺔ‬:‫ﺸ ِﻌﺮَ ﱠن ِﺑ ُﻜ ْﻢ أَﺣَﺪًا‬

ْ ‫وَﻟَﺎ ُﻳ‬

1. They (all) said, “God (alone)

Knows best how long
Ye have stayed here
Now send ye then one of you
With this money of yours.
To the town …
(Surah 18: 19)

.(18 ‫ﺟﺪَ ِﻟ ﱠﻠ ِﻪ ﻓَﻠَﺎ ﺗَ ْﺪﻋُﻮا ﻣَﻊَ اﻟ ﱠﻠ ِﻪ أَﺣَﺪًا" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﺠﻦ اﻵﻳﺔ‬

ِ ‫ "وَأَ ﱠن ا ْﻟﻤَﺴَﺎ‬.2

2. “And the places of worship

Are for God (alone):
So invoke not any one
Along with God;”
(Surah 72: 18)

According to Quran interpreters, the term “‫ ”ورق‬/wariq/, in (1) above, means “silver

coins”. This meaning is missing in this translation. It refers to a specific kind of money that is
“silver coins”. Obviously, a more general term is used as an equivalent to a specific one.
“silver coins” would be more appropriate.

In (2) above, however, the term “‫ ”ﻣﺴـﺎﺟﺪ‬/masajid/ literally means mosques. “‫”ﻣﺴـﺎﺟﺪ‬

/masaajid/ has a direct equivalent in English which is “mosques”; but the translator rendered
it into “placea of worship”. A place of worship can be a place where, say, a Buddhist pray
which is contrary to the fact. Why should we use a general word as an equivalent to a
specific one when we do have the specific word in the target language?

69
 In this surah (al-Jinn) Allah is addressing Prophet Mohammed, "Say: It has been
revealed to me that a company of Jinns listened to the Quran." And "The mosques are for
Allah alone: So do not ascribe any one along with Allah." There is no use translating the term
"‫ "ﻣﺴـﺎﺟﺪ‬into “places of worship” when the TL has a ready equivalent for the SL lexical item.

Books of the interpretation of the Holy Quran suggest that in this particular Ayah "‫"ﻣﺴـﺎﺟﺪ‬

refers to "mosques".

3. Translation by Transliteration:

A helpful and reliable strategy to deal with cases of non-equivalence that encounters
translators in the course of their work is translation by transliteration. Transliteration has
traditionally been defined as the process by which words in one alphabet are represented in
another alphabet. In this strategy the translator uses the letters of the TL to transfer the
meaning of a word from the SL when translation fails completely or is practically impossible.
It is also opted for to deal with culture and language specific words, newly-coined words and
buzz words. More to the point, the transliterated word becomes a loan word in the TL. Ali
transliterated words that need translation. Consider the following examples:

.(17 ‫ )ﺳﻮرة اﻻﻧﺴﺎن اﻵﻳﺔ‬."‫ﺟﻬَﺎ زَ ْﻧﺠَﺒِﻴﻠًﺎ‬ ْ ‫ "وَ ُﻳ‬.1

ُ ‫ﺴﻘَ ْﻮنَ ﻓِﻴﻬَﺎ ﻛَ ْﺄﺳًﺎ ﻛَﺎنَ ِﻣﺰَا‬

1. “And they will be given

To drink there of a
Cup (of wine) mixed
With Zanjabil,”
(Surah 76: 17)

.(5 ‫ )ﺳﻮرة اﻹﻧﺴﺎن اﻵﻳﺔ‬."ً‫ﺟﻬَﺎ ﻛَﺎﻓُﻮر‬ ْ َ‫ "إ ﱠن ا ْﻟﺄَ ْﺑﺮَارَ ﻳ‬.2

ُ ‫ ﻛَﺎنَ ِﻣﺰَا‬‫ﺸﺮَﺑُﻮنَ ِﻣ ْﻦ ﻛَ ْﺄس‬

2. “As to the righteous,

They shall drink
Of a Cup (of wine)
Mixed with Kafur,”
(Surah 76: 5)

ِ َ‫ "ﻣَﺜَ ُﻞ ا ْﻟﺠَ ﱠﻨ ِﺔ ا ﱠﻟﺘِﻲ ُو ِﻋﺪَ ا ْﻟ ُﻤ ﱠﺘﻘُﻮنَ ﻓِﻴﻬَﺎ أَ ْﻧﻬَﺎرٌ ِﻣ ْﻦ ﻣَﺎءٍ ﻏَ ْﻴ ِﺮ آ‬.3

َ‫ ﻟَ ﱠﺬةٍ ﻟِﻠﺸﱠﺎ ِرﺑِﻴﻦ‬‫ ﻟَ ْﻢ ﻳَﺘَﻐَ ﱠﻴ ْﺮ ﻃَ ْﻌ ُﻤ ُﻪ وَأَ ْﻧﻬَﺎرٌ ِﻣ ْﻦ ﺧَ ْﻤﺮ‬‫ وَأَ ْﻧﻬَﺎرٌ ِﻣ ْﻦ ﻟَﺒَﻦ‬‫ﺳﻦ‬

