Euphemism in Arabic and English; the Case of Quranic Sex-Related Euphemisms Translated into English Mohammed Ahmed Albarakati

King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia Abstract Euphemism in the Quranic text offers a unique source for studying euphemism as one can easily notice that the Quran never elaborates explicitly on distasteful themes, but rather employs a number of tools such as al-kinayah and al-tarid to fulfil euphemistic functions. As al-Kinayah and al-Tarid use language and culture-specific expressions, transfer of these expressions to other languages- namely to English in this study- would inevitably pose a special difficulty to translators. This paper argues that unless there are already established equivalent terms in the target language for a source language euphemism, the translators comprehension and innovation would play a definitive role in the conveyance of both the meaning and the euphemistic function which in some cases may not be possible to achieve. A comparison between the concept of euphemism in Arabic and English will first be drawn in terms of its definition, the linguistic devices used for its formation, and the motives behind euphemising in both languages. Then, we will functionally examine how Quranic sex related euphemisms have been translated in five published Quran translations. It was found that translators adherence to the literal rendering of the text has blocked the conveyance of the euphemistic functions. Background: Euphemism is a significant rhetorical device which is used to substitute a mild, indirect, or vague expression for one thought to be offensive, harsh, or blunt. It is widely used in various types of genres for various different purposes. In the religious genre however, it serves a number of purposes such as politeness, giving advice with no or less loss of face, and beautifying the speech with more aesthetic expressions. The Quran, however, offers a unique corpus for studying euphemism. One can easily notice that the Quranic text never directly mentions distasteful terms, but rather employs a number of tools such as al-kinayah and altarid to fulfil euphemistic functions. As these two rhetorical devices use language and culture-specific expressions, transfer of these expressions to English would inevitably pose a special difficulty to translators (House 2002: p 4). Etymologically, dictionaries seem to agree on the Greek origin of the word, i.e. eu (), which means good/well and pheme which means speech/speaking. Similarly, sources seem to agree to define euphemism as: using a less harsh or a less blunt expression as an alternative to a harsh one. For the purpose of this paper, it is examined as a rhetorical device by which language users communicate their aesthetic and cognitive experiences (El-Zeiny 2009). Historically, it is assumed that euphemism has been used by preliterate people, or even ever since the human language developed. It is believed to have existed ever since humans began using speech, which led eventually to communication in writing instead of grunts and growls

(Allan and Burridge 1991). It happened that certain words, such as gods, evil spirits and some animals, took on magical properties that made them either sacred or profane. Therefore, they were expressed with a lot of caution and in some cases they were not even expressed at all (Noble 1982). Furthermore, Noble (1982) points out that several ancient nations such as the Ancient Greeks, the Latin and the Cree Indians had to come up with euphemisms in order to make communication possible. Similarly, Yahweh or Jehovah is not used in the Jewish liturgy; only words like God, Lord, and Most High are used instead. Thus, the art of euphemism, according to Noble (1982), began expanding from alternative names for gods, spirits, and humans. Later, it has expanded to reach everyday functions and events depending on the linguistic fashions of the time. Euphemism in English Based on the opinions mentioned above, we can anticipate that English has benefited from a number of languages, namely Latin, Greek and French with regards to euphemizing. Yet, that the heyday of euphemism in English was the early to the mid nineteenth century claims Lawrence (1973). He cites two quotations by written by Thomas Bowdler and Charles Dickens in 1818 and 1836 respectively, which referred to euphemism as expressions that are omitted and cannot with propriety be read aloud in the family, and the unmentionables respectively (ibid: 9). He further cites some coinages used to express euphemism such as 'irrepressibles' (around 1790), 'indescribables', 'ineffables', inexpressables', 'unutterables', 'indispensibles' and 'innominables', and the Dickens' 'inexplicables' and 'unwhisperables' (Lawrence 1973: p 10). Euphemism can be approached from different angles. If approached as words clustering around a certain theme, one can see that there are religious euphemisms which can serve for avoidance of profanity, or mentioning taboo words, such as Gee for Jesus and Adonai for the Lord in Judaism. There can also be sex euphemisms which can cover up words of lust and desire, parts of the body and effluvia. In addition, press readers would look up fresh euphemisms that are coined on almost a daily basis in the political discourse such as friendly fire and collateral damage. Similarly as well, there can be long lists for euphemisms dealing with other semantic fields such as death and killing. From a linguistic perspective, however, euphemisms can be approached by investigating the linguistic phenomenon that has taken place or the linguistic feature which has been used for euphemism formation. Following Warren (1992), there could be either a semantic or a formal linguistic innovation strategy which occur for euphemism formation. Example of semantic innovations would be overstatement or hyperbole such as sanitary engineer for garbage man (ibid) and personal assistant for secretary. Understatement, on the other hand, can also be used to produce euphemisms as in sleep for die and deed for act of murder (Allan and Burridge 1991, p 18). Moreover, some euphemisms are coined through semantic widening when words are moved up in ladder of abstraction such as growth for cancer (Neaman and Silver 1983, p 10).

