• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION

Dalam dokumen The Problematics of Quranic Homonyms: (Halaman 58-64)

I. INTRODUCTION: HOMONYMS AND OTHER COGNATES

I.III. Research questions

I.Ⅳ. Scope and limitations of the study

5. CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION

57

58 Dawood's statement informs his readers that he has provided explanatory footnotes in order to avoid turning the text into an interpretation rather than a translation. This could have been improved by adding possible meanings of homonymous terms so as to lessen the probability of delivering the reader a different message than the intended one. Adopting this commitment would not probably be considered a violation of the rules he has set for himself, in that his translation is dedicated to general English readers rather than being a complex translation. Moreover, the researcher suggests that homonyms should be pointed at and studied closely in translation and Islamic studies departments.

Having examined four translations of a selected number of homonyms, we can safely conclude that the translation by King Fahd Complex seems to be occasionally more sensitive to the other meanings of the homonyms in question than the other translations.

Obviously, this is the result of the approach followed by the Complex, which relies neither on a single translation nor a single translator to take care of this extremely sensitive task.

The lesson to be learned from all of this is that, with Quranic homonyms, which are always a source of ambiguity, maximum care must be taken in order to approximate the original message. Procedurally, the inclusion of paratexts, such as footnotes, detailed annotations, or parenthetical interpolations is a recommended corrective measure.

Further research should be done on other samples of Quran homonyms. Studies on hermeneutics in the Quran will certainly add more knowledge for translators and all of those interested in the field. Further studies on polysemy and ambiguity in the Holy Quran will be instrumental, as they will be considered eye-openers for translators and all of those

59 working in the field of translation. Also important is the vital role of inter-textuality, which might be linked to similar researches and studies in the same area of interest.

60

REFERENCES

Abedelrazq, Y. I. (2014). Problems of Translating Homonymy in The Glorious Quran: A

Comparative Analytical Study. Amman, Jordan: Faculty of Arts and Science, Middle East University for Graduate Studies.

Abu-Mahfouz, A. (2011). Some Issues in Translating Nouns in Abdullah Yusuf Ali's Translation of the Meanings of the Holy Quran. Jordan Journal of Modern Languages and Literature , 65-83.

Aldahesh, A. Y. (2014). (Un)Translatability of the Qur’ān:A Theoretical Perspective. Sydney:

School of Languages and Cultures, Department of Arabic Language and Cultures,The University of Sydney.

Al-Dulaimy, A. (2017, 4 10). Homonyms. Retrieved from University of Babylon:

http://humanities.uobabylon.edu.iq/lecture_file.aspx?fid=10&lcid=64630

Al-Hadithi, S. (2002). Multiplicity of Meaning in English-Into-Arabic. Baghdad: Al-Mustansiriyah University.

Al-Jabari, R. (2008 ). Reasons for the Possible Incomprehensibility of Some Verses of Three Translations of the Meaning of the Holy Quran into English. Salford: European Studies Research Institute (ESRI).

Al-Khafaji, A. (1998). Multiple Juxtaposition in Quranic Translation Assesment. Journal of the College of Teachers, 11.

alQinai, J. (2012). Convergence and divergence in the Interpretation of QuranicPolysemy and Lexical Recurrence. Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 83-109.

Arsenteva, E., Born, D., Fussel, G., & Polkina, G. (2015). English Lexicology. Kazan: Naberezhnye Chelny: Naberezhnye Chelny Institute of Social-Pedagogical Technologies and Resources.

Baldinger, K. (1980). Semantic Theory: Towards a Modern Semantics. Hoboken, New Jersey:

Wiley-Blackwell Publishing.

Berg, H. (2004). Polysemy in the Qurʾān. Encyclopaedia of the Qur’ān.

Berg, H. (Georgetown University, Washington DC). Polysemy in the Qurʾān,. Retrieved from Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān:

https://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/encyclopaedia-of-the-quran/*- EQCOM_00150

Clark: (1986). Marmaduke Pickthall: British Muslim. London: Quartet.

Complex, K. F. (n.d.). Establishment of the Complex and Its Inauguration. Retrieved from King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Quran :

http://quran.qurancomplex.gov.sa/Display.asp?section=7&l=eng&f=nobza01&trans=

61 Complex, K. F. (n.d.). Frequently Asked Questions, Translations. Retrieved from King Fahd

Complex For The Printing Of The Holy Quran:

http://quran.qurancomplex.gov.sa/Display.asp?section=5&l=eng&f=faqs_eng007&trans

=

Crystal, D. (2008). Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Hoboken, New Jersey: BLACKWELL PUBLISHING.

Daniel Born, E. A. (2016, 03 10). English Lexicology. Retrieved from Stud files:

https://studfiles.net/preview/5809158/#2

Dawood, N. J. (2015). The Koran. City of Westminster, London, England: Penguin Classics;

Revised edition.

Dictionary, O. E. (2001-2019). homonym (n.). Retrieved from Online Etymology Dictionary:

https://www.etymonline.com/word/homonym#etymonline_v_12131

El-Khatib, A. (2010). Abdullah Yusuf Ali: A Study of His Life and Translation. Journal of Quranic Studies, 186-187.

El-Zeiny, I. (2009). The Translation of Quranic Ambiguity: A Linguistic Contrastive Study. 3rd Languages and Translatioon Conference & Exhibition on Translation and Arabization in Saudi Arabia (pp. 33-57). Riyadh: Saudi Association of Languages & Translation.

Finch, G. (2000). Linguistic Terms and Concepts. Palgrave MacMillan: New York.

Fück, J. (2007). Ibn Manẓūr. Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition.

Galadari, A. (2013). The Role if Intertextual Polysemy in Quranic Exegesis. International Journal on Quranic Research (IJQR), 6-7.

George, Y. (1996). The Study of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gilliot, C. (2002). Exegesis of the Qurʾān: Classical and Medieval. Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān.

Hatim, B., & Munday, J. (2004). Translation: An Advanced Resource Book. London: Psychology Press.

Haywood, J. A. (1998, July 20). Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad ibn ʿUmar ibn al-Ḥusayn Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī. Retrieved from Encyclopedia Britannica:

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Fakhr-ad-Din-ar-Razi

Hobbs, J. B. (1999). Homophones and Homographs: An American Dictionary. Jefferson, NC:

McFarland & Company.

Hussain, S. (2014, August 4). Mukhtār al-Ṣiḥāḥ. Retrieved from https://www.arabic- studio.com/mukhtar-al-%E1%B9%A3i%E1%B8%A5a%E1%B8%A5/

Kaddouri , N., & Shaher, W. (2012). Demonstrating Homonymy in English and Arabic as an Ambiguous Lexeme. Tikrit University Journal for Humanities, 25-48.

62 Kidwai, A. (2017). Marmaduke Pickthall: Islam and the Modern World. Boston: Brill.

Lane, E. W. (1874). The Arabic-English Lexicon of W. E. Lane. F. Ungar Publishing Company.

Leech, G. (1976). Semantics. Gretna, Louisiana: Pelican Publishing.

Löbner, S. (2002). Understanding Semantics. London: Arnold Publishers.

Marmaduke: M. (1930). The Meanings Of The Glorious Quran. London: KNOPF DOUBLEDAY PUBLISHING GROUP.

N.J. Dawood Obituary. (2014, 12 11). Retrieved from The Telegraph:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/11287854/NJ-Dawood-obituary.html Newmark: (1988). A Textbook of Translation. New York: Prentice-Hall International.

Newmark: (1998). More Paragraphs on Translation. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Nida, E., & Taber, C. (1969). The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden, Netherlands: E.J.

Brill.

Pedro, R. d. (1999). The Translatability of Texts: A Historical Overview. Meta, 546–559.

Rahman, F. (1988). Translating the Quran. Religion & Literature, 23-30.

Ruano, D. S. (2016). Al-Qurṭubī. Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān.

Taft, R. (1981). The Role and Personality of the Mediator. The Mediating Person: Bridges between Cultures, 53-88.

Ullah, K. (2015). Al-Zamakhsharī. Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān.

Waines, D. (2009, May 13). Abū Jaʿfar Muḥammad ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī. Retrieved from Encyclopedia Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/biography/al-Tabari Youzi, L. (2016). On the Subjectivity of the Translator. Nanjing City.

Zinira, M. (2010). Critique on Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s methods of Quranic commentary (a critical study of the Holy Quran, text, translation and commentary). IAIN Walisongo.

( .يربطلا ريرج نبا .)1994

.نآرقلا يآ ليوأت نع نايبلا عماج .ةلاسرلا ةسسؤم :توريب

( .يبطرقلا نيدلا سمش يجرزخلا يراصنلأا حرف نب ركب يبأ نب دمحأ نب دمحم الله دبع وبأ .)1964

ماكحلأ عماجلا ريسفت

نآرقلا . .ةيرصملا بتكلا راد :ةرهاقلا

( .يرشخمزلا الله راج مساقلا يبأ .)2009

.ليوأتلا هوجو يف ليواقلأا نويعو ليزنتلا قئاقح نع فاشكلا ريسفت راد :توريب

.ةفرعملا ا .ف ,يزارلا. (2010). ريبكلا ريسفتلا وأ بيغلا حيتافم ريسفت. توريب: يبرعلا ثارتلا ءايحإ راد.

إ نب يدولوملا ( .زيزع ليعامس

.)2014 . يزيلجنإ يبرع مجعمل ديهمتو ةسارد :ميركلا نآرقلا يناعم ةمجرتو يظفللا كرتشملا

Dalam dokumen The Problematics of Quranic Homonyms: (Halaman 58-64)

Dokumen terkait