‫ﻄﻊَ أَ ْﻣﻌَﺎءَ ُﻫ ْﻢ" )ﺳﻮرة‬

‫ﺳﻘُﻮا ﻣَﺎءً ﺣَ ِﻤﻴﻤًﺎ ﻓَﻘَ ﱠ‬
ُ َ‫ت وَﻣَ ْﻐ ِﻔﺮَةٌ ِﻣ ْﻦ رَ ﱢﺑ ِﻬ ْﻢ ﻛَﻤَ ْﻦ ُﻫﻮَ ﺧَﺎِﻟﺪٌ ﻓِﻲ اﻟﻨﱠﺎ ِر و‬
ِ ‫ ُﻣﺼَﻔًّﻰ وَﻟَ ُﻬ ْﻢ ﻓِﻴﻬَﺎ ِﻣ ْﻦ ُﻛ ﱢﻞ اﻟ ﱠﺜﻤَﺮَا‬‫وَأَ ْﻧﻬَﺎرٌ ِﻣ ْﻦ ﻋَﺴَﻞ‬

.(15 ‫ﻣﺤﻤﺪ اﻵﻳﺔ‬

3. “(Here is) a parable of the Garden which the righteous are promised: in it are rivers of
water unstaling; rivers of milk of which the taste never changes; rivers of wine, a joy to those
who drink; and rivers of honey purse and clean. In it there are for them all kinds of fruits; and

70
Forgiveness from their Lord, (can those in such bliss) be given to drink, boiling water, so that
it cuts up their bowels (to pieces)?”
(Surah 47: 15)

.(143 ‫ "وَﻛَﺬَِﻟﻚَ ﺟَﻌَ ْﻠﻨَﺎ ُﻛ ْﻢ ُأ ﱠﻣﺔً وَﺳَﻄًﺎ" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﺒﻘﺮة اﻵﻳﺔ‬.4

4. “Thus have We made of you

An Ummat justly balanced.”
(Surah 2: 143)

In his translation of the meanings of the Holy Quran, Ali transliterated words that
directly lend themselves to literal translation. In (1) above, for instance, the Arabic word
“‫ ”زﻧﺠﺒﻴـﻞ‬/zanjabiil/ has a straightforward equivalent in English which is ‘ginger’. The translator

transliterated it possibly because of the fact that in the hereafter ginger would be different but
the SL text uses the term “‫ ”زﻧﺠﺒﻴـﻞ‬/zanjabiil/ in spite of the fact that it would be a different one

in the Hereafter.

Strictly speaking, in authoritative texts like hhe Holy Quran and the Bible formal
equivalence is choice number one and the interpretation, when the need arises, is to be left
for a footnote. In (2) above, the translator transliterates the word ‘Kafur’ which means
‘Camphor’. Similarly, what Muslims believe is that all things in the Hereafter would be
completely different.

In (3) above, the translator used the direct equivalent of “‫ ”ﺧﻤـﺮ‬/xamr/ which literally

means ‘wine’; he rendered the word ‘“‫ ”ﺧﻤـﺮ‬/xamr/ into ‘wine’. For Muslims ‘wine’ is prohibited

and drinking wine is one of the greater sins in this world. However, Muslims believe that the
‘wine’ in Paradise is permitted and it is at the same time a different one in that it does not
make people intoxicated. Ali translated “‫ ”ﺧﻤـﺮ‬/xamr/ as ‘wine’ but he transliterated “‫”زﻧﺠﺒﻴـﻞ‬

/zanjabiil/. The argument here is that the term “‫ ”زﻧﺠﺒﻴـﻞ‬/zanjabiil/ should also have been

rendered into ‘Ginger’. Similarly, instead of transliterating ‘Kafur’, the English equivalent
‘Camphor’ should have been used.

In (4) above, the translator adopted a transliteration of the word as if it was

pronounced by an Indian. In Arabic the word "‫ "أﻣـﺔ‬is pronounced as /ummah/ not /ummat/

which is an Indian or south-east Asian pronunciation of the Arabic term. Apart from that, the
Arabic term "‫ "أﻣـﺔ‬/ummah/ simply means ‘nation’. Should we transliterate it or translate it?

Transliteration is opted for to bridge the semantic gap resulting from linguistic and culture

71
specific terms, among others. To put it short, ‘nation’ is a straightforward equivalent and
transliteration is to be excluded.

Issues of transliteration can arise from the fact that the word in the SL is a name and
has a meaning as well. The translator tries to translate the word and the result is a different
name that an SL speaker does not know any more. Consider the following examples:
.(1 ‫" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﻜﻮﺛﺮ اﻵﻳﺔ‬.َ‫ "ِإﻧﱠﺎ أَ ْﻋﻄَ ْﻴﻨَﺎكَ ا ْﻟﻜَ ْﻮﺛَﺮ‬.1

1. “To thee have we granted the Abundance.”

(Surah 108: 1)
.(1 ‫" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﻤﺴﺪ اﻵﻳﺔ‬.‫ﺐ‬ ْ ‫ "ﺗَ ﱠﺒ‬.2
‫ﺖ ﻳَﺪَا أَﺑِﻲ ﻟَﻬَﺐٍ وَﺗَ ﱠ‬

2. “Perish the hands of the Father of Flame.”

(Surah 111:1)

In (1) above, the translator rendered the term "‫ "ا ْﻟﻜَـ ْﻮﺛَﺮ‬/alkauθar/ into “Abundance”.

Generally speaking, names or proper nouns should not be translated albeit they sometimes
do have meaning. In Arabic, the root of the noun has the meaning of “abundance” or “a lot”
but when it is mentioned to a Muslim it is just a name of a river in Paradise; Muslims do not
usually think of the name to mean “Abundance”. Translation does not fit here and
transliteration should be the choice. Perhaps a footnote should help the non-Moslem reader
understand the meaning of the term. But why leave the interpretation to a footnote after we
choose the right equivalent the thing that the translator did not do.

In (2) above, the translator rendered the name of an infamous person in the Islamic
heritage and literature "ٍ‫ "أَﺑِـﻮ ﻟَﻬَـﺐ‬/abu-lahab as "The Father of Flame". The name literally

means that but translating this name in this way is inaccurate. Big Ben, for instance, was
named after Sir Benjamin Hall. What would happen if we translated "Big Ben", into Arabic for
example? The famous clock would be unknown to those who have known it for a long time.
The same thing happens when we render "ٍ‫ "أَﺑِـﻮ ﻟَﻬَـﺐ‬/abuulahab/ into "The Father of Flame".

Therefore, "ٍ‫ "أَﺑِﻲ ﻟَﻬَﺐ‬/abuulahab/ should be transliterated.

Again, the name "ٍ‫( "أَﺑِـﻮ ﻟَﻬَـﺐ‬Abu-Lahab) is part of the Islamic History and a reader of the

Holy Quran, a Moslem or a non-Moslem, should become acquainted with this person (Abu-
Lahab). I belong to this school of thought. The name “Kohl” (Chancellor of Germany from
1982 to 1998) literally means “Cabbage” but I have never heard of a translator who tried to
translate this name.

72
4. Inconsistency
The issue of inconsistency in translating the meanings of the Holy Quran has been
raised by many scholars and translators of the meanings of the Holy Quran. This, however,
does not underestimate the effort exerted by many translators of the meanings of the Holy
Quran throughout history.

Clearly no translation of the Quran can compare in beauty and style with the original
Arabic, which has been described as: “by turns, striking, soaring, vivid, terrible, tender and
breathtaking.” However, I found when the context is the same, if the same English word is
not used for the same Arabic word throughout the translation, it becomes difficult for
someone who wants to learn to correlate the English and the Arabic to be able to do so. In
other words, the twenty or so English translations put emphasis on interpreting a Quranic
verse without precisely representing the original Arabic word. For example, in one
translation, the English verb “to turn” is used for over forty-three different Arabic words and
the noun “sin,” twenty-three (Bakhtiar 2008).

Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s translation of the meanings of the Holy Quran is not free from
cases of inconsistency in which the translator opted for more than one English equivalent to
the same Arabic word when the context is the same. Consider the following examples:

"‫ ُﻣﺒِﻴﻦ‬‫ﺎ ِإﻧﱠﺎ ﻟَﻨَﺮَاﻫَﺎ ﻓِﻲ ﺿَﻠَﺎل‬‫ﺣﺒ‬

ُ ‫ﺴ ِﻪ ﻗَ ْﺪ ﺷَﻐَﻔَﻬَﺎ‬ ْ ‫ "وَﻗَﺎلَ ِﻧ‬.1
ِ ‫ﺴﻮَةٌ ﻓِﻲ ا ْﻟﻤَﺪِﻳﻨَ ِﺔ ا ْﻣﺮَأَ ُة ا ْﻟﻌَﺰِﻳ ِﺰ ُﺗﺮَا ِو ُد ﻓَﺘَﺎﻫَﺎ ﻋَ ْﻦ ﻧَ ْﻔ‬

.(30 ‫)ﺳﻮرة ﻳﻮﺳﻒ اﻵﻳﺔ‬

1. “Ladies said in the city:

‘The wife of the (great) ‘Aziz
Is seeking to seduce her slave
From his (true) self.
Truly hath he inspired her
With violent love: We see
She is evidently going astray.”
(Surah 12: 30)

.(78 ‫" )ﺳﻮرة ﻳﻮﺳﻒ اﻵﻳﺔ‬.َ‫ﺴﻨِﻴﻦ‬

ِ ‫ﺤ‬ ُ َ‫ "ﻗَﺎُﻟﻮا ﻳَﺎ أَ ﱡﻳﻬَﺎ ا ْﻟﻌَﺰِﻳ ُﺰ ِإ ﱠن ﻟَ ُﻪ أَﺑًﺎ ﺷَ ْﻴﺨًﺎ ﻛَﺒِﻴﺮًا ﻓ‬.2
ْ ‫ﺨ ْﺬ أَﺣَﺪَﻧَﺎ ﻣَﻜَﺎﻧَ ُﻪ ِإﻧﱠﺎ ﻧَﺮَاكَ ِﻣﻦَ ا ْﻟ ُﻤ‬

2. “They said: “O exalted one!

Behold! he has a father,
Aged and venerable, (who will
Grieve for him); so take

73
 One of us in his place,
For we see that thou art
(Gracious) in doing good.
(Surah 12: 78)

In (1) above, on the one hand, the translator transliterated the Arabic word “‫ ”ﻋﺰﻳـﺰ‬as

(‘Aziz) because, as he puts it. “‘Aziz: is the title of a nobleman or officer of Court, of high
rank. Considering all the circumstances, the office of Grand Chamberlain or minister may be
indicated. But ‘Aziz I think is a title, not an office. I have not translated the title but left it as it
is (Ali 560).

In (2) above, on the other hand, Ali chose to render the meaning of the same Arabic
word “‫ ”ﻋﺰﻳـﺰ‬/'aziiz/ as “exalted One!” which he once called a title that should not be translated.

