I 
 

 
 

  

 

 

 

 

Cultural Consistency in the Literary 

Translation of the Novel Awlaadu Haaratena 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By 

Salam Hussam Muhammad Daraghmeh 

 

 

 

 

Supervisor 

Dr. Fayez Aqel 

 

Co-Supervisor 

Dr. Ayman Nazzal 

 
 

 

 

This Thesis is Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the 

Requirements of the Master Degree of Applied Linguistics 

and Translation, Faculty of Graduate Studies, An-Najah 

National University, Nablus, Palestine. 

2016 

An-Najah National University 

Faculty of Graduate Studies  
 





III 

Dedication 

With deepest and warmest gratitude, 

To my mother, to whom I owe everything and who made it all possible, 

To my aunt‟s memory, 

To all my teachers, 

I dedicate this thesis. 

 

  



IV 
 

Acknowledgments 

In the name of Allah, all praise and thanks be to Allah, the Most 

Merciful, the Most Compassionate, and all blessings and peace be upon our 

Master Prophet Muhammad, his kin and kith. 

I‟m most grateful to Dr. Fayez Aqel my supervisor for his patience, 

support, and guidance through the process of writing this thesis. It was 

really an honor to have been one of his students and for him to agree to 

supervise my thesis. 

I'm also grateful to Dr. Ayman Nazzal for his invaluable comments 

and support. Many special thanks are also due to the members of 

examining committee, Dr. Muhammad Thawabteh and Dr. Ekrema Shehab, 

for their fruitful comments and feedback which contributed to the 

improvement of this work. 

Finally, I would like to thank members of my family: my uncle 

Mamoun and siblings Samar, Karim, and Ameer, who each gave me their 

love and support.  

To each one of the above, I extend my deepest appreciation. 

 

  





VI 
 

Table of Contents 

Page Subject No. 
III Dedication  

IV Acknowledgements  

V Declaration  

VI Table of Contents  

VIII List of Tables  

IX Abbreviations  

X Abstract  

XII Definitions of Key Terms  

Chapter One : Introduction 

1 Introduction:  1.1 

3 Statement of the Problem 1.2 

3 Purpose of the Study 1.3 

4 Significance of the Study  1.4 

5 Research Questions 1.5 

5 Hypothesis 1.6 

6 Limitations of the Study 1.7 

6 The Structure of the Study 1.8 

8 Theoretical Framework 1.9 

Chapter Two : Review of Related Literature 

9 Introduction 2.1 

10 Linguistic Theories of Translation 2.2 

10 Problems of Equivalence 2.2.1 

14 Functional Approach 2.3. 

15 Cultural Turn in Translation Studies 2.4. 

16 Translation and Culture 2.4.1 

19 The Translation of Literature 2.5. 

21 Ideology 2.6. 

23 Translation as an Ideology Laden Activity 2.6.1 

27 Strategies of Translation 2.7. 

30 The Master Discourse of Translation from Arabic 2.8. 

34 Studies Related to the Translation of CSIs and RH 2.9 

Chapter Three: Methodology 

40 Introduction 3.1 

41 Data Collection  3.2 

42 Research Methods 3.3 



VII 
 

Page Subject No. 

43 Corpus-Based Translation Studies 3.3.1 

43 Methods of Collecting and Categorizing Data 3.4 

Chapter Four: Data Analysis and Findings 

45 Introduction 4.1 

45 Culture-Specific Items   4.2 

48 Style as a Culture-Specific Item 4.2.1 

49 Ivir‟s Strategies: 4.3 

54 Venuti‟s Domestication versus Foreignization 4.4 

57 Corpus Analysis and Results 4.5 

84 Factors Affecting the Translators‟ Behavior at the 

Textual Level 

4.6 

Chapter Five: Conclusions and Recommendations 

89 Introduction 5.1 

90 Conclusions 5.2 

94 Recommendations 5.3 

96 References  

108 Appendix  

  الملخص ب
 

  



VIII 
 

List of Tables 

Page Title Table No. 

58 Frequency and Percentage of the Strategies Applied 

to the Translation of Children of Gebelawi by Philip 

Stewart 

Table 4.1 

59 Sample Extracted from Children of Gebelawi Table  4.2 

61 Frequency and Percentage of the Strategies Applied 

to the Translation of Children of the Alley by Peter 

Theroux 

Table  4.3 

62 Sample Extracted from Children of the Alley Table 4.4 

66 Comparison between Philip Stewart and Peter 

Theroux‟s translation of CSIs 

Table 4.5 

 

  



IX 
 

Abbreviations 

SL SL 

TL TL 

ST Source Text 

TT Target Text 

CSIs Culture-Specific Items 

RH Retranslation Hypothesis 

 

  



X 
 

Cultural Consistency in the Literary 

Translation of the Novel Awlaadu Haaratena 

By 

Salam  Hussam Muhammad Daraghmeh 

Supervisors 

Dr: Fayez Aqel 

Dr: Ayman Nazzal 

Abstract 

This thesis investigates translators‟ practice in translating culture-

specific items (CSIs) in literary translation through analyzing, as a case 

study, the first English translation of Naguib Mahfouz‟s most controversial 

novel Awlaadu Haaratena as Children of Gebelawi by Philip Stewart and 

its retranslation entitled Children of the Alley by Peter Theroux . 

The translators‟ practice in translating CSIs was examined to 

determine whether they tend to use domestication or foreignization 

strategies of translation over time. This was done in order to investigate the 

validity of the Retranslation Hypothesis (RH) – the claim that “first 

translations of the literary text are more domesticating than the later 

retranslations of the same text” (Bensimon, 1990: ix). 

For this purpose, CSIs were first identified and classified based on 

Larson‟s (1984: 431) and Baker‟s (1992: 21) classification of cultural 

categories: clothes, food, terms of address (honorific titles which precede 

names; they are words that convey esteem or respect and are used when 

addressing or referring to a person), religious expressions, common 

expressions, activities, habits ,and others. Secondly, each item is examined 

to identify which one of Ivir‟s (1987) strategies was applied in its 



XI 
 

translation. Thirdly, the number of occurrences for each strategy is 

calculated and then grouped under Venuti‟s (1995) model of foreignization 

versus domestication. After that, the percentage of foreignization strategies, 

compared to those of domestication, is calculated for each translation. 

The findings of this study support the RH; they show that Philip 

Stewart (1981) applied domestication more than Peter Thoroux (1999) 

whose translation is more culturally consistent and closer to the original 

novel. The findings also demonstrate that retranslation responds to and is 

shaped by the socio-cultural forces of the literary field. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



XII 
 

Definition of Key Terms 

Culture: According to Larson (1984: 431) culture is “a complex of beliefs, 

attitudes, values, and rules which a group of people share”. 

Culture -specific items (CSIs):Baker defines (1992: 21) culture-specific 

items as a SL word which expresses “a concept which is totally unknown in 

the target culture. The concept in question may be abstract or concrete; it 

may relate to a religious belief, a social custom, or even a type of food.‟‟ 

Cultural consistency: According to Bandia (1993: 57), it is difficult to 

fully understand the cultural value systems embedded within a text. 

However, a competent translator must undertake the difficult task of 

uncovering all of the cultural content hidden within the text in order to 

preserve the full socio-cultural meaning of the source text in the translation. 

Cultural consistency in this study means to what extent translators deviate 

from a faithful representation of the source text culture in order to create a 

text readable for the target audience and consistent with the target culture. 

In this study, this will specifically measure whether translators of Awlaadu 

Haaratena translate CSIs from Arabic into English using the strategies of 

foreignization (which creates a more faithful but less intelligible 

representation) or domestication (which creates a less faithful but more 

intelligible representation), according to Venuti‟s (1995) model. Thus, a 

culturally consistent text makes greater use of domestication than 

foreignization. 



XIII 
 

Translation strategies: Baker (1998: 240) defines strategy of translation 

as the act of choosing a foreign text to be translated and then creating a 

method to translate it based on varied elements, including cultural, 

economic, and political elements. 

 

 

 

 



1 

Chapter One 

1.1. Introduction: 

One of the trickiest situations which translators encounter is 

translating culture-specific items in literary works. There are some cultural 

concepts, aspects, and ideas which are found in one language but never 

found in another language in the exact same way. Baker (1992: 21) refers 

to cultural concepts as “culture-specific items” (CSIs). The most difficult 

problem with translating CSIs found in the Source Text (ST), especially in 

literary translation, is finding the exact equivalents which transfer these 

cultural concepts successfully to the Target Language (TL). 

Since the days of Cicero and St. Jerome, there has been an argument 

over “word-for-word” translation and “sense-for-sense” translation 

strategies. This dispute has been expressed in many and varied ways 

through history. It is found in Nida‟s (1964) “formal” and “dynamic” 

equivalence, Newmark‟s (1981) “semantic” and “communicative” 

translation, House‟s (1997) “overt” and “covert” translation, and so on. 

Newmark (1981: 39) favors literal, word-for-word translation but 

supplies a qualification: “provided that equivalent effect is secured”. 

However, by that qualification, he points out a fundamental concept which 

concerns translation scholars: bridging the cultural gaps between ST and 

TT. Later on, particularly in the middle of the twentieth century, interest in 

the translator‟s attitude towards cultural dominance increased. This is 



2 
 

especially the case when there are significant differences between the 

cultural values and concepts of the ST and those of the target reader. The 

frequency of these instances raises a most important question: how should 

these foreign cultural values, or CSIs, be translated? 

Domestication and foreignization are the two strategies advocated by 

Lawrence Venuti (1995) for translating cultural elements. Domestication is 

the conveying of foreign text into the TL cultural values. This means that 

the translator does not include any enigmatic puzzling concepts. On the 

contrary, it is translation in a clear, fluent, and invisible style which is 

familiar to the reader to eliminate the foreignness of the text. On the other 

hand, foreignization means developing a translation method which 

highlights those foreign values that may be very different from the 

dominant cultural values of the TL. 

Literary translation is a complex activity. It involves a complicated 

network of varied practices, both social and cultural (Bush,1998: 127). The 

key factor in this activity is the translator who expresses a great amount of 

creativity during the whole process of translation (Lambert,1998: 130). The 

reason for this is the fact that “literary translators deal with cultures”. 

Literary texts are usually embedded in the culture of the nation, and the 

result is that they are often full of CSIs (Lander, 2001: 72).  

 

 



3 
 

1.2. Statement of the Problem: 

When culture is expressed in lexical expressions in a literary work, 

such as Naguib Mahfouz‟s novel Awlaadu Haaratena (1959), it mostly 

appears in form of CSIs. Because of the cultural distance, it is challenging 

to translate these elements, yet it is of real importance in the translation 

process. Translating items such as ياما تحت السواىي دواىي   or  مادح نفسو كذاب  

and other Arabic CSIs means, among other things, embracing the contrasts 

of domestication and foreignization. 

1.3. Purpose of the Study: 

This study aims to investigate the translators‟ behavior in dealing 

with CSIs in the translation of Mahfouz‟s Awlaadu Haaratena(1959). It 

was first translated into English by Philip Stewart in 1981 and entitled 

Children of Gebelawi. A retranslation was done by Peter Theroux in 1999 

called Children of the Alley. Both translations are examined in order to 

determine whether the prevalent strategy is domestication or foreignization 

and, consequently, which translation is closer to the source text (ST) 

culture. The study also examines the differences between the first 

translation and the retranslation. 

Finally, this study aims to investigate the validity of the RH which 

claims that the first translation of a text is more domesticating than the 

retranslation. This is often referred to in translation studies literature, but 

only in a casual manner, without looking at the issue in great detail. This 



4 
 

thesis takes a closer look at the hypothesis and compares its claims with the 

data from two different English translations of Mahfouz‟s novel Awlaadu 

Haaratena. It is suggested that many different factors, not just the order of 

appearance (the date of novel‟s publication), affect the profiles of these 

translations. 

In short, this study aims to identify the whys, whens, and hows of the 

retranslation of Naguib Mahfouz‟s most controversial novel, Awlaadu 

Haaratena. 

1.4. Significance of the Study: 

The significance of this study derives from the fact that it is the first 

study that compares the translators‟ behavior in translating CSIs in 

Mahfouz‟s Awlaadu Haaratena, comparing its first translation Children of 

Gebelawi by Philip Stewart (1981) to its retranslation Children of the Alley 

by Peter Theroux (1999). In addition, it is significant because it contributes 

to the enrichment of the studies on intercultural communication. 

Furthermore, it provides a theoretical background to the study of culture 

closeness and consistency between translation and retranslation. Finally, it 

helps to clarify methods that foreign translators use in bridging cultural 

gaps in translation. 

Above all, to the best of the researcher‟s knowledge, prior research 

has failed to adequately consider the RH through empirical research 

comparing translations and retranslations.  



5 
 

1.5. Research Questions: 

This study attempts to answer the following questions: 

1. What are the translation strategies the translators have employed in 

translating CSIs in Awlaadu Haaratena from Arabic into English? 

2. Are CSIs mostly foreignized or domesticated in the translation of 

Awlaadu Haaratena? 

3. Which translation is closer to the original novel style and culture? 

4. Do the results of the corpus support the RH? 

5. What are the reasons for the retranslation of Naguib Mahfouz‟s novel 

Awlaadu Haaratena (1959)? 

1.6. Hypothesis: 

Chesterman (2000: 23) notes that the so-called “Retranslation 

Hypothesis” is a descriptive hypothesis that can be formulated as follows: 

“Later translations (same ST, same TL) tend to be closer to the original 

than earlier ones”. Chesterman (2004: 8) afterwards abbreviated it to this 

definition: “later translations tend to be closer to the ST”. According to the 

RH, the first translation mostly uses domestication, while retranslations 

mostly rely upon foreignization. 

 

 



6 
 

1.7. Limitations of the Study: 

The limitation of the study is twofold. First of all, this study is a case 

study and is limited to Naguib Mahfouz‟s novel Awlaadu Haaratena and 

its first translation into Children of Gebelawi as well as its retranslation 

into Children of the Alley. The reason for choosing this novel is that 

Mahfouz addressed issues of culture-specific concern in this novel, so it is 

suitable for studying how he uses CSIs and how they are dealt with in 

translation. 

Secondly, this study addressed CSIs based on Larson‟s (1984: 431) 

and Baker‟s (1992: 21) classification of cultural categories. It is worth 

recalling that culture for Larson (1984: 431) is “a complex of beliefs, 

attitudes, values, and rules which a group of people share”. Similarly, 

Baker (1992: 21) defines culture-specific items in this way: “The SL word 

may express a concept which is totally unknown in the TC. The concept in 

question may be abstract or concrete; it may relate to a religious belief, a 

social custom, or even a type of food”. This study is limited to these 

classification schemes and does not consider the frameworks of other 

scholars. 

1.8. The Structure of the Study: 

The thesis is divided into five chapters. Chapter One consists of an 

introduction, statement of the problem, purpose of the study, significance 

of the study, research questions of the study, hypothesis, limitations, 



7 
 

structure of the study, and finally the adopted theoretical framework for 

this research. 

 In Chapter Two, the researcher presents a review of related literature. 

In this chapter, the researcher presents some theories and literature relevant 

to this research. The researcher also quotes previous studies in order to 

highlight salient points for this current study. 

Chapter Three addresses the thesis methodology. It consists of four 

sections. The first section is the introduction, which introduces the research 

methodology and methods. The second section lists the sources used for 

collecting the data for this study. The third section reveals the rationale 

behind adopting these types of research methods. The final section 

demonstrates the methods used for obtaining and categorizing the research 

data. 

In Chapter Four, the researcher presents the research data analysis 

and findings. In this chapter, the researcher also gives answers to the five 

research questions in light of the textual analysis and based on secondary 

research data.  

Chapter Five consists of conclusions and recommendations for future 

research. 

 

 



8 
 

1.9. Theoretical Framework: 

The theoretical framework of the present research is based on Ivir‟s 

(1987) model which proposed seven strategies for translation of cultural 

terms: literal translation, definition, borrowing, addition, lexical 

substitution, omission, and lexical creation. Ivir (1987: 37) notes that 

“combinations of procedures rather than single procedure are required for 

optimum transmission of cultural information (e.g. literal translation-and-

omission, literal translation-and-definition, borrowing-and-lexical 

substitution, etc.)‟‟. The theoretical framework also takes into account 

Lawrence Venuti‟s (1995) views of domestication and foreignization. 

 

  



9 
 

Chapter Two 

Review of Related Literature 

2.1. Introduction: 

This chapter is dedicated to explore the emergence of translation 

studies. The researcher will, selectively, review the different theoretical 

models. The review will tackle linguistic theories, the problem of 

equivalence, functional, and cultural approaches to translation, literary 

translation, ideology, and the master discourse of translation from Arabic . 

In addition the review will look at previous studies that discuss the RH and 

the problem of translating culture and CSIs in Naguib Mahfouz‟s novels.  

An investigation of these studies and their theoretical findings are 

necessary to provide sufficient background for any who wish to build upon 

this research in the future. The researcher has selected these areas to be 

analyzed and examined to establish a satisfactory background on the topic 

before embarking on any kind of analysis or study of the ST. 

This chapter is divided into two main parts: the first part is dedicated 

to examining the emergence of translation studies and the most prominent 

theoretical approaches to the translation of literature, particularly the 

different views regarding culture in literary translation from Arabic into 

English. The second part is dedicated to reviewing previous studies which 

discuss the problem of translating culture and CSIs in Naguib Mahfouz‟s 

novels as well as the RH. 



11 
 

2.2. Linguistic Theories of Translation: 

Translation is considered a language activity. It is looked at as a part 

of linguistics, and thus, it has to draw upon general linguistic theory. 

According to Catford, “any theory of translation must draw upon a theory 

of language – a general linguistic theory” (as cited in Fawcett, 1997: 1). 

Despite this, translation has always been a controversial activity. Although 

it has its approaches, theories and methods, it also has its problems. One of 

the old debates and problems is the issue of equivalence. 

2.2.1. Problems of Equivalence: 

Translation can be defined as exchanging textual material of one 

language, the SL, with what is considered equivalent to it in another 

language, the TL (Catford, 1965: 20). 

Roman Jakobson distinguishes between three kinds of translation: 

intralingual, interlingual, and intersemiotic. He describes intralingual as the 

translation between two written languages. The key issue of intralingual 

translation is the linguistic meaning and equivalence. Jakobson (1959:114) 

goes as far as pointing out that “there is ordinarily no full equivalent 

between code-units”. As an example, he explains how cheese in English is 

not identical to the Russian syr because the Russian code-unit does not 

include the concept of English cottage cheese.  

Interlingual translation, according to Jakobson, requires the 

translator to record a message from one source and to transmit it into 



11 
 

another, which means two equivalent messages but two different codes. 

Jakobson (1959:114) describes this as “substituting messages in one 

language not for separate code-units but for entire messages in some other 

language”. In Jakobson‟s opinion, the differences are cross-linguistic ones 

and centered on obligatory grammatical and lexical forms. This entails 

different code-units because they belong to different languages. 

Nida (1964: 159) on the other hand, describes two types of 

equivalence, formal and dynamic. Formal equivalence “focuses attention 

on the message itself, in both form and content”. This translation 

concentrates on correspondences such as poetry to poetry, concept to 

concept, and sentence to sentence. Nida calls this kind of translation a 

“gloss translation”, the purpose of which is to enable the reader to 

comprehend the SL context as much as possible (ibid). Dynamic 

equivalence, on the other hand, is based on equivalent effect, where the 

relationship between the reader and the message in the TL is the same as 

the relationship between the reader and the original message in the SL. As 

a prime example of this kind of equivalence, Nida quotes J.B. Philips‟ 

rendering of Romans 16:16, where the idea of “greeting with a holy kiss” is 

translated as “give one another a hearty handshake all round” (as cited in 

Bassnett, 2002: 34).  

Newmark deviates from Nida‟s concepts and asserts that the “gap 

between emphasis on SL and TL will always remain as the overriding 

problem in translation theory and practice” (Newmark, 1981: 38). 



12 
 

Newmark presents a solution to bridge the gap by replacing the old 

terms with semantic and communicative translation, which are in many 

ways similar to Nida‟s dynamic and formal equivalence, respectively. 

Newmark distinguishes between the communicative and semantic types of 

translation as follows: 

 “Communicative translation attempts to produce on its readers an 

effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the original. 

Semantic translation attempts to render, as closely as the semantic and 

syntactic structures of the second language allow, the exact contextual 

meaning of the original” (as cited in Munday, 2008: 44). 

Moreover, Catford (1965: 1) defines translation as “a process of 

substituting a text in one language for a text in another”. This means the 

replacement of SL meanings with receptor-language meanings. Catford 

distinguishes between formal correspondence and textual equivalence 

which Koller (1979) developed later on. 

Formal correspondence is when a TL category occupies, as nearly as 

possible, the same place in the economy of the TL as the SL category 

occupies in the economy of the SL. Textual equivalence, on the other hand, 

is when a TL item is identified with a certain SL item in a specific context. 

It is more concerned with specific ST-TT pairs while formal 

correspondence is more general and connects systems between the two 

languages. 



