Sajad Ahmadi; Hossein Goli
Abstract
Metaphor as one of the aesthetic aspects of the language, especially in literary works such as the Qur'an, has always been noticed between the proponent fan and literary, and one of the most widely used rhetorical aspect. The conversion of metaphor seems to be impossible in the eyes of some people, which ...
Read More
Metaphor as one of the aesthetic aspects of the language, especially in literary works such as the Qur'an, has always been noticed between the proponent fan and literary, and one of the most widely used rhetorical aspect. The conversion of metaphor seems to be impossible in the eyes of some people, which is unlikely. Of course, such great theoreticians as Newark has proposed a precise definition of the translation of metaphor, which today is used by various translators, especially religious sciences. In this essay, after a quick look at the general definition of metaphor and the expression of the structures and frameworks that Newmark proposes for the translation of the metaphor, we look at the comparison of the translation style of the Foladvand and the Halabi of the metaphors of the part one of Quran. The purpose of this paper is to open up a new ideology of metaphorical translation to advance its audience. The method we have adopted in this article is to examine, through various interpretations, the style of the translation of the two abovementioned translators and, finally, to statistically state which translators are using the most theoretical framework and the reason for the high or low frequency of some What are these frameworks in the work of two translators? Although in the old translations we saw the interpreter's commitment to reproduction to preserve the source language, today there are various ways to translate the metaphor into which each particular goal is pursued.
