Explicitation by Textual Addition in Parentheses in Translating the Quranic Text into English

This study aims at exploring new norms as to the textual addition in parentheses (=TAiP) strategy in translating the Quran into English and improving the target text. In such a controversial yet officially approved English version of the Quran as the Hilali-Khan Translation (=HKT), it is to identify binary categories under which the TAiPs can fall and, accordingly, propose a possible corpus-based improvement of the same. Based upon a descriptive approach, this goal mainly concerns itself with the issue of explicitation in pursuance with Klaudy’s (1998/2008) typology. Hypothetically, the TAiPs in such a translation of the Quran are not normatively explicitative, and they only interrupt the flow of attention of a potential TL reader. Six small-sized Surahs/ chapters of the Quran in sequence were selected; this sample was to equally represent the Makki and Madani types of Quranic revelation and the whole conceptual story narrated by the Quran. Encountered in the HKT, the TAiPs were classified to be: linguistically explicitative (=LinE) as obligatory or optional, and referentially explicitative (=RefE) as pragmatic or technical. However, they were found to be either filling-out or specifying—or, say, to either continue or interrupt the flow of attention of a reader. Eventually, several binary translational norms of TAiPs were determined and an improved version of the HKT was accordingly proposed.


INTRODUCTION
A 'text' entails that the words, phrases, clauses or sentences it is woven out of are of meaning.It is a stretch of language open to critical analysis (Carter and McCarthy, 2006) or a set of signs giving an informative message.The property by which a text is not a disconnected sequence is a set of textual or contextual factors determining how it serves a rhetorical purpose and, hence, becomes a 'text' (Hatim and Mason, 1997: 32).For the Arabic text of the Quran in particular, the message is transmitted with literary devices; it is of a nonlinear web-like structure (Nasr, 2007) and its textual expression "exhibit lack of continuity or absence of […] order and repetitiousness" (Blomm and Bary, 1990: 65).This ostensible disorganization is, however, self-referentiality by explaining what's to be transmitted (Wild, 2006).
Explicitation has emerged as a potential universal in translation.It is first introduced by Vinay and Darbelnet (1958: 8) as "the process of introducing information into the TL which is present only implicitly in the SL."In this spirit, Nida (1964: 226) argues that to add is basically to adjust the text to select the closest natural equivalent not for tempering the SL message.Of his nine types of addition, he basically focuses on fitting out elliptical expressions and obligatory specification.Nida (1964) stresses that "important semantic elements carried implicitly in the SL text may require explicit identification in the TL" (p.277).Explaining the wayward use of a word, relating to the topic itself and accounting for cultural differences (Newmark, 1988: 91-92), such two types could continue or interrupt a potential TL reader's flow of attention.
Examined as a transfer operation, a textual addition appears as a typical manifestation of explicitation (Blum-Kulka, 1986: 21).Going beyond cohesive explicitness, explicitation is identified by Klaudy (1998Klaudy ( /2008) ) to be a technique of making explicit in the TL text what is implicit in the SL text; it is to be obligatory, optional, pragmatic or translation-proper.Adding extra information by explanatory phrases or to expand condensed passages (Olohan and Baker, 2000), explicitation is further interpreted as the broader concept that encompasses the more specific concept of addition" (Baker, 2001: 81).In this sense, it is a distinctive feature of the translation product, so justifying why translations are instinctively or deliberately longer than their originals.
Furthermore, Pápai (2002: 488, cited in Heltai 2005: 46) proposed that "the higher degree of explicitness is a result of a translation operation to bring to the surface linguistic or not linguistic information in a non-explicit […] form, ensuring easier or more secure interpretation."Klaudy andKároly (2003, cited in Pym, 2005: 3) argue that explicitation occurs as: a more general SL meaning replaced by a more special TL meaning, a complex SL meaning distributed over several TL words, one SL sentence divided into two/more TL sentences, or SL phrases extended or elevated into TL clauses.Identifying patterns of explicitation, Becher (2010) also stresses it to verbalize "information […] to infer from the context, world knowledge or other inferential sources" (p.2).
Owing to the concisely compact language of the Quran, its being rendered into such a completely different linguistic system or cultural background as English is highly challenging.Such interpolations as textual additions in parentheses (=TAiPs) in this claimed-to-be inimitable type of text might be essential for producing more natural equivalence.Yet, they could be misleading overstatements as they might be distorting the SL meanings or not be based on linguistic approaches and/or reasonable procedures.Therefore, the present study aimed at analyzing the strategy of TAiPs in an officially sealed, widely spread yet heavily criticized English translation of the Quran, The Noble Quran: English Translation of the Meanings and Commentary, by Hilali and Khan (=HKT) in terms of both: a) Exploring new translational norms and accordingly b) Improving the HKT of the Quran.

RESEARCH METHOD
Produced by two Muslim translators, the population of concern (PoC) of this study is the HKT.Entitled as The Noble Quran, it is the 15 th revised edition published in 1996, as a co-translation of the Quranic text into modern English by Taqi-ud Din Hilali and M. Muhsin Khan.Based upon a systematic method of sampling, the HKT was wholly probable to be a sample.However, to deal with the whole PoC and cite every TAiP within it is a huge task; each chapter or group of chapters could be undertaken for further research on its own.Therefore, a six-chapter segment (namely, Chapters 44-49) of the HKT was selected to be both registerially and conceptually a representative sample; it consisted of (318 lines by nine words per each, equaling) 2.862 words, i.e. 3.7% of the total Quranic text. 1  Both Makki and Madani types of Quranic revelation were addressed in a nearly equal amount (see Table 1).The Makki chapters have small stylistically motivating verses and normally avoid long and perplexing speeches.Their prevailing theme is the doctrine of monotheism: God's attributes and powers in reference often to the stories of past people/prophets.Emphasizing the Prophethood of Muhammad and the reality of the Judgment Day, they also express a literal, rhetorical and linguistic miracle.However, the Madani chapters have long verses yet easier vocabulary; they are capable of explaining technical concepts, e.g.inheritance and matrimonial laws.They lay down the Islamic law and jurisprudence to emphasize judicial, economic, criminal, monetary and educational rules, and relationship of Islam with the other religions in the world.
Furthermore, the sample included TAiPs that could generally narrate the formal story entailed by the Quranic message (see Table 2).Sixteen concepts (or themes) were developed in four subsets.To determine a set of concepts also allowed examining very specific things; however, introducing a level of coding flexibility allowed new, important material to be incorporated into the coding process.Both existence and frequency were considered in the coding process.A concept was counted once, no matter how many times it appeared.This was a very basic process of coding giving a very limited perspective of the text.However, the number of times a concept appeared was more indicative of significance.
For the purpose of the present study, a typology of explicitation was considered as a theoretical instrument.Dealing with such two completely different languages as Arabic and English, information is added into the TL text as a sort of explicitation or adjustment in form of basically filling-out or specifying addition for sake of dynamic rendering (Nida, 1964).It continues or interrupts the flow of attention of a potential TL-reader of a translated text at either a linguistic, cultural or technical level (Newmark, 1988).Furthermore,   Klaudy (1998Klaudy ( /2008) classifies this information-as deliberately inserted into the translated/TL text-into four types: obligatory, optional, pragmatic and translation-proper (see Figure 1 as adapted from Klaudy, 1998Klaudy, /2008;;Newmark, 1988;Nida, 1964): Being a technique used to make replicable and valid inferences beyond merely identifying concepts, a relational content analysis began with exploring explicitative relations in the subject HKT against the predetermined set of norms.The 6-chapter HKT segment was reduced into its Ayaat/ verses and the subject TAiPs were given serial numbers as units of language.The types of relations to examine were variously determined at both levels of linguistic and referential explicitness.A general framework for building this content-based instrument was followed (cf.Palmquist, Carley and Dale, 1997).What happened in basically analyzing the functional types of TAiPs-until they were eventually counted to be eight (and, then, sixteen) ones-could be a twostage procedure: 1.The subject TAiPs were initially classified into two categories in keeping with the two levels of language: grammar and lexis.They were all treated as obligatorily grammatical or lexical.However, what of the TAiPs could not be obligatory were considered to be optionally textbuilding or stylistic, respectively.2. Such four subclasses in italic above were linguistic ones since what's basically dealt with was a piece of language.Now, what of such TAiPs could not be obligatory was to be pragmatically virtually-or actually-bracketed, and what of them could not be optional was technically translation-proper or interpretative, respectively.

BINARY EXPLORATION OF NORMS Linguistically Explicitative (LinE) Obligatory TAiPs
The LinE obligatory (LinEObl) TAiPs were necessarily performed by the translator for avoiding any structurally or meaningfully ill-formed sentences in the TL text.They came for filling in the missing categories and were found to be generally performed in a conscious or automatic manner (Klaudy, 2008: 102).Adjusting the SL form as per the structural requirements of the TL (Nida, 1964: 226), this class of TAiPs was either grammatical or lexical.The grammatical TAiPs put the translated text of the Quran together by filling out any implicit, unstated parts of it; they spelled out the functional units of language being of deictic nature.However, the lexical TAiPs put on weight any indirect, oblique expressions; they also gave necessarily relevant sorts of specification for any meandering lexical parts of the Quranic content.
1.For the grammatical TAiPs, they filled-out the translated text or specified a unit of language in it: a) A filling-out TAiP was both essential in form of a necessary part of a nominal construction as in "… and (Allah) will make their deeds vain" (47/08) in which the bracketed word was originally left out for good style, compactness and connectedness, or excessive as a full/partial predicate or complement understood from the context to help avoid any undesired indications as in "…and leave the sea as it is (quiet and divided)" (44/24).b) However, to settle on the meaning of a given part of the text, a specifying TAiP was only pronominal to help avoid any kind of misleading references, being personal as in ".or say they: He (Muhammad) has fabricated it!"(46/08), or demonstrative as in ".those who disbelieve (the strong and wealthy) say of those who believe" (46/11).2. The lexical TAiPs, likewise, filled-out the translated text or specified any of its units of language: a) At an ordinary or far-fetched extent of occurrence, a filling-out TAiP was found to be adjectival, to customarily happen as in ".thenWe have put you on a (plain) way of Our commandment" (45/18), or adverbial, to unexpectedly happen as in "…and We have (repeatedly) shown the Ayat in various ways that they might return" (46/27).b) However, a specifying TAiP considered four forms of speech; it came as qualified in form of nouns or verbs to determine the meaning of a word or phrase as in "...thatHe may admit [...] to Gardens under which rivers flow (Paradise)" (48/05), or qualifying to adjectivally/adverbially give specifications as in "...but Allah is Rich (Free of all needs), and you are poor" (47/38).

Figure 1. Typology of Explicitation in Translation
Linguistically Explicitative (LinE) Optional TAiPs The LinE optional (LinEOpt) TAiPs were caused by the differences in the textbuilding strategies and stylistic preferences between the two languages.They came as sentences could be constructed if the TL grammatical construction was not taken into account but the resultant translation was unnatural and unidiomatic (Klaudy, 2008: 102).Producing equivalent structures of semantic nature in the TL text (Nida, 1964: 226), this class of TAiPs was either textbuilding or stylistic.The textbuilding TAiPs drew together the translated Quranic text; they efficiently gave it real, specific amount of unequivocal sense and equipped it with related initial and final complements.However, the stylistic TAiPs held up the style of diction; they kept the stylistic usage of transliterated-in-Arabic proper names and lexical units in the Quranic text explaining them in English.
1.For the textbuilding TAiPs, they came at the level of a word or at a phrasal/clausal level: a) A word-level TAiP was either functional in form of connectives or possessive determiners as in "…a sin would have been committed by you without (your) knowledge" (48/25) putting a ceiling on this 'inferior' knowledge, or content-like as adverbs of time, focus or status based on the local and/or global Quranic contexts as in "…and Allah knows (all) your deeds" (47/30) triggering a TL reader's thought of Allah's might.b) However, a multi-word TAiP was phrasally vocative, prepositional, participial/infinitive and conjunctive as in ".when a decisive Surah (explaining things) is sent down" (47/20) giving a more attention-grabbing, yet avoidable, structure, or clausally to vocatively, relatively and conjunctively build the text as in ".nor shall they be returned to the worldly life, (so that they repent to Allah)" (45/35) interpreting and avoiding other indications to think about.2. The stylistic TAiPs were found, however, to give English counterparts of already-transliterated proper names or lexical units: a) A PN-render TAiP was either human as to past leading figures (namely, prophets and tyrants) as in ". there came to them a noble Messenger [i.e.Musa (Moses) 44/17) ‫السالم["‬ ‫)عليه‬ giving a semi-identical TL-adapted specification, or nonhuman as to holy books or celestial beings, stylistically specifying their preceding peers in the text as in ".this is their description in the Taurat (Torah)" (48/29) preserving the L1 style.b) However, an LU-render TAiP physically tackled human attributes and kinships or nonhuman objects as in "…that He may punish the Munafiqun (hypocrites)" (48/06) keeping a Quranic item along with its formal TL counterpart, or conceptually came as statuses, concepts and celestial beings as in "… pleased with the believers when they gave the Bai'ah (pledge)" (48/18) keeping important lexical units of language as only transliterated in Arabic.

