Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.691051
Title: Identifying causes of mistranslation of Syrian political discourse : a contrastive Arabic-English analysis of interviews by the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad
Author: Ibrahim, Majd Yousif
ISNI:       0000 0004 5916 494X
Awarding Body: Durham University
Current Institution: Durham University
Date of Award: 2015
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Thesis embargoed until 31 Jul 2018
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
This research investigates the general causes of mistranslation of Syrian political discourse and in particular the causes that lead to pragmatic failure in translation. It starts by highlighting the key concepts in major theories of translation, including the review of the importance of pragmatics for translation. Next, it moves to highlight the necessity of exploring the importance of pragmatic translation equivalence in bridging the gap between the source text (ST) and the target text (TT). It also clarifies pragmatic failure in translation, which could be classified as pragma-linguistic failure, or socio-pragmatic failure or both, and then reviews the translation differences between Arabic ST and TT(s). The source of the research data was four interviews by the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The four interviews together with their official and unofficial translations were presented in a questionnaire format to the research participants in a comparable manner, so that the contrastive research could be conducted. Each three sentences, the Arabic ST and the TTs, were put in a table designed to perform the contrastive analysis and collect the data necessary for answering the research questions. The questionnaire data was collected and analysed and the results of analysis reveal that the observed mistranslations in the unofficial TT (70.14%) were more than those observed in the official TT (29.85%). Out of these percentages 79.84% of the unofficial mistranslations caused pragmatic failure. The causes for these mistranslations were grammatical (7.75%), semantic (20.93%), culture-related (22.48%) and the other deviations under the previous three types together (28.68%). 20.15% of the official mistranslations caused pragmatic failure. The causes for these mistranslations were grammatical (0%), semantic (11.24%), culture-related (0%) and the other deviations under the previous three types together (8.91%). Further research in the light of findings in this research has been suggested.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.691051  DOI: Not available
Share: