Assessing the translation of the Political Ideology in Ahmed Matar's Poetry into English
The process of translating political poetry is a challenging task because it connects between two approaches: literary translation and discourse analysis. Literary translation suggests procedures and strategies which can be helpful means to deal with the form and the content of the poem as a piece of literary text which has aesthetic and creative values that need to capture the interest of the translator. Whereas discourse analysis deals with the ideological content and the process of diagnosing the political ideology of the poet in order to convey it into the target text faithfully. That means, translator must make a balance between the aesthetic values, on the one hand, and the ideological content of the political poem, on the other hand, to fulfill a satisfactory rendition that can meet with creativity of the original poem.
This paper suggests a number of strategies and procedures that can be adopted to face the obstacles that may face the translator through translating such kind of complicated genre. Moreover, the paper also suggests two models of assessments to diagnose the political ideology in the poem: The first model belongs to Van dijk which is dedicated mainly for analyzing political ideology, whereas the second model is House's model which is dedicated for translation assessment in general; but through this research, house's model is driven into the area of political ideology analysis to support the and confirm the results of ideological assessment besides its main function as translation assessment.
• Backer, M. (2001) In Other words: a course book on Translation. London, New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
• Baker,P. & Ellece, S. (2011) Key Terms in Discourse Analysis. London, New York: Continuum International Publishing group (C.I.P.G.).
• Burr, V. (1995) An Introduction to Social Constructionism. Florence, KY, USA: Taylor & Francis, Routledge.
• Colston, H. & Gibbs, R. (2002) Are Irony and Metaphor Understood Differently? Metaphor and Symbol: Vol. 17. London: Taylor & Francis Group.
• Cruse, D. A. (1986) Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: CUP.
• Cuddon, J.A. (2013) Literary Terms and Literary Theory. 5th edition. Revised by Habib, M.A. R. UK, Oxford: Wiley- Blackwell.
• Farhan, K., Athil (2017) Ideological manipulation in the Translation of Political Discourse: A study of Presidential Speeches after the Arab Spring based on Corpora and Critical Discourse Analysis. Published Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Surrey.
• Firth, J. R. (1957). Papers in Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Foucault, M. (1972) The Archaeology of Knowledge and Discourse on Language (translated from the French to English). New York: Pantheon Books.
• Hopper, P. J. & Thompson, S. A. (1980) Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse. Washington: Linguistic Society of America.
• Louw, B. (1993) Irony in the Text or Insincerity in the writer? Diagnostic Political of Semantic Prosodies. In Baker, M., Francis, G. & Tognini-Bonelli, E. (eds.), Text and technology: In Honor of John Sinchair. Amsterdam: Benjamins., pp.157-176.
• Munday, J. (2012) Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications. 3rd edition. London, New York: Routledge, Taylor& Francis Group.
• Newmark, P. (1987) A Textbook of Translation. UK\Hemel Hempstesd: Prentice- Hall International.
• Quirk, R. & Greenbaum,S. (eds.) (1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
• Ritchie, L. David (2013) Metaphor: Key Topic in Semantics and Pragmatics. USA: Cambridge University Press, New York.
• Saeed, J. I. (2009) Semantics. 3rd edition. UK: Wiley- Blackwell.
• Simpson, P. (1993) Language, Ideology and Point of View. London, New York: Routledge.
• Stubbs, M. (1983) Discourse Analysis: The sociolinguistic Analysis of National Language. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Stubbs, M. (1996) Text and Corpus Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Stubbs, M. (2001) Words and Phases: Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell.