Translation Quality Assessment of Iraqi Condolences Expressions Rendered into English
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25130/Lang.10.2.P2.15Abstract
In recent decades, scholars in translation studies have emphasized the challenges associated with translating culture-specific items, particularly those loaded with emotional and spirit ual meanings. Iraqi condolence expressions, shaped by Islamic beliefs and local customs, often include references to divine will, fate, and communal solidarity elements that may not have direct equivalents in English or may require significant adaptation to be contextually appropriate in the target language. The main problem of this paper is that misinterpretation or literal translation of these expressions can lead to awkwardness or diminishing the intended effect of the message. This paper, therefore, explores the quality of translating Iraqi condolence expressions into English, aiming to assess how effectively such translations convey the intended emotional and cultural meanings. The assessment is conducted through an framework grounded in contemporary translation quality model, which consider both linguistic equivalence and pragmatic appropriateness. In doing so, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of the intersection between language, culture, and emotion in translation. Five Iraqi condolence expressions are selected to be translated by five seven translator to see how to what extent good quality of their translation is achieved in the TL.
References
Al-Ali, M. N. (2005). Communicating Condolence in Arabic: The socio-cultural and religious context. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(8), 1345–1364.
Al-Khatib, M. A. (2006). Speech acts in English and Arabic: A contrastive study. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(11), 1901–1917.
Allan, K., & Burridge, K. (1991). Euphemism and dysphemism: Language used as shield and weapon. Oxford University Press.
Badie, M. M. (2025). Identity, Experiences, and Agency in EFL Learning among Iraqi Students. Journal of Language Studies, 9(1), 415-426. https://doi.org/10.25130/Lang.9.1.25.
Baker, M. (1992). In other words: A coursebook on translation. Routledge.
Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1984). Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguistics, 5(3), 196–213.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
Catford, J. C. (1965). A linguistic theory of translation. Oxford University Press.
Holmes, J. (1995). Women, men and politeness. Longman.
House, J. (1997). Translation quality assessment: A model revisited. Narr.
Husein, R. A. (2025). A Pragmatic Analysis of Reactions to Rumors on COVID-19 in Iraq. Journal of Language Studies, 9(1), 250-266. https://doi.org/10.25130/Lang.9.1.14.
Lakoff, R. (1973). The logic of politeness; or, minding your p’s and q’s. In C. Corum, T. Cedric Smith-Stark, & A. Weiser (Eds.), Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (pp. 292–305). Chicago Linguistic Society.
Munday, J. (2016). Introducing translation studies: Theories and applications (4th ed.). Routledge.
Newmark, P. (1988). A textbook of translation. Prentice Hall.
Nida, E. A. (1964). Toward a science of translating: With special reference to principles and procedures involved in Bible translating. Brill.
Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge University Press.
Suleiman, Y. (2003). The Arabic language and national identity: A study in ideology. Edinburgh University Press.
Wierzbicka, A. (1991). Cross-cultural pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Mouton de Gruyter.