Referentially Explicitative (RefE) Pragmatic TAiPs
The RefE pragmatic (RefEPra) TAiPs could be removed from the translated text of the Quran and the given text should remain grammatically and lexically acceptable.They were caused by the differences between cultures and shared knowledge (Klaudy, 2008: 103).Carrying an equivalent load of communication to the TL readership (Nida, 1964: 226), this class of TAiPs was either virtually-or actually-bracketed.The virtually-bracketed TAiPs were second parenthetically-unmarked parts of bigger TAiPs and introduce a local flavor into the TL text; they complementarily put up the Quranic text in a manner amplifying the semantic value of the given Verse.However, the actually-bracketed TAiPs were extra, second parts of bigger TAiPs and added exegetical values to the translation; they came in round-in-square brackets or dashed in round ones enabling the TL reader to have the full grasp of the message.
1.For the virtually-bracketed TAiPs, they provided secondary phrases or clauses: a) A phrasal TAiP was text-based as the coordinately conjunctive phrase in "...as a Command (or this Qur'an or the Decree of every matter) from Us" (44/05), or TAiP-based to be a separate TAiP as in "…above the Alamin (mankind and jinn of their time, during that period)" (45/16) depending on the TAiP as no related reference existed in the immediate text.b) Similarly, a clausal TAiP could be text-based as an extra addition as in "…then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives)" (47/04) coming out of the text as a second part of the TAiP, or TAiPbased as in "...thus [carrying out Jihad against the disbelievers till they embrace Islam]" (47/04) only depending on the TAiP as the text did not bear any indication to any religion.2. The actually-bracketed TAiPs were to fill-out the translated text or specify a unit of language, yet with the same classification above: a) A filling-out TAiP was text-based coming out of the text as already referred to as in "…and a witness testifies that [this Qur'an is from Allah (like the Taurat)]" (46/10), or TAiP-based only depending on the TAiP itself not basically on the literally translated text as in ".Ha-Mim [.and none but Allah (Alone) knows their meanings]" (44/01) being a second TAiP within a big bracket.b) Likewise, a specifying TAiP was text-based despite lexically specifying a word in the squared bracket as in "…that who has At-Taqwa [i.e. he is one of the Muttaqun (the pious)]" (49/13) as 'Al-Taqwa' was basically referred to in the text, or TAiP-based as in "…who disbelieved (in the Oneness of Allah -Islamic Monotheism)" (48/25) being essentially based on the preceding phrase 'Oneness of Allah'.

Referentially Explicitative (RefE) Technical TAiPs
The RefE technical (RefETec) TAiPs could only depend on the translator's view of the appropriate relationship between the SL text of the Quran and its translation.They were almost caused by the functional nature of the translating process itself as translations are often longer than the original texts (Klaudy, 2008: 103).Providing stylistic appropriateness in a suitably equivalent manner (Nida, 1964: 226), this class of TAiPs was either translation-proper or interpretative.The translation-proper TAiPs came out of the translating process as related to the target-or source-language texts of the Quran; they were either semantically duplicative or culturally associative ones.However, the interpretative TAiPs provided paraphrases of given parts of the Quranic text or explanatory commentaries; they were based on instant contexts or the translator's historical/religious knowledge.or exegetical to specify/replace a preceding unit of language on the basis of the translator's world of knowledge as in "…Ha-Mim [These letters are one of the miracles of the Quran]" (44/01).

POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT OF THE HKT
The sixteen subclasses of TAiPs were found to continue or interrupt the TL reader's flow of attention (cf.Nida, 1964;Newmark, 1988).Eight of them were continuative while the other eight ones were interruptive (see Figure 2).The con-tinuative TAiPs filled out elliptical expressions on the basis of parallel structures to be evident enough to determine the number and/or nature of the words to be added; anyhow, the structures might be also nonparallel yet formulaic even if non-evident (Nida, 1964: 227).However, as no obvious determined indication existed or there were multiple indications, the interruptive TAiPs came due to the fact that greater specificity may be required so as to avoid any ambiguities or misleading references in the TL formations and hence correctly rendering the SL text (Nida, 1964: 228).All the continuative TAiPs are includable as they keep the flow of attention but all the interruptive ones are excludable as they conversely get it broken.
A functional or being-of-dynamicity TAiP is considered in terms of being linguistic or referential, continuing or interrupting the flow of attention and being kept up-in-parentheses (UpiPs) or kept out-of-parentheses (OtfPs).In rendering into English such a claimed-to-be holy text as the Quran, TAiP could be processed by being excluded at all from the translated text, parenthetically included as just encountered in the text, included into the text but out of parentheses or let merely replace its corresponding SL unit of language.On this binary two-by-two processing of TAiPs in the subject HKT material, let us consider the following description: 1.To render in a conventional parenthesis-full manner: This mode of text-transfer involves using the syntactic and semantic TL constraints to reproduce the author's precise meaning.It attempts to render as closely as Language 2's structures allow the contextual meaning of the original text.It involves both literal and formal-1 types of translation: a) Literal translation: This type is a word-for-word kind of rendering or closely sticks to SL lexis and syntax.This explicitative type is to hesitantly tackle the LinEObl subclasses of TAiPs; a TAiP is included into the translated text by UpiPs insertion or direct replacement.Hence, the grammatical TAiP in "… who disbelieve, for them is destruction, and (Allah) will make their deeds vain" (47/08), for instance, is merely inserted and kept up in parentheses to be then "who disbelieve, for them is destruction, and (Allah) will make..." b) Formal-yet-impassive (formal-1) translation: This type is a TAiP-full kind of rendering, and respects context, interprets and even explains.This explicitative type is to decisively tackle the LinEOpt subclasses of TAiPs; a TAiP is included into the translated text by UpiPs deletion or reverse replacement.
Hence, the stylistic TAiP in "…Allah was pleased with the believers when they gave the Bai'ah (pledge)" (48/18), for instance, reversely replaces and kept up in parentheses to be then "Allah was pleased with the believers when they gave the pledge (Bai'ah)."2. To render in an unconventional parenthesis-free manner: This mode of transfer seeks to produce the same effect on the TL readers as was produced by the original on the SL readers.It attempts to produce on its read-ers an effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the original.It involves both formal-2 and liberal types of translation.a) Formal-yet-expansive (formal-2) translation: This type is a TAiP-free kind of rendering, and hands everything on a plate to the reader.This explicitative type is to decisively tackle the RefEPra subclasses of TAiPs; a TAiP is included into the translated text by OtfPs insertion or direct replacement.Hence, the virtually-bracketed TAiP in "…as a Command (or this Qur'an or the Decree of every matter) from US" (44/05), for instance, is merely inserted but kept out of parentheses to be then "as a Command (or this Qur'an) or the Decree of every matter from Us." b) Liberal translation: This type is a sense-for-sense kind of rendering or closely sticks to TL space and time.This explicitative type is to recklessly tackle the RefE-Tec subclasses of TAiPs; a TAiP is included into the translated text by OtfPs deletion or reverse replacement.Hence, the interpretative TAiP in "...thereafter either for generosity (i.e.free them without ransom), or ransom" (47/04), for instance, directly replaces but kept out of parentheses to be then "thereafter either for free-ing them without ransom, or ransom."Being either linguistically or referentially explicitative, the TAiPs were to complement the linguistic meaning(s) of Quranic utterances or referentially provide information presupposed or deduced from outside the linguistic context.In line with a binary pattern of classification, the LinE type of TAiPs seems to be conservatively processed while the RefE one is processed in an alternative manner.It is the matter of disparity, anyhow, between literality-wise and liberality-wise explicitations as argued by most of the approaches to equivalence in translation studies.Nonetheless, the translations of the Quranic text as observed in the related literature (e.g.Siddiek, 2012) have been only three types: literal translation, translation of meaning and interpretative translation.