In a footnote, he explained the reason for translating the title in this case.

(‘Aziz: I have translated the title of ‘Aziz here as “the exalted one” when addressed to
Joseph in order not to cause confusion with the other man, the ‘Aziz to whom Zulaikha was
married, and who is apparently no longer now in the land of the living” (Ali 560).

Obviously, Ali did not want to cause confusion between the “‫‘( ”ﻋﺰﻳـﺰ‬Aziz) mentioned in

verse ‘30’ above and the other “‫‘( ”ﻋﺰﻳـﺰ‬Aziz) who is Joseph. However, the context of the story

of Joseph makes it clear that the first “‫‘( ”ﻋﺰﻳـﺰ‬Aziz) is the one who imprisoned Joseph who is

the “‫‘( ”ﻋﺰﻳــﺰ‬Aziz) in verse (78). Therefore, consistency in translating the same term

necessitate that the title in the two verses be dealt with in the same way. Moreover, verses
54 and 55 of the same Sura are the starting point of the era of the second “‫‘( ”ﻋﺰﻳـﺰ‬Aziz) (The

era of the rule of Joseph).

Historically speaking, there were some titles used to address the ruler of the nation in
question. For example, “Pharaoh” was the king of Egypt at a certain era. The same applies
to “Caesar” and “Caliph” among others. No translator, to the best of our knowledge,
attempted to translate these titles whether they would refer to “X” or “Y”. The title “‫‘( ”ﻋﺰﻳﺰ‬Aziz)

used to be just like a prime minister. I think the title “‫‘( ”ﻋﺰﻳﺰ‬Aziz) should be used as is whether

it refers to Joseph, “X’ or “Y”.

Other translators of the meanings of the Holy Quran translated this term in different
ways which aggravates an already complicated situation. It is rendered by Arberry (1955) as

74
“The Governor” in verse (30) and as “Mighty prince” in verse (78). Pickthall (undated)
rendered it as “The ruler” in verse (30) and as “ruler of the land” in verse (78).

The issue of inconsistency in dealing with nouns is obvious in Ali’s translation of the
meanings of the Holy Quran. The Arabic term "‫ "ﻋﺬاب‬/'aδaab/ is a case in point. It is translated

in more than one way which unjustifiably conveys the assumption that the word has more
than one meaning in the context in which it occurs. Consider the following verses:

.(46 ‫" )ﺳﻮرة اﻻﻧﺒﻴﺎء اﻵﻳﺔ‬.َ‫ب رَ ﱢﺑﻚَ ﻟَﻴَﻘُﻮُﻟ ﱠﻦ ﻳَﺎوَ ْﻳﻠَﻨَﺎ ِإﻧﱠﺎ ُﻛﻨﱠﺎ ﻇَﺎِﻟﻤِﻴﻦ‬ ‫ "وَﻟَِﺌ ْﻦ ﻣَ ﱠ‬.1
ِ ‫ﺴ ْﺘ ُﻬ ْﻢ ﻧَ ْﻔﺤَﺔٌ ِﻣ ْﻦ ﻋَﺬَا‬

1. “If but a breath of the Wrath

Of thy Lord do touch them,
They will then say, “Woe
To us! we did wrong indeed!”
(Surah 21: 46)

.(22 ‫" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﺤﺞ اﻵﻳﺔ‬.‫ﻖ‬ ْ َ‫ " ُﻛ ﱠﻠﻤَﺎ أَرَادُوا أَ ْن ﻳ‬.2

ِ ‫ﺨ ُﺮﺟُﻮا ِﻣ ْﻨﻬَﺎ ِﻣ ْﻦ ﻏَ ﱟﻢ ُأﻋِﻴﺪُوا ﻓِﻴﻬَﺎ وَذُوﻗُﻮا ﻋَﺬَابَ ا ْﻟﺤَﺮِﻳ‬

2. “Every Time they wish

To get away therefrom,
From anguish, they will be
Forced back therein, and
(It will be said), “Taste ye
The Penalty of Burning!”
(Surah 22: 22)

.(71 ‫ب ﻋَﻠَﻰ ا ْﻟﻜَﺎ ِﻓﺮِﻳﻦَ" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﺰﻣﺮ اﻵﻳﺔ‬ ْ ‫ "ﻗَﺎﻟُﻮا ﺑَﻠَﻰ وَﻟَ ِﻜ ْﻦ ﺣَ ﱠﻘ‬.3
ِ ‫ﺖ ﻛَ ِﻠﻤَ ُﺔ ا ْﻟﻌَﺬَا‬

3. “The answer
Will be: “True: but
The Decree of Punishment
Has been proved true
Against the Unbelievers!”
(Surah 39: 71)

.(114 ‫ﺧﺮَ ِة ﻋَﺬَابٌ ﻋَﻈِﻴﻢٌ" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﻨﺤﻞ اﻵﻳﺔ‬ ِ ‫ "ﻟَ ُﻬ ْﻢ ﻓِﻲ اﻟ ﱡﺪ ْﻧﻴَﺎ‬.4
ِ َ‫ﺧ ْﺰيٌ وَﻟَ ُﻬ ْﻢ ﻓِﻲ ا ْﻟﺂ‬

5. " There is nothing but disgrace

In this world, and in the world
To some, an exceeding torment."
(Surah 16: 114)

75
 ْ ‫ "ﻣَ ْﻦ ﻛَﻔَﺮَ ﺑِﺎﻟ ﱠﻠ ِﻪ ِﻣ ْﻦ ﺑَ ْﻌ ِﺪ إِﻳﻤَﺎ ِﻧ ِﻪ ِإﻟﱠﺎ ﻣَ ْﻦ ُأ ْﻛ ِﺮهَ وَﻗَ ْﻠُﺒ ُﻪ ُﻣ‬.5
‫ﻄﻤَِﺌ ﱞﻦ ﺑِﺎ ْﻟﺈِﻳﻤَﺎ ِن وَﻟَ ِﻜ ْﻦ ﻣَ ْﻦ ﺷَﺮَحَ ﺑِﺎ ْﻟ ُﻜ ْﻔ ِﺮ ﺻَ ْﺪرًا ﻓَﻌَﻠَـ ْﻴ ِﻬ ْﻢ ﻏَﻀَـﺐٌ ﻣِـﻦَ اﻟﻠﱠـ ِﻪ وَﻟَﻬُـ ْﻢ‬

.(106 ‫ﻋَﺬَابٌ ﻋَﻈِﻴﻢٌ" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﻨﺤﻞ اﻵﻳﺔ‬

4. “Any one who, after accepting

Faith in God, utter Unbelief, -
Except under compulsion,
His heart remaining firm
In Faith – but such as
Open their breast to Unbelief, -
On them is Wrath from God,
And theirs will be
A dreadful Penalty”.
(Surah 16: 106)

Inconsistency at word level is a correlative of synonymy. Synonyms are words that

have the same meaning, for example, "big" and "large". The Arabic word "‫ "ﻋـﺬاب‬/'aδaab/ is

rendered into "the Wrath", "the Penalty", "the Punishment" and "torment" in (1), (2), (3), and
(4) respectively. In those examples the idea of synonymy pops out each time we address the
issue of inconsistency.

Moreover, the idea of perfect synonymy in language is altogether rejected. Synonyms

might belong to different dialects or styles, have different emotive meanings, and are
collocationally restricted. In the Holy Quran, some linguists fairly convincingly argue that
there is no such thing as perfect or complete synonyms. To determine whether two words
are synonyms or not we need to jot down all the possible contexts in which the two words
might occur. This, however, is impossible. Therefore, using five different words as an
equivalent for the same word in the SL text is, to say the least, confusing and unacceptable
in an authoritative text like the Holy Quran and adds to the burden of understanding the
translated text. Stylistically speaking, synonyms are resorted to to avoid repetition but this,
however, does not fit here, again because of the Holy Quran being an authoritative text.

It can, however, be maintained that there are no real synonyms, that no two words
have exactly the same meaning. Indeed it would seem unlikely that two words with exactly
the same meaning would both survive in a language (Palmer 1976, 66).

The idea of synonymy in the Holy Quran has been a controversial issue that has not
yet been settled. Most Muslim scholars argue that there is no such thing as synonymy in the
Holy Quran. Every word in the Holy Quran communicates a message that no other word can
communicate.

76
 "But when a Muslim closely investigates the meanings of words in the Holy Quran,
he/she finds out that each single letter in the Holy Quran was chosen carefully. And there is
nothing called synonymy. Every word has a meaning that no other word can convey; even
though the two words resemble one another" (Sharawi 1993, 47. vol. 1).

Strictly speaking, the same concept throughout the text should be translated in the
same way; in other words, translation accuracy necessitates consistency. The translation of
a concept in more than one way conveys the assumption that the word has more than one
meaning which is contrary to the fact. This, however, does not negate the fact that a
translator, as Newmark (1987) puts it, cannot do without synonymy; he has to make do with
it as a compromise in order to translate more important segments of the text.

A synonymy is only appropriate where literal translation is not possible and because
the word is not important enough for componential analysis. Here economy precedes
accuracy (Newmark 1988, 84).

A synonym is resorted to when we do not have a word in the TL that conveys the
meaning perfectly. It should not in any way be a technique to avoid repetition in a text like
the Holy Quran because every word has a meaning that no other word can have. While a
translator may try to avoid repetition he/she becomes inconsistent in his/her translation of an
authoritative text like the Holy Quran. Consider the following examples:

.(143 ‫ "وَﻛَﺬَِﻟﻚَ ﺟَﻌَ ْﻠﻨَﺎ ُﻛ ْﻢ ُأ ﱠﻣﺔً وَﺳَﻄًﺎ" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﺒﻘﺮة اﻵﻳﺔ‬.1

1. “Thus have We made of you

An Ummat justly balanced.”
(Surah 2: 143)
.(110 ‫س" )ﺳﻮرة ال ﻋﻤﺮان اﻵﻳﺔ‬
ِ ‫ﺖ ﻟِﻠﻨﱠﺎ‬ ْ ‫ " ُﻛ ْﻨ ُﺘ ْﻢ ﺧَ ْﻴﺮَ ُأ ﱠﻣﺔٍ ُأ‬.2
ْ َ‫ﺧ ِﺮﺟ‬

2. "Ye are the best

Of peoples, evolved
From mankind,"
(Surah 3:110)
(92 ‫ﺣﺪَةً وَأَﻧَﺎ رَ ﱡﺑ ُﻜ ْﻢ ﻓَﺎ ْﻋُﺒﺪُو ِن" )ﺳﻮرة ااﻷﻧﺒﻴﺎء اﻵﻳﺔ‬
ِ ‫ "ِإ ﱠن ﻫَ ِﺬ ِه ُأ ﱠﻣ ُﺘ ُﻜ ْﻢ ُأ ﱠﻣﺔً وَا‬.3