13 
 

Catford (1965: 27) makes a distinction between formal 

correspondence and what he calls “textual equivalence‟‟, but this does not 

mean a distinction between two approaches to translation. Formal 

correspondence is a matter of langue but textual equivalence is about 

parole; the actual linguistic behavior of individuals which may contrast 

with the linguistic system of a certain community. Formal correspondence, 

as already noted, is when a TL category occupies the same place in its 

language system as the same or another category occupies on the SL. They 

are either structure shifts like “John loves Mary”, which, if translated into 

Gaelic, will become “Is love at John on Mary”, or class shifts like the 

adjective in “medical student”, which, if translated into French, will 

become an adverbial phrase, “student medicine”. However, Catford is firm 

about one thing in translation, that is, whether formal correspondence or 

textual equivalence which may be achieved by translation shifts is used. 

We do not transfer meaning between two languages. Instead we find a TL 

expression which can have the same function as that of the SL and can 

linguistically represent that situation. Catford insists that two equivalent 

statements in SL and TL do not necessarily have the same meaning because 

different situational features will be verbalized in different ways, for 

instance, indicating that the speaker is a woman or expressing verbal 

respect. Catford‟s (1965: 52) definition of textual equivalence poses 

problems, and he is aware of that. The concept of sameness of situation, as 

he admits, is a difficult one, especially when very different cultures are 

involved.  



14 
 

2.3. Functional Approach: 

The functional approach considers translation as a communicative 

activity carried out by experts in intercultural communication. “The 

translator plays the role of text producer aiming at some communicative 

purpose‟‟ (Nord, 1997: 151). One cannot deny the role of Christine Nord, 

who is one of the supporters of the functionalist theory; she has many 

publications on what functionalist theory is and its connection with 

translation studies. Nord wholly agrees with Van Vermeer, who formulated 

the Skopos Theory. This theory considers function to be the main purpose 

of translation. Nord believes that a TT is always produced in a situation 

which differs from the circumstances that produced the ST in regards to 

time, place, and even medium. Thus the true meaning of a text may not be 

expressed precisely through linguistic means but only by understanding the 

surrounding conditions and circumstances of the situation in which the text 

was created. This approach depends on evaluating the function of a text in 

the TC to determine which translation method to use. Nord (1997: 92-93) 

suggests replacing equivalence-based approaches with a functional 

approach that depends on the suggestions in Skopos.  

Translators should not translate the ST according to the sender‟s 

intention alone; they also have to take into account its compatibility with 

the target situation. The functions in the target situation should be the same 

as the sender‟s intention, and the text should be written and the translated 



15 
 

words chosen in a way to achieve that. In addition, the code elements as 

well should be chosen so that the target effect matches the TT functions. 

2.4. Cultural Turn in Translation Studies: 

According to Bassnett and Lefevere (1990: 11), the cultural turn in 

translation studies means shifting from a focus entirely upon language to a 

focus on the interaction between culture and translation as well as the ways 

in which culture influences and affects translation. This redirects research 

towards the much broader problems of context, history, and tradition. 

The cultural turn is mainly associated with the work of Bassnett and 

Lefevere (1990). They state, “There is always a context in which the 

translation takes place, always a history from which a text emerges and into 

which a text is transposed translation as an activity is always doubly 

contextualized, since the text has a place in two cultures” (Bassnett & 

Lefevere, 1990: 11). Bassnett and Lefevere here do not separate translation 

from history and environment; they consider it a reflection of history and 

an outcome of the environment in which the translation is produced. It is 

basically a “text embedded within its network of both source and target 

cultural signs” (ibid:12). Lefevere was the first to come up with the concept 

of “Translation-Rewriting Studies”. These studies address the bonds which 

affect the rewriting of texts, such as the ideological and political bonds in 

the TL cultural system (Bassnett& Lefevere, 1990:12). 



16 
 

Lefevere examines the elements which control the manipulation of 

literature, and he sums them up in the “concept of patronage”. He defines it 

as “any power (person, institution) that can further or hinder the reading, 

writing and rewriting of literature‟‟ (Lefevere, 1992: 15). The source of 

power can be any of these elements – ideology, economics or status – and 

these can limit the translator‟s choices while translating them.  

To conclude, Lefevere‟s conception of translation patronage clearly 

contributes to our understanding of the ways in which a text is chosen 

within a certain cultural context and the ways in which human agents write 

and rewrite that text. 

2.4.1. Translation and Culture: 

Translation is a lingual activity whose main function is allowing 

people from certain cultures and who speak different languages to study 

and understand the literary works of other cultures. It is thus classified not 

only as an intralingual but also an intercultural activity. Consequently; it 

presents a challenge to translators since these languages are deeply affected 

by their parent cultures. The greater the differences, the greater the 

challenge will be. One good example is translating between Arabic and 

English, in both directions. 

Culture encompasses the total attitudes towards the world, events, 

other people, and cultures and the way that these attitudes are perceived 

and mediated. Culture refers to beliefs and values adopted and shared by 



17 
 

certain social groups and the positions taken by producers and receivers of 

texts, including translators, during the mediation process (Faiq, 2004: 36). 

According to Lefevere (1992: 118) at certain times, some cultures 

are considered superior, more prestigious or authoritative than some other 

neighboring or successor cultures. A culture may be considered superior to 

another culture if the later imagines that it can learn much from the former. 

Superior cultures tend to disregard members of what they consider an 

inferior culture and treat their literature arrogantly. However, the relations 

between the superior and the inferior cultures change over time. Because 

language is a main component of any culture and meaning relates directly 

to producing or receiving culture, translation with intercultural 

communication has succeeded in bridging the gap between the different 

parts of the world and presenting a new base of understanding, or 

misunderstanding, between different cultures. 

In this regard Toury (1978: 200) defines translation as “a kind of 

activity which inevitably involves at least two languages and two cultural 

traditions”. From this definition, we can understand that cultural meanings 

are a central part of the language and that the translator must comprehend 

these cultural implications in the ST and transfer this to the target reader. 

Simon (1996,130-31) takes the same position. She explains that 

translators should not seek solutions for their problems in dictionaries, 

instead, they should rather understand the ways in which the language is 

tied to social realities, to literary forms, and to changing identities. 



18 
 

Translators have to pick out cultural meanings embedded in language and 

estimate the degree of difference or similarity between the two cultures. 

These are not technical difficulties that can be rectified by experts in 

vocabulary. Rather they need practice and intelligence; the actual process 

of transferring the meaning of a term is more about reestablishing its value 

rather than its cultural inscription. “No language can exist unless it is 

steeped in the context of culture, and no culture can exist which doesn‟t 

have at its center, the structure of natural language” (Lotman, 1978: 211-

32). 

When talking about the interaction between translation and culture, 

Nida and Taber (1969:199) define cultural translation as “a translation in 

which the content of the message is changed to conform to the receptor 

culture in some way, and/or in which information is introduced which is 

not linguistically implicit in the original”. Similarly, when talking about the 

close relationship between translation and culture, Ivir (1987: 35) believes 

that translation does not mean translating languages but rather translating 

cultures. That is why a literary translator should not concentrate only on 

linguistic differences or mechanical word-for-word translation, but they 

also should maintain the same cultural elements which the writer has 

utilized when writing to a particular group, especially when this group is 

formed wholly or partially of people belonging to a different culture. 



19 
 

The cultural elements of different regions are varied. So it is the 

translator‟s responsibility to convey not only the same meaning but also the 

dissimilarities between two different cultures and cultural perspectives.  

On the other hand, Snell-Hornby (1988: 41) states that what makes a 

text translatable is the extent to which the text is ’’embedded in its own 

specific culture‟‟ and also the distance, whether in time or in place, that 

separate the ST and TT receivers.  

Moreover, Venuti (1995: 305) thinks that translation should 

highlight similarities between language and culture, especially similar 

messages and formal techniques, but instead it always encounters 

dissimilarities, and in reality translation should not try to eradicate all these 

dissimilarities. A translated text should reflect a different culture, so the 

reader can face a cultural other and opposition. Theoretically, what 

characterizes a good translation is its ability to give the reader the same 

conception the native reader gets when he reads the original text.  

2.5. The Translation of Literature: 

Translating literature, whether written or spoken, places an extra 

burden on the shoulders of honest translators. This is because they have to 

not only keep the literal meaning of the texts but also transfer the aesthetics 

that the producer intended to enclose. This makes some literary texts more 

difficult and challenging than others. Poetry, puns, and popular sayings, for 

example, are very difficult to translate since they carry a lot of figurative 



21 
 

language where using the “dictionary definition” would deform the 

aesthetic beauty in the original text. Translators should have the talent and 

skill of preserving and conveying this value in the translation keeping in 

mind that literature is the vehicle that carries the culture of the language in 

which it is written, and this makes it doubly hard to translate.  

Importing literature from a different culture and language creates the 

need for literary translation. In the TL tradition, this is usually done to 

fulfill specific, practical needs rather than be an indulgent activity. Two 

things are needed to properly understand and comprehend the dynamics of 

the literary relationships and cultural traditions: to examine the specific 

needs of literary translation and to identify suitable strategies for literary 

translation. Consequently, and by necessity, the study of literary translation 

entails studying the translation tradition, norms, and models. 

In this sense, translation is more artistic work rather than automatic, 

mechanical work. Translated literature has had considerable influence in 

forming and controlling the dynamics of discourse, culture, and 

communication. 

Literary translation is, in fact, a combination of three elements: 

ideology, culture, and mechanical translation. It involves a recurring and 

interesting challenge in a given literary system. This challenge stems from 

the very nature of the two literary systems concerned and the differences in 

the cultural circumstances between the source and the target cultures. 



21 
 

Contrary to traditional practice, literary translation should not be 

treated as a simple process of replacing words and expressions from the ST 

by synonyms from a different language (TL). This is apparent clearly in 

legal documents where the literal meaning of the words is more important 

than the spirit of the text. Biguenet and Schulte (1989: xii) state that in 

literary translation the focus is on the words and examining their 

dimensions: the connections between words and their etymological origins, 

their cultural environment, their historical traditions in addition to the 

context within the text. Weaver (1989: 117) agrees that literary translation 

is a creative activity where there cannot be “an absolute right or an absolute 

wrong”, and the literary translator “must do more than convey 

information”.  

2.6. Ideology: 

If we look up the entry “ideology” in the New Oxford Dictionary of 

English (2010), we find that the dictionary defines it as “a system of ideas 

and ideals, especially one which forms the basis of economic or political 

theory and policy.‟‟ 

Shuping (2013: 57) described the history of the term “ideology”. 

Ideology as a term was coined in France by Destutt de Tracy and his 

friends in the 1790s. They defined it as “the genetic theory of ideas”. 