Formal innovation is yet another source for euphemism formation. Applying word formation methods such as clipping, abbreviating, acronym, blending; or by applying phonemic modifications as in Gosh for God and Gee for Jesus, one can have an endless list of euphemisms. Yet, borrowing is a major source for euphemisms in English. Latin and French seem to have contributed a great deal in the English repertoire of euphemisms for the reason that foreign languages sound finer, argues Rawson (1983: 8). The influence of French language is also evident in various English semantic fields such as love and women clothes as in affair, amour, and lingerie. Latin, on the other hand, is equally popular especially in other semantic fields such as bodys sexual functions with euphemisms such as fellatio and pudendum(Rawson 1983). Nevertheless, English euphemisms can also be formed by metaphorical language. The very essence of a metaphor is that it produces an aesthetic function; hence they are often used in literary and public oratory works (Stefanowitsch 2005). Thus, metaphors are pervasive in euphemism formation and one can see that a great numbers of euphemisms are figurative; to mention but a few: 'to kick the bucket' and ' to go to the happy hunting grounds' for 'to die' or to spend a penny for going to the toilet. What is more, cultures reflect how a language lexically copes with taboo themes. Accordingly, the stronger a taboo is the more numbers of euphemistic expressions one may find in a language (Rawson 1983). Consequently, differences do exist between languages with regards to frequency and abundance of euphemisms. For example, some topical fields seem to enjoy greater numbers of euphemisms than others within the same language. In English, for instance, euphemisms which are linked to sex, drugs and addictions noticeably outnumber those which one would find in Arabic; more than 800 terms for 'copulation' according to Allan and Burridge (1991: 91), and 356 synonyms for drunk in American slang (Rawson 1983, p 6). Not only that, with the fact that English has borrowed a great number of words from a wide range of languages, and that Arabic tends to depend on lexical inflection rather, the number of euphemisms in the two languages is no wonder disparate (AlQadi 2009). Yet, it is difficult to make a sound statistical estimate of euphemisms in Arabic with the lack of Arabic dictionaries for euphemisms. Al-Kinayah and the Concept of Euphemism Although Arabic abounds in euphemistic expressions which cover a wide array of topics, genres, and forms (Ali 1996), euphemism, as a rhetorical term, or as it is used in English, has not had an absolute Arabic equivalent term. Instead, Arabic uses other rhetorical devices that similarly deal with hiding meaning and making harsh words sound more pleasant to listeners and readers i.e. al-kinayah and at-tarid. These two devices had been studied by rhetoricians such as al-Thaalibi (d.1038) and al-Jurjani (d. 1078), and more recently however, a number of Arabic rhetorical researchers have touched upon the concept of euphemism in Arabic giving it a number of labels such as lutf al-ta'bir, tahsin al-lafzh, and at-talattuf (Umar 1998). In his book Fiqh Al-lughah wa asrar Al-arabiyyah, Al-Thaalibi (2000) assigned a short chapter which dealt exclusively with euphemistic metonymy. Yet, he devoted a whole book

for this topic which is titled as al-Kinayah wa al-Tarid. The book is divided into seven sections all of which deal with a number of sensitive themes that are broadly presented such as women, disease, ageing, death, food and other themes which are usually euphemized for in Arabic. Another rhetorician who dealt with this topic was Al-Jurjani (d. 1078). He defines al-kinayah as:

" (al-Jurjani 2004, p 66) "

