رهیافتی به نقد و تحلیل ترجمه عربی برخی غزلیات حافظ از امین الشواربی و علی عباس زلیخه (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
دیوان غزلیات حافظ نخستین بار در میانه های سده بیستم میلادی توسط ابراهیم امین الشواربی به عربی برگردانده شد و از آن پس کسانی چون محمد الفراتی، علی عباس زلیخه و صلاح الصاوی همه غزلیات یا منتخباتی از آن را به عربی ترجمه کردند. نگارنده در این مقاله برآن است تا دو ترجمه امین الشواربی و علی عباس زلیخه را مورد نقد و بررسی قرار دهد. از عمده ترین نقاط ضعف و کاستی های هر دو ترجمه نخست خوانش نادرست ابیات و تلقی و دریافت اشتباه پیام و سپس برابرگزینی های نامناسب و گاه غلط مترجمان است. عدم آشنایی کافی به روح زبان فارسی و به ویژه عدم درک درست تشبیهات و استعارات زیبا و دلنشین و گاه عبارات دارای ایهام و پیچیده و معلق حافظ در موارد بسیاری دو مترجم را در انتقال صحیح پیام ناکام گذاشته و منجر به تحریف متن شده است. همچنین شیوه بیان و انتقال مفاهیم به ویژه در ترجمه علی عباس زلیخه نه تنها توان همسنگی و همآوردی با زبان دلنشین، استوار و اعجازگونه حافظ را ندارد که گاه فرسنگ ها از آن به دور است؛ به گونه ای که در هر دو ترجمه، گاه نه تنها آن پیام، تأثیر، زیبایی و شیرینی و حلاوت معانی رمزی حافظ و آن تفکرات عمیق و اندیشه های والای وی که در زیباترین قالب ها عرضه شده است به زبان مقصد و گیرنده منتقل نمی شود که با ارائه مفاهیم و معانی سست و گاه سخیف، لسان الغیب که در یک کلام نماد ادبیات و فرهنگ ایرانی و روح زبان فارسی است در چشم عرب زبانان تا حد شاعری عادی و حتی گاه بیهوده گو فرو می لغزد.An Approach to the Critique and Analysis of the Arabic Translations of Some Ghazals of Hafez by Amin al-Shawarbi and Ali Abbas Zulekha
The Divan of Hafez’s ghazals was first translated into Arabic in the mid‑20th century by Ibrahim Amin al‑Shawarbi. Since then, figures such as Muhammad al‑Furati, Ali Abbas Zulekha, and Salah al‑Sawi have rendered either the entire collection or selected portions into Arabic. In this article, the author seeks to critically examine the translations by Amin al‑Shawarbi and Ali Abbas Zulekha. The primary weaknesses in both translations arise first from an erroneous reading of the verses and a flawed interpretation of the intended message, and second from the use of inappropriate or occasionally incorrect lexical equivalents. The translators’ insufficient familiarity with the spirit of the Persian language—especially their inability to grasp Hafez’s elegant, captivating metaphors, similes, and often ambiguous or intricate expressions—has frequently hindered their ability to convey the original message accurately, resulting in textual distortions.Furthermore, the mode of expression and transmission of concepts, particularly in Zulekha’s translation, not only fails to match the enchanting, robust, and almost miraculous quality of Hafez’s language but at times diverges significantly from it. In several instances, neither translation succeeds in transferring the profound thoughts, sublime ideas, and cryptic meanings of Hafez—presented in the most exquisite forms—to the target language and its audience. Instead, the rendering of weak or even trivial interpretations has, in effect, reduced Lesan al-Ghayb (the Tongue of the Unseen)—who epitomizes Persian literature, culture, and the very soul of the Persian language—to that of an ordinary, or even nonsensical, poet in the eyes of Arabic readers.Keywords: Hafez’s ghazals, Critique, Arabic translations, al‑Shawarbi, Zulekha.IntroductionThere is no doubt that translating poetry—a medium imbued with human emotions and sentiments—is an exceedingly challenging task, and the deeper the poetry, the more formidable its translation becomes. This is particularly true for Hafez’s Divan of ghazals. Through creativity and innovation, Hafez employs a language of symbols and exquisite metaphors, crafting a linguistic style that is uniquely his own. His artistry lies in the manner in which words in his poetry depart from their literal meanings and, much like actors on a stage, assume roles far removed from their