Napoleon was the first to favor ideology, but later on, after theorists 

opposed his conspiracy to establish a monarchy, he started to show 

contempt towards it and went as far as calling it “negative and derogatory”. 



22 
 

On the other hand, when Marx embraced the term, he gave it a whole new 

meaning. He defined it as “the system of ideas and representations in the 

mind of an individual or a group”. Later on, the French philosopher Louis 

Althusser used ideology to refer to the relationship of individuals to their 

conditions of existence, whether real or imaginable. 

Seliger (1976) defined ideology as “an action-oriented set of beliefs” 

(as cited in Ireland, 1989: 131). If we accept this definition and accept as 

well that those beliefs, whether they are described as aesthetic, religious or 

poetic, are in fact political in essence (in the sense that they are applied to 

impose relations of dominance), then we can see for ourselves how 

individuals and institutions have been applying their own beliefs to create 

certain effects in translation. 

Moreover, Hatim and Mason (1997) state that ideology encompasses 

“the tacit assumptions, beliefs and value systems which are shared 

collectively by social groups” (as cited in Hatim & Munday, 2004: 102-

103). They make a distinction between “the ideology of translating” and 

“the translation of ideology”. Whereas the former refers to the basic 

orientation chosen by the translator (the choice, for example between 

Venuti‟s domesticating and foreignizing translation), in the translation of 

ideology they examine the extent of mediation supplied by a translator of 

sensitive texts. According to Hatim and Mason (1997), “Mediation is 

defined as the extent to which translators intervene in the transfer process, 



23 
 

feeding their own knowledge and beliefs into processing a text” (as cited in 

Hatim & Munday, 2004: 102). 

Applying the above mentioned definitions, it becomes obvious that 

ideology refers to a complex combination of politics, authority, and history. 

Thus, it seems natural to base the ideology of translation studies on these 

definitions. 

2.6.1. Translation as an Ideology Laden Activity: 

From a cultural and ideological point of view, some theorists 

consider that translation involves several acts: manipulation, subversion, 

appropriation, and violence. Venuti (1995, 1996, & 1998) argues that the 

purpose and the act of translation represent violence. Taking the concepts 

of domestication and foreignization as an example, Venuti states that all the 

Anglo-American translation tradition succeeded in doing over the last three 

centuries was to produce a normalizing and naturalizing effect which 

deprived the ST producers of their voice by presenting foreign cultural 

values in a way that was familiar and unchallenging to the western, 

superior, dominant culture. The differences implied by the translation will 

be stamped by the TL culture and absorbed into its own understandings, 

taboos, laws and legislations, codes, and ideologies. 

The aim of translation is to present the other as familiarly as possible 

and as recognizable as could be, and this may present the risk of total 

domestication of the foreign text, especially when the translation is a self-



24 
 

conscious project, and foreign cultures are appropriated in order to serve an 

imperialist domestic agenda whether cultural, economic, or political 

(Venuti, 1995: 196). 

Translation assumes an added significance in postcolonial contexts, 

especially in regards to which texts are chosen for translation and which 

strategies are used to produce those translations. Venuti (1995) asserts that 

translation is primarily domestication; the foreign text is written using 

linguistic and cultural values that are familiar and understandable by a 

specific group. This process of domestication is applied to every stage 

whether in production, circulation, or reception of the translation. It starts 

with the choice of the text to be translated, and it has to conform to certain 

domestic interests. This choice means that other texts are excluded. The 

process of domestication continues most forcefully while developing the 

strategies to translate this text, always using domestic dialects and 

discourses, highlighting certain domestic values and excluding others. 

Baker (1992: 2-4) claims that “translators need to develop an ability 

to stand back and reflect on what they do and how they do it.” Linguists 

often define translation as an ideology laden activity, because the patrons, 

who commission or publish translation, whether they are individuals or 

institutions, enforce their ideology on the translation.  

According to Penrod (1993: 39), since we are always required when 

translating to “take a position relative to other languages and cultures, we 

must as well remain ever vigilant as to the nature of the position assumed.” 



25 
 

This was the reason she interpreted Schleiermacher‟s philosophical 

differentiation between foreignization and domestication in terms of power 

relations.  

Additionally, Newmark (1981: 62) observes that when choosing 

between communicative and semantic translation, the choice is decided by 

orientation. Is the translation done for individuals, the single voice of the 

text producer, or for society and the mass readership? The mere choice 

implies ideology. It is Venuti (1995), however, who highlights the 

ideological consequences of this choice. Venuti goes on to distinguish 

between domesticating and foreignizing translation. As said above, Venuti 

states that all the Anglo-American translation tradition succeeded in doing 

over the last three centuries was to produce a normalizing and naturalizing 

effect which deprived the ST producers from their voice because translators 

presented foreign cultural values in a way that was familiar and 

unchallenging to the western, superior, dominant culture. A prime example 

of this is the homophobia which appears clearly in Robert Graves‟s 

translation of Suetonius which Venuti documented. The translation reflects 

the cultural values dominating the TL society at the time of translation, the 

United Kingdom in 1957, and “creates an illusion of transparency in which 

linguistic and cultural differences are domesticated” (Venuti, 1995: 34). 

The question of whether this domestication of the ST values was a 

deliberate process or a coincidence does not really matter because the result 

is the same, namely to assimilate to a dominant or hegemonic culture all 



26 
 

that is foreign to it. This major ideological choice cannot be avoided by 

translators, according to Venuti, and what some translators present as a 

personal preference can be seen by another entirely as a commitment, a 

pledge to reinforce the codes of the dominant culture or to challenge them 

despite the translator‟s opinion or position. It is important to realize that 

this domestication view is only true when the TL, not the SL, is the 

dominant culture.  

On the other hand, domestication may have serious negative effects 

if it is accepted and adopted when translating from a dominant culture, or 

what is considered a superior SL, to what is considered an inferior, or 

minority, TL. Caution must be employed to protect the later from a 

common inclination for it to be absorbed, and thus undermined, by SL 

textual practice. This can manifest itself in the production of media which 

dominates the media output of the TL country. This might be viewed by 

critics as cultural or ideological imperialism rather than a process of 

domestication or foreignization. The result of such a strategy in a socio-

cultural situation will certainly have ideological effects in the long run. The 

translator works in a social context, so they cannot be treated but as an 

integral part of that context, and that is enough reason why translation is 

considered an ideological activity. 

Similarly, Norton (1984: 61-63) highlighted religious ideology in 

describing how translation was used in the battle lines of theology. The 

theologians of Francis I of France opposed literal translation of the Old 



27 
 

Testament because the tradition of non-allegorical readings, which offered 

comfort to the Jews, went against Christian tradition. The Soviet writer 

Fedorov (1958: 26), who has a Marxist point of view, discussed the 

inclination toward biblical translation for another reason. He claims that it 

is “arising not so much from conscious theoretical position as from 

superstitious piety „devout trembling‟ before the biblical texts translated” 

(as cited in Baker,1998: 108-109). 

Translation has, for a long time, been entangled in religious 

ideology. This can be obviously observed in the clashes and confrontations 

among those types described by Norton. It can also been seen in the 

horrible end of some translators who were burned at the stake such as 

Tyndale in Britain and Dolet in France. A more recent evidence of this 

influence is the assassination of the Japanese translator who translated 

Salman Rushdie‟s Satanic Verses. The result is that other publishers have 

refused to produce a translation (Baker,1998: 109). 

2.7. Strategies of Translation: 

Baker (1998: 240) defines strategy of translation as the act of 

choosing a foreign text to be translated and then creating a method to 

translate it based on cultural, economic, and political elements. According 

to Palumbo (2009: 136), each of the bipolar general methods of translation 

is associated with a specific strategy for translation. Different authors 

classify translation strategies to show contrast in different ways, for 

example, 



28 
 

- covert versus overt translation (House, 1997) 

- semantic versus communicative translation (Newmark, 1981) 

- documentary versus instrumental translation (Nord, 1997) 

- domestication versus foreignization translation (Venuti, 1995) 

- literal versus free translation (Palumbo, 2009: 136). 

It should be noted that this thesis will not delve into too many details 

about every scholars‟ propositions. One approach will be sufficient. 

According to Toury (1995: 19), the most decisive approach is offered by 

the German theologian and philosopher Schleiermacher (1813). 

Schleiermacher, the nineteenth century theologian and translator, 

acknowledged that it is difficult to translate scholarly or artistic texts 

because the ST language is culture-bound and the TL can never match it 

fully. Schleiermacher‟s answer for this problem is to “move the reader 

towards the writer” (as cited in Munday, 2001: 28). 

In an 1813 lecture On the Different Methods of Translating, 

Schliermarcher argued that “there are only two. Either the translator leaves 

the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him 

or he leaves the reader in peace as much as possible, and moves the author 

towards him” (as cited in Lefevere, 1992: 149). 



29 
 

According to Schliermarcher‟s views, domestication has been used 

in most translations, which represents an ethno-deviant reduction of the ST 

to TL cultural values. The result then is bringing the author back home. 

Nevertheless, he much preferred the foreignization strategy because it 

poses an ethno-deviant pressure on the domestic values to record the 

linguistic and cultural differences of the foreign text, which results in 

sending the reader abroad instead. 

The French theorist Antoine Berman (1985: 87-91) considered 

Schliermarcher‟s view to be ethical translation, where a cultural other is not 

ignored or erased but rather shown, even if the difference can never be 

shown in its own terms but in those of the other language. Foreignizing 

translation may aim to imprint a sense of the foreign, but it most certainly 

answers to a domestic situation which avails itself to serve a cultural and 

political agenda (Berman, 1985: 87-91). 

Berman denounces the inclination to reject the foreign in translation 

by using a naturalization strategy, which is equal to Venuti‟s 

domestication. “The properly ethical aim of the translating act, is receiving 

the foreign as foreign,” says Berman (1985: 277); this may have influenced 

Venuti‟s adopted strategy of foreignization translation. On the other hand, 

Berman states that there is generally a “system of textual deformation” in 

TTs that stops the foreign from coming through. His examination of these 

forms of deformation is termed “negative analytic”  



31 
 

The negative analysis is concerned with ethnocentric, annexationist, 

and hyper textual translations, such as pastiche, imitation, adaptation and 

free writing, where deforming forces are freely exercised (Berman,1985: 

278).  

Berman (1985: 279), who had his own experience in translating 

Latin American fiction and German philosophy, argues that every 

translator inevitably faces these ethnocentric forces which determine his 

desire to translate as well as the form of the TL. He believes that the only 

way to neutralize these inclinations is by psychoanalytical analysis of the 

translator‟s work which will make the translator aware of these forces. The 

main problem when translating a novel is to respect its polylogic and avoid 

any arbitrary assimilation . 

Venuti‟s position matches that of Berman and Schleiermacher; only 

he prefers the concepts of domestication and foreignization. 

2.8. The Master Discourse of Translation from Arabic: 

Translation, by definition, means transferring, to foreign receivers, a 

written or spoken text from SL into a different TL while preserving the 

cultural elements of the original text. Usually, these receivers have their 

own language or lingual systems which represent their ways of interacting 

and conveying attitudes and thoughts about people, events, and objects. 

These systems produce a master discourse which represents and defines 



31 
 

these receivers and pinpoints the differences which are carried out through 

translation. 

At the same time, the use of language as a discourse is controlled by 

ideologies when texts are transferred from a SL to a TL through translation. 

This is because it challenges deeply instilled stereotypes and the 

hegemonies which may exist between communities whether they speak the 

same language or different languages. In this context, language is 

considered as a consistent system for representation. Following from that is 

the belief that “language used is representing a given social practice from a 

particular point of view” (Fairclough, 1995: 56). 

In the 1980s, the view that culture is represented through translation 

produced questions which could not be answered simply by the 

conventional equivalence or accuracy framework. Thus translators instead 

began to focus on the more practical cultural, political, and economic 

dimensions of translation. Nowadays, this shift in perspective is mainly 

practiced by the cultures of Western Europe and America which adopt a 

dominant and oftentimes superior attitude towards other cultures. This has 

of course influenced the translation of the cultural heritage of these cultures 

(Faiq, 2004: 38-39). 

The Western world has  often considered Arabs and Muslims to be 

trouble makers and a nuisance to them because the West has had to step in 

and solve their problems. Additionally, the West has the privilege of 

industry and wealth as well as technology. Thus, translation in this context 



32 
 

is a place where questions about representation, authority, and historical 

heritage are posed. This context challenges stereotyping, retells unfounded 

stories, and explains the discordant and imbalanced relations between 

cultures, peoples, races, and languages (Niranjana, 1992:1). 

Despite many excellent pieces and Mahfouz‟s Nobel Prize in 1988, 

Arabic literature still faces an embargo, with the exception of those works 

which affirm and emphasize the old clichés about “Islam, violence, 

sensuality and so forth” (Said, 1995: 99). Arabs and the Islamic World 

have become, invisibly, a target for hegemonic treatment within the 

intercultural discourse of translation. This reinforces the conclusion that 

translation has also become a battleground for conflicting power relations 

and struggle between what is considered an inferior culture, which is being 

translated from, and the superior culture which is benefiting from this 

translation. This in turn has led to dire consequences, accusations of 

misrepresentation, and subversion (Faiq, 2004: 40-41). 

This explains why translation from Arabic still faces the stereotyping 

strategies of the existing master discourse, a discourse that reflects the 

power of the various ways in which culture is fashioned. This also explains 

why this discourse appears as a network of signs joined together with 

endless denotations and connotations: a complex meaning system which is 

reflected, developed, and recorded in writing (Carbonell, 1996: 81). 

Some of the Arab and Muslim writers in the Western World were 

able to attract the attention of academics, critics, and readers; in addition, 



33 
 

they were awarded prestigious prizes. Those who have received prizes have 

been the writers whose works conformed to the established representations 

of Arab and Islamic culture and societies and fit the established ideologies, 

morals, and values of the translating culture. 

A prominent example is the most celebrated Arab writer in French, 

Tahar Ben Jelloun. Ben Jelloun conforms to both these conditions in his 

work. The proof reveals itself in the work which earned him the Prix 

Goncourt in 1987, La Nuit Sacree (1987). This novel has sold millions of 

copies and has been translated into many languages. In this work, as well as 

his other works, Ben Jelloun establishes his trademark obsession with sex. 

He presents the world of the “delire” (the French word for delirium) and 

“fantasmes” (the French word for fantasies). In his prize-winning text, Ben 

Jelloun presents varied accounts of fantasies, sex, irrationalities, and mental 

diseases. These same concepts can be detected in the works of orientalists 

when describing Arabs and Islam. Ben Jelloun relies on Islamic mysticism 

but ignores the historical context of these concepts. Doing that, he creates a 

text that is easily accepted within the French master discourse and culture, 

in contrast with an accurate representation of Arabs and Islam (Faiq, 2004: 

42-43).  

Another example is Heikal's book Autumn of Fury (1983), which 

was originally written in English. This book echoes the example of Ben 

Jelloun in that it gives the English reader the familiarly represented 

stereotypes, which are prescribed by ideologies and politics of the master 



34 
 

discourse of translation and representation dictated by the Anglo-American 

culture: invisibility, subversion, and appropriation (Faiq, 2004: 43). 

2.9. Studies Related to the Translation of CSIs and RH: 

It is fascinating to study retranslations. What would motivate 

someone to make a retranslation of a text which has already been translated 

before? Also, what are the differences between the two translations? The 

RH proposes an answer to these questions.  

 There are a few studies that examine the RH. For instance, Dastjerchi 

and Mohammad (2013) aimed to verify the validity of the RH as well as 

the ways in which retranslation supplements previous translations, as 

proposed by Robinson (1999), by studying the first and subsequent Persian 

translations of three selected chapters from Austin‟s classic novel, Pride 

and Prejudice (1813). The findings of their study partially confirmed the 

RH. The study showed that later translators tended to preserve the original 

stylistic feature more, so the retranslation presented a more ST-oriented 

rendition. By this, they confirmed that the hypothesis holds true to some 

extent. 

Moreover, Dean (2011) has examined the validity of RH on the 

British retranslations of Flaubert‟s Madame Bovary and Sand‟s La Mare 

Au Diable. She presents a methodology which allows her to decide the 

degree of the principal notion of closeness both on linguistic and cultural 

aspects. She uses Halliday‟s (2004) Systematic Functional Grammar to 



35 
 

measure linguistic closeness for Madame Bovary and relies on narrativity 

(Baker, 2006) to feed the analysis of how Berrichon cultural identity is 

interposed through retranslation to measure cultural closeness for Sand‟s 

La Mare Au Diable. 

Based on a study of the British retranslation of French ST, Dean 

concluded that RH is not sustainable when confronted with the 

polymorphous behavior of retranslation, both within and without the text. 

Considering the scarcity of studies that evaluate RH, especially in 

translation from Arabic into English, this study will contribute to filling the 

gap in this field. 

As for the studies that are associated with the translated novels of 

Naguib Mahfouz, Abdel-Hafiz and Sokarno (2003) investigated pragmatic 

and linguistic problems in the English translation of Mahfouz‟s novel The 

Thief and the Dogs to show how English  translators failed to appreciate the 

importance of the cultural context in determining the meaning. This current 

thesis seeks to expand  Abdel-Hafiz and Sokarno‟s work in evaluating the 

importance of cultural context in determining the appropriate translation 

strategy by investigating the translation of CSIs. The results of both this 

current thesis and Abdel-Hafez and Sokrano‟s study can help future 

translators be aware of the complications that result from ignoring the 

cultural context. Moreover, Shehab (2004) addresses troubles with the 

translation of Midaq Alley‟s honorifics. He makes some important points 

about the flaws in Tervor Le Gassick‟s renditions. Shehab discusses the 



36 
 

problems translators encounter when they render Arabic social honorifics 

into English in light of their linguistic, social, and cultural function in the 

Arabic context. He concludes that careful consideration of the semantic, 

social, and pragmatic dimensions of honorifics can be greatly beneficial in 

translating such important cultural expressions. Similar to Shehab, this 

thesis examines the complexity of translating cultural expressions and the 

various factors which affect translators‟ strategy choices. In particular, this 

thesis seeks to explain how temporal, social, and cultural changes in the 

context of the novel‟s translation affect these strategy choices. In another 

study, Madani (2009) assessed whether the pragmatic force of the 

colloquial dialect is discarded or preserved through translation. Madani 

determined that Mahfouz‟s translators systematically upgrade the casual, 

colloquial language found in his novels to a higher, more formal register, 

taking a work of popular fiction and transforming it into an elite, 

intellectual text. She considered examples from Naguib Mahfouz‟s novel 

The Harafish (1977)to see how the issue of dialectal translation is handled. 

Madani concludes that, in this particular case, the translator‟s decision not 

to preserve colloquial speech and expression is motivated by a desire to 

create a certain image that suits the target audience at that time and make 

the text more attractive to them. The translator hid the popular nature of the 

ST from the TT audience and created the illusion that the ST is a more 

sophisticated genre than it actually is. Like Madani, this thesis examines 

how translators deal with the culture of the ST, particularly whether they 

faithfully represent the ST culture through a foreignizing strategy or 



37 
 

whether they omit or change culture specific features for a specific purpose 

like making the text more attractive to the target reader. 

Edward Said gave the most serious criticism. Said (2000: 1) 

evaluates eleven translations of Mahfouz‟s works and argues that his 

translators have failed to convey his characteristic style. Mahfouz‟s 

distinctive voice is immediately recognizable to most Arabs. He masters 

the Arabic language, but at the same time his style does not draw attention 

to this mastery. However, when his work is translated into English, he 

sounds like his translators, who are not stylists, with one or two exceptions, 

and who appear to have misunderstood his meaning entirely. 

Another study was conducted by Ismail (2013) who addresses the 

reasons behind different receptions of the same text. The east-west duality 

is examined to establish why and how reception of Naguib Mahfouz‟s 

novel Awlaadu Haaratena is different. He examines examples from both 

Mahfouz‟s original Arabic text and its English translation by Peter 

Theroux. He concluded that the English translation of the novel seems to 

manipulate reception. 

While this current thesis also looks at Awlaadu Haaratena, it differs 

from Ismail‟s (2013) research in that its main focus is the comparison of 

the strategies that different translators resort to when translating CSIs for 

the same novel whereas Ismail focused on different receptions of the text. 



38 
 

Another relevant study was conducted by Al-Khawaja (2014). She 

investigated the field of translation in an Egyptian context around the work 

of the Egyptian writer and Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz by adopting 

Pierre Bourdieu‟s sociological framework. She argued that there are 

important social agents who have contributed significantly to the structure 

of the field and its boundaries, such as the author, the publisher, and the 

translator. 

In her study, she argues that translators introduced Western ways of 

thinking and expression into Mahfouz‟s works. To investigate the influence 

of these factors on translators‟ practice in the field, she empirically 

examined, at the textual level, a corpus of six translated novels written by 

the same author, Mahfouz, namely Midaq Alley (1966), The Thief and the 

Dogs (1984), Respected Sir (1986), Arabian Nights and Days (1994), The 

Day the Leader was Killed (1997), and Khan Al-Khalili (2008). She found 

that the translators have an increased tendency, over time, towards applying 

a foreignization approach in their translations of CSIs. This current thesis is 

similar to Al-Khawaja‟s work in that it also uses a parallel corpus study to 

examine the prevalent translation strategy in accordance with Venuti‟s 

model of foreignization and domestication and relating the change in 

translator‟s behavior to the wider cultural context. 

The present study is different from all the previous studies that 

handle Naguib Mahfouz‟s novels in that it examines the RH and the 



39 
 

behavior of different translators when they deal with CSIs in the same 

novel. 

Summary: 

This chapter has provided an overview of some related theoretical 

models. It began by discussing the linguistic theories of translation, 

focusing on the problem of equivalence, functional theories, cultural turn in 

translation studies, and the relationship between translation and culture 

from the viewpoints of different translation theorists. Then, it explored 

various topics directly related to the subject of this study, including the 

translation of literature, translation as an ideology laden activity, translation 

strategies, and the master discourse of translation from Arabic. The chapter 

concluded with a brief discussion of the previous studies that handled RH 

and the problems in translating Mahfouz‟s novels. 

  



41 
 

Chapter Three 

Methodology 

3.1. Introduction: 

This chapter is concerned with the research process and its overall 

approach. It explains the methodology, the research methods, and data 

collection used in this research. The researcher here agrees with Saunders 

et al. (2009: 138) claiming that there is a difference between the research 

methodology and the research methods or tactics employed in executing a 

research study.  

The research methodology is concerned with the general. In other 

words, it explains why the researcher has preferred these particular 

methods or tactics over others. On the other hand, research methods is 

concerned with the particular. It lists and explains each, and every, method 

or tactic employed in collecting and analyzing the data for the research.  

 Hemple (1952) suggests that when choosing a research 

methodology, the first thing to do is to pinpoint the aim of the research; 

what purpose will this research serve? This can be specified into two 

categories: first describing certain occurrences in which the researcher has 

interest, second determining the principles or laws that govern and explain 

these occurrences, so that it is possible for us to predict, understand and/ or 

even control them. So, if we need to find these explanatory and predictive 



41 
 

elements of any given scientific discipline, we only have to observe its 

theories and general hypotheses (as cited in Toury, 1995: 9).  

To achieve the purpose of this research, the researcher combines 

both the descriptive and critical characteristics of research. It is descriptive 

research because it will describe the translation as a product, investigate the 

translators‟ practices at the textual level, and explore their tendencies when 

it comes to translating CSIs. Additionally, the research is critical because it 

will explain the possible reasons for the retranslation of this novel. 

3.2. Data Collection: 

There are two types of data which can be collected for any research: 

primary data collected from original resources such as questionnaires, 

experiments, interviews, case studies, and other such firsthand methods, 

and secondary data collected from existing or secondhand resources such 

as websites, books, journals, and databases (Williman, 2006: 85). This 

holds true for this research. The primary data were collected by analyzing a 

corpus of Awlaadu Haaratena novel and its two translations: Children of 

Gebelawi (1981) and Children of the Alley (1999). This novel was 

intentionally chosen because it presents a rich amount of different and 

varied CSIs which may pose a challenging task for translators to convey in 

another language. In addition, this novel was retranslated providing the 

researcher a chance to investigate the RH. 



42 
 

 Secondary data was customarily collected from the documented 

secondary resources such as books, articles, and websites as background 

support for this research. 

3.3. Research Method: 

This study employed case study as a research method. It was the 

most appropriate method to test and generate hypotheses and to investigate 

the translators‟ tendencies when translating CSIs from the same text. This 

method allowed the researcher to investigate how each translator decided to 

translate these CSIs and in addition to test the RH. In this study Mahfouz‟s 

Awlaadu Haaratena was chosen as the case study.  

 The use of case study as a research method needs multiple sources of 

data. In order to examine the translators‟ strategies when dealing with CSIs, 

and to identify translators‟ tendencies to use either domestication or 

foreignization in their translation of the CSIs, the researcher opted for 

textual analysis using a corpus-based approach.  

 Choosing this method enabled the researcher to discover whether 

there was a change in translators‟ tendencies over time (1981-1999) and 

whether the second translation is more foreignized than the first one in 

order to examine the RH. 

 

 



43 
 

3.3.1. Corpus-based Translation Studies: 

Baker (1995: 225) defined a corpus as a collection of writings by a 

specific author. Generally, the advantage of a corpus-based approach is that 

it provides researchers with empirical data which enable them to make 

objective rather than subjective or intuitive statements about the topic 

under study. Additionally, the corpus-based approach enables the 

researcher to answer the research questions, investigate specific phenomena 

which are of interest for the researcher, and provide insights into these 

phenomena which can enhance future research. Moreover, the findings of 

the corpus can be used as a source for new hypotheses. 

 The corpus of this study is a body of CSIs which is extracted from 

two translations of the Arabic novel, Awlaadu Haaratena, into English and 

their original Arabic text. The translations were produced in different 

periods: 1981 and 1999. The aim of the study is to reveal how CSIs were 

translated at different times and highlight translators‟ tendencies 

concerning translating CSIs. Textual analysis is applied to the corpus and 

the findings are used to present a scaled down report about translation 

strategies that have been used. 

3.4. Methods of Collecting and Categorizing Data (CSIs): 

In addition to revealing how CSIs were translated, this study also 

sought to determine which strategies were used in those translations and 



44 
 

whether the data from the corpus support the RH. For this reason the 

corpus of the study was examined in the following way: 

First, all types of CSIs needed to be identified and collected. This was 

done by reading the Arabic novel alongside its two translations and 

categorizing the CSIs according to Larson‟s (1984: 431) and Baker‟s 

(1992: 21) classification of cultural categories. The cultural terms were 

then divided into several categories: clothes, food, terms of address used to 

address or refer to a person, religious expressions, common expressions 

and activities, habits, and other. 

Second, each item was examined to decide the strategy used in its 

translation; Ivir‟s strategies were applied in determining these strategies.  

Third, the frequency of the strategies used, whether domestication or 

foreignization, were calculated and categorized. Venuti‟s model of 

foreignization and domestication was applied, and the percentage of both of 

these strategies was calculated for each novel. Examples were selected and 

presented in Tables 4.4 and 4.5 in Chapter 4 and Appendix A (p.108). 

Summary: 

This chapter first presented the overall design of this study including 

the research methods and strategies. After that, the chapter turned to the 

sources of data collection and the justifications for choosing the case study 

and corpus for this research, followed by a description of the methods used 

in obtaining and categorizing the data. 



45 
 

Chapter Four 

Data Analysis and Findings 

4.1. Introduction: 

This chapter is allocated for examining the translators‟ tendencies 

when translating CSIs; which will be discussed in detail. First, the 

definitions of CSIs are checked, in addition to Ivir‟s strategies and Venuti‟s 

domestication and foreignization. Second, the data collected from the 

novels is analyzed in detail and presented along with their interpretation. 

All other concepts of culture, literary translation, and translation strategies 

were dealt with and presented earlier in section 2.4. Third, the answers of 

the overall research questions of the study are presented. Finally, a 

correlation of the findings of the data from the novels with the possible 

changes in the cultural context are explained.  

4.2. Culture Specific Items: 

One of the common concepts in translation, especially in literary 

translation, is “cultural terms”. This concept is used and defined differently 

by different scholars. Newmark (1988: 94-95), for example, uses “cultural 

words” to refer to this idea; cultural words are usually prominent as they 

can obviously be attributed to a foreign language and culture. He also 

suggests a definition of culture as a way of life and its aspects that are 

common to one community but foreign to another community which might 

have a different language and different ways of lingual expression. As for 



46 
 

cultural focus, it is usually associated with translation problems of cultural 

gap or distance between the source and TLs. 

Newmark (1988: 95) categorized the cultural words as follows: 

1. Ecology: flora, fauna, hills, winds, plains 

2. Material Culture: food, clothes, houses and towns, transport 

3. Social Culture: work and leisure 

4. Organizations, customs, activities, procedures, concepts (i.e. political 

and administrative, religious, artistic) 

5. Gestures and Habits 

In 1992, Baker stated that SL words may express a concept which 

cannot be readily understood in the TC. This can be anything from food to 

social customs to religious beliefs or any other concept. Baker (1992: 21-

26) draws attention to all the familiar non-equivalents which frequently 

face translators in the translation process. She stresses that the SL has a 

certain culture that is different from that of the TL. Baker arranges these 

non-equivalents in the following order: 

a) Culture-specific concept. 

b) The SL concept which are not lexicalized in TL. 

c) The SL word which is semantically complex. 



47 
 

d) The SLs and TLs make different distinction in meaning. 

e) The TL lack of superordinates. 

f) The TL lack of a specific term (hyponym). 

g) Differences in physical or interpersonal perspective. 

h) Differences in expressive meaning. 

i) Differences in form. 

j) Differences in frequency and purpose of using specific forms. 

k) The use of loan words in the ST. 

In translation, CSIs are not an individual occurrence; they rather 

reflect a translation problem when there is an item in the ST which cannot 

be conveyed by an equivalent in the TL because of the different values of 

the TC (Aixela, 1996: 56).  

For example, translating the image of a lamb in translations of the 

Bible posed a problem for the translators since some cultures did not know 

the animal and others did not attribute innocence or helplessness to the 

lamb. Thus translating “lamb” from Hebrew into the Eskimo language, for 

instance, will be problematic and represent an example of a CSI. The same 

item would not be considered a CSI when transferred to an intertextual 

language such as English or Spanish (Aixela, 1996: 56). 



48 
 

Based on the definitions of culture and CSIs by Larson (1984: 431) 

and Baker (1992: 21), and based on the data collected for this study, the 

selected CSI terms are divided, for the purpose of this research, into several 

categories: clothes, food, terms of address which are used when addressing 

or referring to a person, religious expressions, common expressions and 

activities, habits, and others. The “others” category refers to CSIs which 

are not frequent and do not merit a separate category. 

4.2.1. Style as a Culture-Specific Item: 

Hatim and Mason (1990: 9) see style as being “an indissociable part 

of the message to be conveyed”. Style here is being distinguished from the 

conventional patterns of expression that may be found in a particular 

language, or from idiolect. Modification on stylistic grounds is seen as “a 

step on the road to adaptation” (Hatim& Mason, 1990: 9). It turns the 

producer of the ST into someone with the views of the TL community, and 

thus the producer is seen as a different person from who he actually is. 

Bassnett (1991: 119) also notes that dialect forms or “regional linguistic 

devices particular to a specific region or class in the SL” can be significant, 

so their function should be first determined and then rendered adequately 

by the translator. Therefore, features of style or register could be classified 

as CSIs. 

As for Mahfouz‟s style of writing, Mahfouz is well known for his 

command of Modern Standard Arabic. This is reflected in the fact that his 

characters speak a different dialect – the colloquial language – while the 



49 
 

narrative voice uses the formal, traditional language. Moreover, even when 

Mahfouz writes in polished Modern Standard Arabic, the reader can 

discern the rhythms of the colloquial, or street, language of Cairo behind 

the formal language (Beard &Haydar, 1993: 2-3). 

4.3. Ivir’s Strategies: 

Ivir (1987: 35) has proposed seven strategies for the translation of 

CSIs, namely borrowing, definition, literal translation, substitution, lexical 

creation, omission, and addition. 

a. Borrowing: 
Since there is no equivalent term that matches the source word in the 

TL, this strategy transfers an expression from the ST into the TT without 

any adaptation (Ivir, 1987: 38). 

The following example from Children of the Alley (1999) shows the 

translator has borrowed the Arabic words Abu Zaid Al-Hilali into the TT 

without any adaptation. 

Example: 

(78:1986,أْوالد َحارِتنا ) "؟أبو زيد اليالليوماذا يشقيك اليوم يا " .1  

“What's wrong with you today, Abu Zaid al-Hilali [emphasis added]?” 

(Children of the Alley, translated by Peter Theroux, 1999: 63) 

 



51 
 

b. Definition: 

Definition uses words and phrases which are familiar in the TL to 

describe the SC element and explain what it means, (Ivir, 1987: 39). 

The following example is from Children of Gebelawi (1981). The 

translator used definition to explain the full meaning of the source concept. 

Example: 

(216:1986،أْوالد َحارِتنا)السيجة وأراد أن يتسمى فدعا كعبميا، فمعبا .1  

He sought comfort by inviting Kaabelha and they played Egyptian 

draughts on the ground using pebbles for pieces[emphasis added] 

(Children of Gebelawi, translated by Philip Stewart,1999: 133). 

c. Literal Translation: 

Literal translation is a strategy where the translator takes a ST 

expression and renders it in the TT with an expression which has the exact 

same dictionary definition as the ST expression. The translator does respect 

the grammar and word order of the target language, but this sort of overly 

precise translation strips the original expression of its full meaning and 

elegance (Ivir, 1987: 39). 

Examples:  

(192:1986، أْوالد َحارِتنا) ."وعد الحر دين عميو " .1  

’’ A free man‟s promise is binding.‟‟ (Children of Gebelawi, translated by 

Philip Stewart, 1981: 124) 



51 
 

’’ A free man‟s promise must be kept.‟‟ (Children of the Alley, translated by 

Peter Theroux, 1999, 157) 

(141:1986، أْوالد َحارِتنا)"أكل الدوم "ال تحزن فالقتل في حارتنا مثل  .2  

’’ Don‟t be sad; killing in our Alley is easy as eating palm nuts.‟‟ (Children 

of Gebelawi, translated by Philip Stewart,1981:90) 

d. Substitution: 

This strategy requires the translator to exchange an item in the SL 

with a similar, equivalent and easily recognizable item in the TL (Ivir, 

1987: 39).This strategy can only be used when “the two cultures display a 

partial overlap” (ibid). 

Examples: 

(474:1986، أْوالد َحارِتنا)وطي يا بصمو  وراح يتسمى برؤية الصغار يمعبون  .1  

"He watched some children playing leap frog[emphasis added]"(Children of 

Gebelawi, translated by Philip Stewart,1981:304)  

" جئتكم بيذه تحيو لممجمسوقال وىو يتخذ مجمسو: كنافة  فوضع رفاعة عمى الطبمية لفة" .2  

(263:1986 ،أْوالد َحارِتنا)  

’’ Rifaa put down a packet of honey cakes[emphasis added] on the table 

and said as he sat down: I have brought you this in honor of the 

company.‟‟(Children of Gebelawi, translated by Philip Stewart,1981: 189). 

 



52 
 

e. Lexical Creation: 

This is the most challenging and the least used strategy of all, both 

for the translator and for the audience who is required to comprehend a new 

item. It requires the translator to introduce a newly-coined expression that 

can easily be understood and recognized by the target readers instead of a 

translator‟s borrowed foreign word (Ivir, 1987: 40). It is important to 

mention that neither translator uses lexical creation in the translation of 

Awlaadu Haaratena into English, so there are no examples. 

f. Omission: 

This strategy is obvious enough. The translator decides to omit 

something from the ST and not convey it in the TT (Ivir, 1987: 40). This is 

only used when the omitted item is trivial and does not add to the 

faithfulness of the translation or costs the translator more effort in 

translation than it is worth. 

Example :  

1.  حتى يفتح اهلل  عمي "ربنا عمى المفتري ! قدره...قدره ىو أكبر مفتري، قمت أميمني إلى الغد  
(119:1986 ،الد َحارِتناأوْ ’’ )فرماني عمى األرض وبرك فوق صدري حتى كتم أنفاسي  

“Kidra Kidra is the biggest tyrant. I asked him to let me put off payment for 

a day, and he knelt on my chest till I couldn‟t breathe” (Children of 

Gebelawi, translated by Philip Stewart,1981: 76). 

 



53 
 

2. (35:1986,َحارِتناأْوالد ) "معمم؟اسمك يا "   

"Your name[emphasis added]?"(Children of Gebelawi, translated by 

Philip Stewart, 1981: 21). 

"What is your name[emphasis added]?"(Children of the Alley, translated 

by Peter Theroux,1999: 29). 

g. Addition: 
This strategy is used to clarify an item in the SL that would 

otherwise not be comprehended in the TT; the translator usually provides 

the required additional information that does not originally exist in the ST 

to facilitate understanding in the TT (Ivir, 1987: 45). 

1. ايومركب حبيبي في المية ج"  

"راخية شعورىا عمى المية  

(264: 1986، أْوالد َحارِتنا ) 

 My sweetheart's ship is coming across the water. 

How sadly [emphasis added]the sails hangover the water. (Children of the 

Alley, translated by Peter Theroux, 1981: 215) 

2. (257: 1986،أْوالد َحارِتنا)مين قمك تعمل دي العممو"  "يا رفاعو يا وش القممو    

"O Rifaa you louse-faced rat!"[emphasis added] 

"Who told you to do like that?" (Children of Gebelawi, translated by Philip 

Stewart, 1981: 166) 



54 
 

To facilitate understanding, the researcher selected examples of all 

the different types of CSIs from the novel Awlaad Haaratena and identified 

how the translators dealt with them in Appendix A (p.108). 

Considering the above definitions, these strategies can be divided 

into two categories: strategies used for ST and strategies used for TT. 

Borrowing, definition, literal translation, and addition are considered ST 

strategies, while lexical substitution, deletion, and lexical creation are 

considered TT strategies. 

 In this study, Ivir‟s strategies are employed as they are “the basis for 

many later classifications” (Qafzezi, 2013: 567). Moreover, Ivir‟s strategies 

are used as they are suitable for the classification of the data under study, 

and, consequently, they will help in answering the study questions and 

clarifying the study results. 

4.4. Venuti’s Domestication versus Foreignization: 

Following Schliermarcher (1813) and Berman (1985), Venuti (1995: 

20) prefers the concepts of foreignization and domestication to describe the 

strategies that translators use when translating. 

Domestication means changing everything that is foreign in the ST 

and making it familiar and recognizable to the TL reader, while 

foreignization “signifies the differences of the foreign text, by disrupting 

the cultural codes that prevail in the translating language” (Venuti, 2008: 

15). In promoting foreignization, Venuti (2008) encourages the translator to 



55 
 

“resist dominant values in the receiving culture so as to signify the 

linguistic and cultural differences of the foreign text” (18). This choice 

represents a question of “fundamentally ethical attitudes towards a foreign 

text and culture” (Venuti, 2008: 19). 

A foreignizing strategy can enhance the difference of the foreign text 

by taking an opposing stance toward the TL culture through defying theory, 

codes, professional standards, and even the ethical norms in the TL. When 

twentieth century German theorists like Rudolf Pannwitz and Walter 

Benjamine revived foreignizing translation, it was considered as an 

instrument of cultural innovation. For Pannwitz, “the translator makes a 

fundamental error when he maintains the state in which his language 

happens to be instead of allowing his language to be strongly affected by 

the foreign language” (as cited in Baker,1998: 242). 

Since its origin in the German tradition, foreignizing translation has 

meant a close adherence to the original text, using literal translation that 

resulted in enhancing the foreign cultural forms and creating a diverse 

dialect and discourse. For example, Johann Heinrich Voss introduced a 

new prosodic form into German poetry by his hexameter translations of the 

Odyssey (1781) and the Iliad (1793), thus earning Goethe‟s admiration for 

putting “rhetorical, rhythmical, material advantages at the disposal of the 

talented and knowledgeable youngster” (as cited in Lefevere, 1992: 77). 

On the other hand, Venuti (1995, 1998) believes that domestication 

is the natural inclination when translating, and this means translating in a 



56 
 

way which is fluent, idiomatic, and transparent, so that the translation may 

conquer the strangeness of the foreign text and meet the values of the 

domestic culture. 

Deciding whether a translated text is domesticating or foreignizing is 

based on a detailed reconstruction of the whole cultural formation in which 

the translation is presented and used; what is domestic and what is foreign 

can only be defined in light of the changing hierarchy of values in the TL 

culture. 

According to Venuti (1998: 240), domestication and foreignization 

as strategies take place at two levels: at the macro level, in which is the 

actual choosing of the foreign text to be translated, and at the micro level, 

which encompasses the methods to be used in the translation. 

Another way of categorizing Ivir‟s definition of the seven strategies 

is by considering it from a foreignization and domestication perspective. 

Foreignization and domestication are broad and general expressions; they 

encompass many strategies and approaches that are limited in focus as well 

as in meaning. Thus, if Ivir‟s definitions are applied to foreignization and 

domestication, borrowing, literal translation, definition, and addition may 

be considered as foreignizing translation, and substitution, deletion, and 

lexical creation can be considered as domesticating translation. 

Based on this, the CSIs in the corpus are processed in two ways: 

first, they are analyzed and categorized in relevance to Ivir‟s (1987) model. 



57 
 

Second, they are classified according to Venuti‟s (1995) model of 

foreignization and domestication, as this can assist in determining the 

translator‟s choices when it comes to the types of strategies adopted. 

4.5. Corpus Analysis and Results: 

In the previous section, the researcher has examined Ivir‟s and 

Venuti‟s strategies for the translation of CSIs. In this section the researcher 

carefully analyzed and identified the strategies employed for translating 

CSIs in the two translations of Awlaadu Haaratena in order to clarify 

whether the second translation is more foreignizing than the first. This 

investigation may shed light on the translators‟ tendencies to use either 

domestication or foreignization and whether these tendencies have changed 

over time or been affected by wider cultural exposure.   