3. “Verily, this Brotherhood

Of yours is a single Brotherhood,
And I am your Lord and cherisher: therefore
Serve Me (and no other).”
(Surah 21: 92)

77
 (141 ‫ﺴﺄَﻟُﻮنَ ﻋَﻤﱠﺎ ﻛَﺎﻧُﻮا ﻳَ ْﻌﻤَﻠُﻮنَ" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﺒﻘﺮة اﻵﻳﺔ‬
ْ ‫ﺖ وَﻟَ ُﻜ ْﻢ ﻣَﺎ ﻛَﺴَ ْﺒ ُﺘ ْﻢ وَﻟَﺎ ُﺗ‬ ْ َ‫ " ِﺗ ْﻠﻚَ ُأ ﱠﻣﺔٌ ﻗَ ْﺪ ﺧَﻠ‬.4
ْ َ‫ﺖ ﻟَﻬَﺎ ﻣَﺎ ﻛَﺴَﺒ‬

4. " That was a people that hath

Passed away. They shall reap
The fruit of what they did,
And ye of what they do
Of their merits”.
(Surah 2: 141)

.(18 ‫ "وَِإ ْن ُﺗﻜَ ﱢﺬﺑُﻮا ﻓَﻘَ ْﺪ ﻛَ ﱠﺬبَ ُأﻣَﻢٌ ِﻣ ْﻦ ﻗَ ْﺒ ِﻠ ُﻜ ْﻢ وَﻣَﺎ ﻋَﻠَﻰ اﻟ ﱠﺮﺳُﻮ ِل ِإﻟﱠﺎ ا ْﻟﺒَﻠَﺎ ُغ ا ْﻟ ُﻤﺒِﻴ ُﻦ" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﻌﻨﻜﺒﻮت اﻵﻳﺔ‬.5

5. “And if ye reject (the message),

So did generations before you:
And the duty of the apostle
Is only to preach publicly
(And clearly).”
(Surah 29: 18)
.(213 ‫ﺸﺮِﻳﻦَ وَ ُﻣ ْﻨ ِﺬرِﻳﻦَ" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﺒﻘﺮة اﻵﻳﺔ‬
‫ﺣﺪَةً ﻓَﺒَﻌَﺚَ اﻟ ﱠﻠ ُﻪ اﻟ ﱠﻨ ِﺒﻴﱢﻴﻦَ ُﻣﺒَ ﱢ‬ ُ ‫ "ﻛَﺎنَ اﻟﻨﱠﺎ‬.6
ِ ‫س ُأ ﱠﻣﺔً وَا‬

6. “Mankind was one single nation.

And Allah sent Messengers
With glad tidings and warnings.”
(Surah 2: 213)
.(48 ‫" )ﺳﻮرة اﻟﻤﺎﺋﺪة اﻵﻳﺔ‬.ً‫ﺣﺪَة‬
ِ ‫ "وَﻟَ ْﻮ ﺷَﺎءَ اﻟ ﱠﻠ ُﻪ ﻟَﺠَﻌَﻠَ ُﻜ ْﻢ ُأ ﱠﻣﺔً وَا‬.7

7. "If God had willed,

He would have made you
A single People,”
(Surah 5: 48)

In the above examples, the translator rendered the Arabic term “‫ ”أﻣـﺔ‬/ُummah/ in many

different ways. He transliterated it once (as in (1) above) and translated it in more than one
way as in (2), (3), (4), (5), (6) and (7) above. The term “ummat”, in (1) above, is a mere
transliteration. In (2) above, the term “brotherhood” is “a feeling of loyalty, an organization or
group of people.

However, the Arabic term “‫”أﻣـﺔ‬, in its general sense, simply means “nation”. In (5)

above, the term “‫”أﻣـﻢ‬, which is the plural form of “‫”أﻣـﺔ‬, is translated as “generations”. In (4) the

translator used the term "people" as an equivalent to nearly the same term "‫ "أﻣـﻢ‬in example

(5). Not to mention inconsistency, the translator used a more specific term "a hyponym" as

78
an equivalent to a superordinate when the TL has an equivalent superordinate which is
“nation” or "people". The translator confused the reader by giving many translations for the
same Arabic word. Examples (6) and (7) above are the clearest among the mistranslations.
The term “‫ ”أﻣﺔ‬has exactly the same meaning in the two examples.

In some cases the translator seems to be unaware of the meaning of the Arabic word
that has more than one meaning depending on the context in which it occurs. The term “‫”آﻳـﺎت‬

/?ayaat/ means “verses” of the Holy Quran or “signs”, “evidence” or “miracles”. In some
cases, it can mean all of the possible meanings it communicates. Consider the following
examples:

ِ ‫"وَِإذَا ُﺗ ْﺘﻠَﻰ ﻋَﻠَ ْﻴ ِﻬ ْﻢ آَﻳَﺎ ُﺗﻨَﺎ ﺑَ ﱢﻴﻨَﺎتٍ ﻗَﺎلَ اﱠﻟﺬِﻳﻦَ ﻟَﺎ ﻳَ ْﺮﺟُﻮنَ ِﻟﻘَﺎءَﻧَﺎ ا ْﺋ‬.1
‫ ﻏَ ْﻴ ِﺮ ﻫَﺬَا أَ ْو ﺑَ ﱢﺪ ْﻟ ُﻪ ُﻗ ْﻞ ﻣَﺎ ﻳَﻜُﻮ ُن ﻟِﻲ أَ ْن ُأﺑَ ﱢﺪﻟَ ُﻪ ِﻣ ْﻦ ِﺗ ْﻠﻘَﺎ ِء‬‫ﺖ ِﺑ ُﻘ ْﺮآَن‬

.(15 ‫" )ﺳﻮرة ﻳﻮﻧﺲ اﻵﻳﺔ‬.‫ ﻋَﻈِﻴﻢ‬‫ﺖ رَﺑﱢﻲ ﻋَﺬَابَ ﻳَ ْﻮم‬

ُ ‫ف ِإ ْن ﻋَﺼَ ْﻴ‬
ُ ‫ﻧَ ْﻔﺴِﻲ ِإ ْن أَ ﱠﺗ ِﺒ ُﻊ ِإﻟﱠﺎ ﻣَﺎ ﻳُﻮﺣَﻰ ِإﻟَ ﱠﻲ ِإﻧﱢﻲ أَﺧَﺎ‬

1. "But when Our Clear Signs

Are rehearsed unto them,
Those who rest not their hope
On their meeting with Us,
Say: "bring us a Quran
Other than this, or change this, …”
(Surah 10: 15)

In this example, the translator mistranslates the term “‫ ”آﻳـﺎت‬/?aayaat/ by rendering it as

“signs”. However, the context in which the word occurred makes it clear that it refers to the
“verses” of the Holy Quran. These “verses”, as mentioned in the verse itself, are rehearsed
or recited. More to the point, the unbelievers would say: "bring us a Quran other than this”. In
short, the context in which the term “‫ ”آﻳﺎت‬/?aayaat/ occurred makes it clear that it refers to the

verses of the Holy Quran not the “signs” or “miracles” of the prophets in spite of the fact that
the word lends itself to such a meaning, not in this context though. The translator translated
this word and similar occurrences thereof, including but not restricted to (1: 129; 2: 113; 10:
1; 2: 11), inaccurately and incorrectly.

.(1 ‫" )ﺳﻮرة ﻳﻮﻧﺲ اﻵﻳﺔ‬.‫ب ا ْﻟﺤَﻜِﻴ ِﻢ‬ ُ ‫ "اﻟﺮ ِﺗ ْﻠﻚَ آَﻳَﺎ‬.2
ِ ‫ت ا ْﻟ ِﻜﺘَﺎ‬

2. "A. L. R.
These are the Ayats
Of the Book of Wisdom”
(Surah 10:1)

79
.(11 ‫ )ﺳﻮرة آل ﻋﻤﺮان اﻵﻳﺔ‬.‫ب‬ ِ ‫ "ﻛَﺪَ ْأ‬.3
ِ ‫ب آَ ِل ِﻓ ْﺮﻋَ ْﻮنَ وَاﱠﻟﺬِﻳﻦَ ِﻣ ْﻦ ﻗَ ْﺒ ِﻠ ِﻬ ْﻢ ﻛَ ﱠﺬﺑُﻮا ِﺑﺂَﻳَﺎ ِﺗﻨَﺎ ﻓَﺄَﺧَﺬَ ُﻫ ُﻢ اﻟ ﱠﻠ ُﻪ ِﺑ ُﺬﻧُﻮ ِﺑ ِﻬ ْﻢ وَاﻟ ﱠﻠ ُﻪ ﺷَﺪِﻳ ُﺪ ا ْﻟ ِﻌﻘَﺎ‬

3. “Their plight will be

No better than that
Of the people of Pharaoh,
And their predecessors:
They denied our Signs.
And God called them to account
For their sins.
For God is strict
In Punishment.”
(Surah 3: 11)

In this example, the translator argues that the term “‫ ”آﻳﺎت‬/?aayaat/ here means signs

or verses of the Holy Quran at the same time. Here, as the translator suggests, both
meanings are to be understood. So he transliterates the term because it means “signs” or
“verses”. What we understand is that each time the term “‫ ”آﻳﺎت‬/?ayaat/ has the two meanings

it should be transliterated to maintain consistency in the translation, the thing that the
translator does not do. Ali uses the term “signs” to mean “verses” as in (1) above, used the
term “signs” to mean “miracles or evidence” as in (3) above and above all he unjustifiably
transliterated the same term in (2) above. Is the translator consistent in his approach? Of
course, not.

The researcher, however, understands that “‫ ”آﻳـﺎت‬/?aayaat/ in this particular context, in

(1) above, exclusively refers to the verses of the Holy Quran. In the verses of the Holy
Quran, we are told about different kinds of miracles or evidence brought by many prophets.
In (3) above, the people of Pharaoh and their predecessors denied the “Signs” of Allah. It is
historically and ideologically known to Muslims, Christians and Jews that Moses came to
Pharaoh with miracles and signs not verses (like The Holy Quran or The Holy Book). The
Torah, however, was sent to the people of Israel not to Pharaoh.

Conclusion:
This paper has investigated the problems and semantic issues related to nouns that
Ali in his translation of the meanings of the Holy Quran tackled but not successfully. It was
found out that those problems can be traced back to at least four reasons: the translator
used synonyms, transliterated words that have straightforward equivalrnts, and translated
words that needed translation. Again, the paper should not be looked at as an attempt to
undermine the great job done by Ali but a modest contribution to improve the translation.

80
Notes:

1. There is more than one publication (or version) of the same translation done by Ali with
additions and omissions. The translation adopted by the researcher is the one cited in
the bibliography.
2. The examples discussed in the paper do not exhaust all the nouns that have problems
but sample cases to highlight the problem.
3. The paper should not, in any way, be looked at as an undermining of the wonderful job
done by Abdullah Yusuf Ali but a modest contribution to improve the translation.

81
 ‫ﺑﻌﺾ اﳌﺸﻜﻼت اﳌﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺑﱰﺟﻤﺔ اﻷﺳﻤﺎء ﻋﻨﺪ ﻋﺒﺪاﷲ ﻳﻮﺳﻒ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺘﻪ ﳌﻌﺎﻧﻲ اﻟﻘﺮآن اﻟﻜﺮﻳﻢ‬

‫ﻋﺪﻧﺎن أﺑﻮ ﻣﺤﻔﻮظ‬

‫ﻣﻠﺨﺺ‬

‫ﺗﻬﺪف ﻫﺬه اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ إﻟﻰ إﻟﻘﺎء اﻟﻀﻮء ﻋﻠﻰ ﺑﻌﺾ اﻟﻤﺸﻜﻼت اﻟﺪﻻﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺑﺘﺮﺟﻤﺔ اﻷﺳﻤﺎء ﻋﻨﺪ ﻋﺒﺪاﻟﻠﻪ ﻳﻮﺳﻒ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻓﻲ‬

‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺘﻪ ﻟﻤﻌﺎﻧﻲ اﻟﻘﺮآن اﻟﻜﺮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺣﻴﺚ أﻧّﻪ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻮﻓﻖ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺗﺎم ﺑﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ ﻫﺬه اﻟﻤﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﺑﻨﺠﺎح‪ .‬وﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺠﻬﺪ اﻟﻜﺒﻴﺮ‬

‫واﻟﺠﻠﻴﻞ اﻟﺬي ﺑﺬﻟﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺘﻪ ﻟﻠﻘﺮآن‪ ،‬وﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﻧﺠﺎﺣﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻌﻈﻢ اﻟﺤﺎﻻت‪ ،‬إﻻ أﻧﻪ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻮﻓﻖ ﻓﻲ ﺑﻌﺾ اﻟﺤﺎﻻت اﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ‬

‫ﺑﺪﻻﻟﺔ ﺑﻌﺾ اﻷﺳﻤﺎء‪ .‬وﺗﻌﺘﺒﺮ ﻫﺬه اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ ﻣﺤﺎوﻟﺔ ﻣﺘﻮاﺿﻌﺔ ﻟﺮأب ﻫﺬا اﻟﺼﺪع ﺑﺘﻘﺪﻳﻢ ﻣﻘﺘﺮﺣﺎت ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ‪ .‬وﻫﺬا اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ‬

‫إﻻ اﺿﺎﻓﺔ ﻣﺘﻮاﺿﻌﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺠﻬﺪ اﻟﺠﻠﻴﻞ اﻟﺬي ﻗﺪﻣﻪ ﻋﺒﺪاﻟﻠﻪ ﻳﻮﺳﻒ ﻋﻠﻲ‪.‬‬

‫ﻛﻠﻤﺎت ﻣﻔﺘﺎﺣﻴﺔ‪ :‬اﻟﻘﺮآن اﻟﻜﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬اﻟﺘﺮادف‪ ،‬اﻷﺳﻤﺎء‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﻘﺎﺑﻞ اﻟﻠﻔﻈﻲ‪ ،‬ﻋﺪم اﻹﻧﺴﺠﺎم‪ ،‬اﻟﻠﻔﻆ اﻟﻌﺎم‪ ،‬اﻟﻠﻔﻆ اﻟﺨﺎص‪ ،‬اﻟﺘﺮﺟﻤﺔ‬

‫اﻟﻜﺘﺎﺑﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻔﻆ‪.‬‬

‫‪82‬‬
References

Ali, Abdullah. (Undated). The Holy Quran. Beirut. Dar Al - Arabia.

Al-Kharabsheh, Aladdin and Al-Azzam, Bakri. 2008. "Translating the invisible in the Qur`an".
Babel 54:1, 1-18.

Al-Salem, Reem. 2008. The Translation of Metonymy in the Holy Qur`an. A Comparative,
Analytical Study. Doctoral Dissertation. King Saud University. Riyadh.

Arberry, Arthur. 1955. The Quran Interpreted. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.

Bakhtiar, Laleh. 2008. The Sublime Quran www.sublimequran.org.

Baker, Mona. 1992. In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. Routledge: London and
New York.

Dawood, Nessim. 1986. The Quran, Translated with Notes. Penguin books.

Farghal, Mohammed. 1991. “Evaluativeness Parameter and the Translator from English into
Arabic and Vice Versa". Babel 37(3): 138-151.

Hurford, James and Heasley, Brendan. 1983. Semantics: a coursebook. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Newmark, Peter. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd.

Palmer, Frank. 1976. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pickthall, Mohammed. (Undated). The Meaning of the Glorious Kuran. Universal Book Stall:
New Delhi.

Sharawi, Mitwali. 1993. Mu`jizat Al Qura`n Al Kareem, vol1.

83