inherent definitions. Words that in everyday usage might carry negative or vulgar connotations—such as those for taverns, drunkenness, or rogue mystics—are, in Hafez’s poetic realm, endowed with a refined and unexpected beauty. Conversely, terms associated with sanctity and spiritual elevation—like mosque, khanqah (Sufi lodge), Sufi, ascetic, and pious sheikh—are stripped of their hallowed character and sometimes burdened with negative or trivial implications.Thus, if the translator of Hafez’s poetry—known as Lesan al-Ghayb (the Tongue of the Unseen) and who, as he himself asserts, composes his verses through divine inspiration—fails to familiarize himself with the poet’s distinctive language and does not fully apprehend the symbolic nuances, lofty themes, and profound ideas expressed in the most elegant forms, the resulting translation will inevitably convey weak or even absurd concepts to the reader. The research methodology of this article is descriptive-analytical, grounded in a detailed critique of the translated verses.Literature ReviewIn recent years, several theses and articles have been published critiquing the Arabic translations of Hafez’s ghazals. These include:A Short Critique of Salah al‑Sawi’s "Diwan al‑Ishq" by Professor Nader Nezam Tehrani (Literary Text Research Journal, Vol. 2, No. 6, Winter 1998);Ibrahim Amin al‑Shawarbi and Muhammad al‑Furati’s Reception of Hafez Shirazi’s Eighth Ghazal by Dr. Hojjat Rasouli and Maryam Abbasalinejad in Research in Comparative Literature (No. 16, Winter 2014);A Critique and Analysis of the Arabic Translations of Hafez’s Ghazals by Mohammad Reza Azizi in Arabic Language and Literature Journal (Issue 11, Fall/Winter 2014);Ibrahim Amin al‑Shawarbi’s Reception of Hafez Shirazi’s Poetry (20 Ghazals as Samples), an article derived from Manijeh Teymouri’s MA thesis under the supervision of Seyyed Fazlollah Miraqadri, University of Shiraz, 2013;A Comparative Study of Abbas Zulekha’s and the Researcher’s Reception (The First 20 Ghazals of the Divan), an article derived from Fatemeh Barzegar’s MA thesis under the supervision of Seyyed Fazlollah Miraqadri, University of Shiraz, 2016.Additionally, Dr. Azartash Azarnoush, in his article “Hafez in the Realm of the Arabic Language” published in The Great Islamic Encyclopedia (Vol. 19, pp. 677–680, 2011), surveys the work and efforts of Arab scholars in Hafez studies and critiques various aspects of the Arabic translations of Hafez’s Divan.ConclusionBoth Ali Abbas Zulekha and Amin al‑Shawarbi, in certain instances, either misunderstood the original message or misread the verses, thereby failing to adequately convey the concepts and meanings of Hafez’s poetry. In some cases, such misinterpretations have led to distortions of the original text.Even when both translators managed to comprehend the source text, their translations often fell short in effectively communicating the intended concepts to an Arabic-speaking audience, resulting in a noticeable lack of equivalence and balance between the source and target texts.In many instances, al‑Shawarbi—owing to his deeper familiarity with the Persian language and the idioms, expressions, and metaphors inherent in Hafez’s Divan—was more successful in selecting appropriate lexical equivalents and delivering a more acceptable translation.Zulekha, on the other hand, does not adhere to a consistent translation methodology. At times, he employs a source-oriented approach, adhering to a literal, word‑for‑word translation in an attempt to remain completely faithful to the original text; at other times, he adopts a target-oriented approach, favoring a freer, more communicative style. In contrast, al‑Shawarbi has attempted to strike a middle ground by balancing fidelity to the source text with the selection of a more eloquent language for conveying its meanings—although this balance has not always been achieved successfully.
تبلیغات
