الفهرس 
Translation: Theories, Strategies and AnalysisOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 207 |  |  |
| | | from | 207 | | |
Abstract
The main focus of this thesis is to make a comparative study between the
dialogue in Naguib Mahfouz’s The Thief and the Dogs and its English
translation. The Thief and the Dogs (1961) was translated by Trevor Le
Gassick and M.M. Badawi and revised by John Rodenbeck in 1984. The aim of the thesis is to elucidate through a comparative analysis, the
relation between the Arabic dialogic extracts and their English counterparts
in light of the differences between the two languages. It tries to show how
the translators of The Thief and the Dogs deal with its stylistic features and to manifest to what extent they keep or violate these features. The first chapter paves the way to the rest of the study as it firstly demonstrates how Arabic, as any other language, can be possibly translated with the average
loss found in any other translated works. It consists of three parts: translation
theories, involvement strategies (ellipsis, repetition, parallelism, imagery,
and etc.), and an illustrative analysis focusing on violating involvement
strategies in the translation.
The second chapter firstly tries to present how Mahfouz proficiently
intermingles voices in the novel particularly through the outstanding use of the stream of consciousness of Said Mahran showing the impact of this
plurality of voices on the source reader. Secondly, it reveals how the
translators sometimes fail to realize the importance of this technique in the
source text and how this undoubtedly reduces the involving effect on the
target reader. In the third chapter, the thesis focuses on how Mahfouz deliberately inserts his Egyptian clues within Modern Standard Arabic dialogues to enable his reader to be fully aware of the social background of his
characters. Having some clues, the source readers do not face any problem
in identifying the social rank of the illiterate characters such as Said Mahran, Bayaza, Tarzan, Nur, and Ilish. This final chapter, likewise, concludes that through overlooking such helpful clues, the translation may sometimes be
perplexing for the target reader particularly when there are no clues
employed to distinguish such illiterate characters.