The researcher identified all types of CSIs in the original text of 

Awlaadu Haaratena and in the first translation Children of Gebelawi(1981) 

and calculated the frequency in which each strategy was employed. The 

researcher identified 87 CSIs and clarified whether these CSIs were 

domesticated or foreignized and presented them under the two categories in 

Table 4.1. 



58 
 

Table 4.1: Frequency and Percentage of the Strategies Applied to the Translation Children of Gebelawiby Philip Stewart 

Foreignization Domestication Approach 

Addition definition Literal 

translation 

borrowing Lexical 

creation 

Deletion Lexical 

substitution 

Category 

0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Clothes 

0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Food 

0 1 1 2 0 0 2 Terms of address 

0 0 9 0 0 2 5 Religious 

expression 

0 0 5 0 0 3 5 Common 

expression 

0 1 20 0 0 8 19 Activities, habits 

and others. 

0% 2% 35% 2% 0% 13% 37% Strategy’s average 

39/87 50/87 Total 

44% 57% Percentage 



59 
 

Table 4.1 demonstrates that the prevailing tendency in Stewart‟s 

translation is domestication, primarily through the use of lexical 

substitution. The researcher identified 87 CSIs, 50 of which are translated 

by domestication. From a percentage point of view, the level of 

domestication is 57% compared to 44% for foreignization. 

The following table provides an example of each type of CSI from 

the novel and how it was dealt with by Philip Stewart. 

Table 4.2: Sample CSIs from Children of Gebelawi 

Strategy 

adopted 

Children of 

Gebelawi 

Awlaadu 

Haaratena 

An example 

of each type 

of CSIs 

Lexical 

substitution 
Honey cakes 

(p.189) 
 كنافة

(p.263) 

Food 

Lexical 

substitution 

Brocaded camel hair 

coat.(p.34) 

 

مزركشة من  عباءة
الجملوبر   (p.54) 

Clothes 

Literal 

translation 
Woman 
(p.64) 

وليةيا   
(p.100) 

Terms of 

address 

Lexical 

substitution 
For god sake 
Daabas.(p.77) 

يا عم دعبس وحد اهلل  
(p.120) 

Religious 

expressions 

Deletion I am an old woman 

with one foot in the 

grave. 

(p.267) 

وأنا عجوز رجل فوق 
 األرض ورجل في القبر

(p.414) 

Common 

expressions 

Lexical 

substitution 
Carnation scents 

and mint and lute's 

refrain unleash a 

moonlight spell 

bind the smokers 

of hashish. 
(p.431) 

يا عود قرنفل في الجنينة 
منعنع يعجب 

 الجدعان,الحشاشة
 المّجدع.
(p.530) 

Activities, 

habits and 

other 



61 
 

Similarly, the researcher analyzed and identified all types of CSIs in 

the original text of Awlaadu Haaratena and its second translation, Children 

of the Alley (1999). The researcher calculated the frequency of each 

strategy in order to determine whether CSIs are mostly domesticated or 

foreignized. The researcher has identified 87 CSIs in the novel and 

classified them under the two approaches as presented in Table 4.3. 

 



61 
 

Table 4.3: Frequency and Percentage of the Strategies Applied to the Translation of Children of the Alley by Peter Theroux 

Foreignization Domestication Approach 

Addition Definition Literal 

translation 

borrowing Lexical 

creation 

Deletion Lexical 

substitution 

Category 

0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Clothes 

0 0 0 2 0 0 1 Food 

0 3 3 0 0 0 0 Terms of address 

0 0 8 0 0 0 7 Religious expressions 

0 0 10 0 0 1 3 Common expressions 

1 1 31 1 0 1 14 Activities, habits and 

others. 

1% 4% 52% 3% 0% 2% 28% Strategy’s average 

60/87 30/87 Total 

68% 34% Percentage 



62 
 

Table 4.3 reveals that the dominant tendency is foreignization; literal 

translation was employed to translate most of the foreign items. The 

researcher has identified 87 CSIs, 60 of which are translated using 

foreignization. From a percentage point of view, the level of domestication 

is 34%, and of foreignization 68%. 

The following table provides an example of each type of CSIs from 

Children of the Alley and how it was dealt with by Peter Theroux. 

Table 4.4: Sample CSIs from Children of the Alley 

Strategy 

adopted 

Children of the 

Alley 

Awlaadu 

Haaratena 

An example of 

each type of 

CSIs 

Borrowing Kunafa(p.214) كنافة(p.263) Food 

Lexical 

substitution 

An embroidered 

camel-hair cloak 

(p.44) 

مزركشة من  عباءة
 وبر الجمل
(p.54) 

Clothes 

Literal 

translation 
Woman 
(p.80) 

وليةيا   
(p.100) 

Terms of 

address 

Literal 

translation 
I am old. I have 

one foot on the 

ground and the 

other in the grave. 

(p.335) 

وأنا عجوز رجل فوق 
األرض ورجل في 
 (p.414)القبر

Common 

expressions 

Lexical 

substitution 
For god sake 

(p.98) 
يا عم دعبس وحد اهلل  

(p.120) 

Religious 

expressions 

Literal 

translation 

Carnations as 

fresh as mints in 

the garden soothe 

the manly men 

who smoke 

hashish. 
(p.341) 

يا عود قرنفل في 
 الجنينة منعنع

يعجب 
 الجدعان,الحشاشة

 (p.530)المّجدع.

Activities, 

habits and 

other. 



63 
 

After analyzing the novels in terms of CSIs and identifying the 

frequency and percentage of each strategy, the researcher moves to answer 

the research questions based on the results of the quantitative reports. 

In response to the first thesis question (What are the translation 

strategies the translators have employed to translate CSIs in Mahfouz‟s 

novel Awlaadu Haaratena from Arabic into English?), Philip Stewart tends 

to translate CSIs mostly by using lexical substitution (37% of the time), 

literal translation (35%), and deletion (13%) while Peter Theroux tends to 

translate CSIs by using literal translation most often (52%), followed by 

lexical substitution (28%) and deletion (2%). 

In response to the second thesis question (Are CSIs mostly 

foreignized or domesticated in the translation of Awlaadu Haaratena?), 

although both translators tend to use foreignization, Philip Stewart uses 

domestication strategies more often than Peter Theroux. Stewart used 

lexical substitution 37% of the time while Theroux only used it 28% of the 

time. Similarly, Stewart used the deletion strategy 13% of the time while 

Theroux only used it 2% of the time. This means that Philip Stewart uses 

domestication more than foreignization in Children of Gebelawi (1981) 

while Peter Theroux uses foreignization more than domestication in 

Children of the Alley (1999). 

 In response to the third research question (Which translation is closer 

to the original novel‟s style and culture?), the researcher argues that Philip 

Stewart tends to translate CSIs and similes by using deletion and lexical 



64 
 

substitution while Peter Theroux translated them literally. This made 

Theroux‟s translation more poetical and closer to the style of the ST and 

consequently more culturally consistent. In this sense, Raymond Stock says 

about Theroux: “His translations are at the same literary level – or even 

beyond – as that of the original work” (Peterson, 2008). 

The following examples demonstrate the differences between 

Stewart and Theoroux‟s translation of CSIs: 

Example 1: 

على باب حارتنا على حين افترشت تمر حنه خيشه أمام أحد ربوع حمدان وراحت تدندن: 

 (132:1986، أْوالد َحارتِنا)حسن القهوجي 

Tamrind spread a sack on the ground in front of one of the houses in 

Hamdaan's quarter and began singing "cats wailed as they scrapped over 

food or females[emphasis added]" (Children of Gebelawi, translated by 

Philip Stewart, 1981: 84) 

While Tamar Henna spread a piece of burlap in front of the Hamdan 

houses singing: "at the gate of our alley, we have the finest coffee 

man[emphasis added]." (Children of the Alley, translated by Peter Theroux, 

1999: 107) 

 

 



65 
 

Example 2: 

 (51:1986,أْوالد َحارِتنا حطو يا بطو ويا ذقن القطو )

Tinker, tailor, soldier, sailor[emphasis added](Children of Gebelawi, 

translated by Philip Stewart, 1981: 31) 

Duki, duki, duki, spin! Where’d you get your kitty chin[emphasis 

added]. (Children of the Alley, translated by Peter Theroux,1999: 41) 

We can notice that Theroux‟s translation is more consistent with ST 

culture, so it is closer to the ST. This consistency and closeness are due to 

the use of foreignization strategies, particularly literal translation. Stewart, 

on the other hand, used lexical substitution, and as a result his translation is 

more consistent with the TL culture. 

Table 4.5 compares Philip Stewart and Peter Theroux‟s ways of 

translating CSIs and similes in detail. 

 



66 
 

Table 4.5: Comparison between Philip Stewart and Peter Theroux’s Translation of CSIs 

Strategy 

adopted 

Children of the Alley by 

Peter Theroux 

Strategy 

adopted 

Children of Gebelawi by 

Philip Stewart 

(ST)Awlaadu Haaratena 

Literal 

translation 
Why was your anger like 

fire, burning without 

mercy?(p.45) 

Deletion Why did your rage burn 

everything up?(p.34) 
لماذا كان غضبك كالنار التي تحرق 

 (p.55)؟بال رحمة

Literal 

translation 

Peace be upon you(p.180) Lexical 

substitution 

Hello(p.141) السالم عميكم 
(p.219) 

Literal 

translation 

While Tamar Henna spread a 

piece of burlap in front of the 

Hamdan houses singing: at 

the gate of our alley, we 

have the finest coffee 

man.(p.107) 

Lexical 

substitution 

Tamrind spread a sack on the 

ground in front of one of the 

houses in Hamdaan's quarter 

and began singing "cats 

wailed as they scrapped 

over food or females''(p.84) 

عمى حين افترشت تمر حنة خيشة 
 أمام أحد ربوع حمدان وراحت تدندن:

 جيعمى باب حارتنا حسن القيو 
(p.132) 

Literal 

translation 
Duki, duki, duki, spin! 

Where'd you get your kitty 

chin.(p.41) 

Lexical 

substitution 
Tinker,  tailor, soldier, 

Sailor(p.31) 
 حطة يا بطة ويا ذقن القطة

(p.51) 

Literal 

translation 

These dreams were like the 

moon light. It would be less 

than hour before their victory 

was decisive, or their hopes 

would evaporate along with 

the souls from their slain 

bodies.(p.338) 

Lexical 

substitution 

These dreams were like the 

moonlight. Within the hour 

they would have won their 

victory; or their hopes would 

have been lost with their 

lives.(p.269