الفهرس 
صفحة العنوانOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 351 |  |  |
| | | from | 351 | | |
Abstract
Translation of the Quran is a hard task, not everyone is qualified for it. According to Gutt (1991), the translation process has to be ’’ based on the fact that the output will be an interpretation of underlying meanings of the Quran rather than a substitution for the original text or ST; it is vital that a distinction is made between the Quran and translated Quran’’(p. 125).The Glorious Quran has been translated dozens of times into English. Each interpretation represents one person’s understanding of the text, each is different from the others. Therefore, the translation of the Quran is an aid to understand the Quran but, it is not the Quran itself. According to Robinson (1996), Quran translators often translate an Arabic word or phrase in a variety of different ways, which makes it difficult for the reader ’’ to appreciate the structural unity of individual Suras and of the Quran as a whole’’(p .2). Robinson (1996) also confirms that much is lost when the Quran is encountered in Translation (p. 3). For him ’’none of the translation is entirely satisfactory’’(p. 4). Goldberg (1981) wonders if ”it is difficult to translate the human word; then how can one possibly translate the divine word?”(p.vi). He also asks how could one translate ”words which have distinct connotations in one language, that do not exist in another”(p.9).
Most translators claim that any translation of the Quran is only scratching the surface of the multi-layered Quranic meanings. This is also supported by Irving (1985) who believes that any accurate translation is really a tafsir, i.e., an exegesis or commentary written in the target language and also asserts that ’’the translation of the Quran literally is impossible’’ (ibid, p. xxiv). Akbar (1978) rightly observes that no translation, however good it may be, can ever take the place of the original Quran, which is its Arabic text. For him, it is difficult to transfer accurately into English every shade of meaning that is contained in the Arabic word of the Quran. For this very reason, he supports the use of the explanatory notes in the Quran translation. Richardson (1991) observes that, in his attempt to translate the Quran the structure, the lengths of verses, the external and internal rhymes and assonances of the Quranic verses were far more complex than he had believed (p. xv). Arberry (1998) mentions that the rhythm of the Quran is ’’so characteristic, so powerful, so highly emotive, any version whatsoever is bound in the nature of things to be but a poor copy of glittering splendor of the original ’’(p. 24). Since the purpose of translation is that people should understand the message, a translation which does not achieve this purpose is worthless. The Quran translator needs to have a sound awareness of translation and also ’’ needs to provide an informative rendering with the same ease and pleasure, the same interest and enjoyment that the original text has’’ (Savory ,1957, p. 52). So, the target text has ’’to affect and touch the heart of its target audience in the same way the original affects its source reader’’ (Tytler, 1980, p. 790).
. Context of the Problem2
The foregrounding strategy that moves constituents of verbal sentences to initial positions is more frequent in Arabic than in English. The types of structure that front elements to initial position in English sentences are only topicalization and passivization. The Glorious Quranic text, on the other hand, has at least six operations that can foreground elements to initial positions. It implies that this strategy serves more rhetorical functions in the Arabic discourse.