The paper titled "A Comparative Investigation of the Interpretation of Colour Terms in the Quran" by Amal Abdelsattar Metwally primarily focuses on analyzing the strategies used in interpreting color terms in the Quran across three well-known English translations: those by Pickthall (1938), Muhammad Asad (1980), and Yusuf Ali (1992). The study explores whether there is consistency in the strategies employed for translating these color terms and examines the applicability of the concepts of foreignisation and paraphrase as translation methods.
The purpose of the study is to investigate the translation strategies for color terms in the Quran, particularly focusing on how foreignisation, a strategy that retains the foreignness of the source language, and paraphrase, a more target language-oriented approach, are used by different translators. The scope includes a comparative analysis of specific verses in the Quran that contain color terms, examining the translators' adherence to the original Arabic text or their adaptations to convey meaning more clearly in English.
The methodology involves a comparative analysis based on Venuti’s (1995) concept of foreignisation versus paraphrase. The study compares how each of the three translations handles color terms, assessing whether the translators lean towards a literal translation that preserves the original cultural and linguistic context (foreignisation) or towards a more adapted translation that makes the text more accessible to the target audience (paraphrase).
Key findings of the study reveal that foreignisation is more frequently used in the translations by Pickthall and Yusuf Ali, particularly in retaining the original Arabic color terms and their associated meanings. On the other hand, Muhammad Asad tends to employ paraphrase more often, using descriptive terms that convey the intended meaning without directly translating the original color terms. The study finds that the use of foreignisation is generally more effective in maintaining the integrity and original values of the Quranic text, while paraphrase can be beneficial in cases where cultural differences make direct translation less effective.
The study concludes that while both foreignisation and paraphrase have their merits, foreignisation is often the preferred strategy when translating sacred texts like the Quran, as it preserves the original cultural and linguistic nuances. However, the study also acknowledges the usefulness of paraphrase in certain contexts, particularly when dealing with idiomatic expressions and cultural references that may not have direct equivalents in the target language. The findings underscore the importance of balancing fidelity to the source text with the need for clear and accessible translation.