CONCLUSION
Focusing on the thought processes of the translators of the English text of the Quran or being subjective, reader-focused and oriented towards an English language and culture, the TAiPs fell under two main types (cf.Klaudy, 1998Klaudy, /2008)); linguistically and referentially explicitative.The LinE TAiPs were caused by the syntactic and semantic structures of languages and items not found as self-evident on the linguistic SL surface.However, for subjectively complementing the TL picture, the Ref E TAiPs was to be redundant items as explicitness is a universal feature of translation.A set of sixteen subclasses of TAiPs were generated from the subject HKT material; some of them were almost to remain within the SL culture and some others were to put across SL foreign elements to the TL culture and readership.
Our types of explicitation as to the Quranic text rendered into English are eventually four, falling under two umbrellas: conservative and alternative (cf.Larson, 1984Larson, /1998: 17-20): 17-20).In general, little choice is provided to the translators to formulate their words; yet, a large number of linguistic variations sometimes exist to use (Newmark, 1982: 134;cf. Hawamdeh, 2014).In this spirit, the TAiPs as encountered in the subject HKT material were instruments by which the English text of the Quran was not inferior to the SL one and, as efficiently as possible, its meanings were not lost.Eventually, the TAiPs attempted to give force and clarity in the following four types: 1. Caused by the various syntactic and semantic structures of languages, the TAiPs were obligatory for producing grammatical and meaningful TL sentences.2. The choice of whether to optionally explicitate was influenced by a tolerable degree of freedom in translation or the translator's own notions of how to efficiently render the SL text.3. Since the TL readers do not share the same historical, geographic and cultural knowledge, the translator pragmatically made explicit such implicit kinds of information.In matter of fact, the TL versions are regularly observed to be longer than their SL versions in the process of translation, and this is technically to refer to the amount of explicitness.

END NOTES
1 For calculating the sample size, the original copy of the Quran in Arabic-also published by King Fahed Complex-was based upon; it is more easily countable.It is almost commonly agreed by Muslims includes 77.439 words. 2 Peace and blessing be upon him.3 Peace be upon him.

Figure 2 .
Figure 2. Classes and Subclasses of Explicitation in the HKT

Table 2 .
A conceptual analysis of TAiPs in HKT 1.For the translation-proper TAiPs, they were functionally in relation to either the TL or SL text.a) Actually, a TLT-related TAiP was rhythmic, i.e. to preserve a culture-bound rhythm of speech as in "… such are indeed Zalimun (wrong-doers, etc)" (49/11) instead of synonyms in sequence or short/long phrases despite being smoothly includable, or lengthy as in "…We have shown the Ayat (proofs, evidence, verses, lessons, signs, revelations)" (46/27) to represent something not easily includable in a small space in the text.b) However, a SLT-related TAiP could be direct being directly bracketed based on the SL culture as in ".Muhammad ( 2 ‫وسلم‬ ‫عليه‬ ‫هللا‬ ‫)صلى‬ is the Messenger of