"that the speaker intends to express a certain meaning but not with the word [usually] assigned for the meaning but with an indirect one; a secondary [word] which alludes to the meaning indirectly (my translation). The indirectness is metaphorical, and is what produces the euphemistic function in euphemistic metonymy. According to al-Jurjani (2004), the meaning should be traced in the senses which are logically preceding the utterance as in: female slugabed". This utterance entails that such a woman is rich enough to have maids employed to work for her, so she would not need to wake up as early as others would need to i.e. the poor. He rightly posits that al-Kinayah (i.e. indirectness) is more eloquent than disclosure (i.e. that of the meaning) (ibid: 70). Moreover, Abu al- Abbas Al-Jurjani wrote a book in which he included many examples of Arabic euphemistic expressions. His book al-Muntakhab min kinayat al-'ulam' wa 'irshadt al-bulagh' contains chapters about metonymic expressions which deal with themes such as adultery, illegitimacy, copulation, sexual potency, defloration, homosexuality, body effluvia, and other related chapters. Al-Jurjani (1908: 4) considers al-kinayah as a circumlocutory way to express topics that are not ought to be seen i.e. [by the public] such as copulation and relief of oneself. He also narrates some stories that include situations when speakers had to avoid mentioning embarrassing words, and found their way out of the dilemma using al-kinayah and al-tarid (i.e. for euphemizing). However, it is worth mentioning that al-Jurjani allocated a whole chapter for al-kinayah in the Holy Quran and the Islamic tradition. On the other hand, 'Ibn al-Athir (d. 1251) views al-kinayah as a double meaning structure which has both factual and metaphorical meanings (Ibn-al-Atheer 1959, p 51). An example for this is the Quranic verse: "( " Q. 4:43) which literally translates: Or you have touched women. According to 'Ibn al-Athir, the factual meaning is that of the actual touching, whereas the metaphorical meaning refers to sexual intercourse which is not explicit in the verse. His interpretation concords with opinions of scholars such as Ibn Abbas and al-Shafii who interpreted the part of touching as sexual intercourse. More recently, Umar (1998), a modern Arabic linguists, has recently used the term "" al-talattuf for euphemising. He links euphemism with taboos which, according to Umar, are substituted with other words that are already preoccupied with different meanings. According to Umar (1998:240), the euphemistic word had had a different meaning and its meaning was extended to be used as a euphemism for a taboo meaning by means of delusion.

Al-Ta'rid and the Concept of Euphemism The word al-ta'rid stems from the verb 'Arrada meaning to widen, and one would rightly assume that there is a logical link between the very meaning of the verb arrada and widening of meaning. Thus, as a rhetorical term, it means to make a hint, and hence, would by definition, contrast with declaration (al-Khouli 2004). Al-ta'rid has been approached by various rhetoricians. For instance, al-Zamkhshari defines it as "when one mentions something but at the same time is indirectly alluding to something not mentioned [by the very words of the utterance]" .i.e. pointing to something that is not worded (Al-Zamakhshari 1998, p 459). He illustrated his definition with some examples like an example of a needy person who would address a wealthy one saying: "I dropped by to see your pretty. The speaker does not literally mean what he said, but he rather means he needs some money from the wealthy. For al-Zamkhshari, those examples are charged with hidden messages transferred from the speaker to the addressee (al-Zamkhshari 1998). They should only be perceived by those who are privy to the speaker's and addressee's circumstances and situation. Other listeners- who are not- will only be able to perceive the literal or, in other words, the surface meaning. Thus, the beauty and artistry lies in the ambiguity of the double meaning structure which is exclusive to this closed group. Nevertheless, he differentiates between al-kinayah, al-ta'rid stating that while both of them are symbolic i.e. declaration-free; it is the wording which makes the distinction between al-kinayah and al-ta'rid. That is if the meaning - or a link to the meaning- is worded, then it is a sort of al-kinayah whereas the meaning of al-ta'rid can only be solicited from the context and the circumstances beyond. Furthermore, al-Tha'alibi (1998:167) claims that al-ta'rid style is common among Arabs, and they would criticize those who elucidate. He lists various situations from the Arabic tradition which make good examples for al-ta'rid. Interestingly though, some examples are difficult to understand as they need prior knowledge of the culture and the personages. In our point of view, that is justifiable as al-ta'rid utterances are meant to be ambiguous in its very essence. If they happened to be lucid, they would violate al-ta'rids principle and would not qualify as examples of al-ta'rid. We will briefly discuss a couple of examples from al-Tha'alibi's book: 'Ibn Mukram was blessed with a child, so 'Ibn al-Fuja'ah came along to congratulate him. Upon 'Ibn al-Fuja'ah leaving, he left him a stone" (1998:172) The stone which was left by 'Ibn al-Fuja'ah alludes to the fact that 'Ibn Mukram's wife had committed adultery to have given birth to that child, so she needed to be stoned to death in accordance to the Islamic punishment ruling for those who commit adultery after marriage. In order to understand the intended meaning of the story, one must have a background of the Islamic ruling first, and maybe some account of information about the persons involved. Otherwise, the stone in the story will make no pragmatic value. Similarly, 'Ibn al-Athir views al-kinayah as a metaphorical aspect - as we mentioned earlierwhereas al-ta'rid is understood through contextual hints. He adds that al-ta'rid is more deeply hidden than al-kinayah. That is because there is always a hint in the al-kinayah utterance

whereas al-ta'rid's is contextual and can be misleading to those who are not fully aware of the situation ('Ibn al-Athir 1959, Vol.1, p 57 ). Thus, it is understood through insinuation rather than through figurative language. To conclude, meanings of both al-kinayah and al-ta'rid utterances are not literal; both have hidden meanings. Nevertheless, the genius of al-Kinayah is its employment of figurative language and idiomatic expressions, whereas al-ta'rid deals with a deeply hidden message that can often be found in long sentences and structures rather than in short fixed expressions. Besides contextual hints whether that of the culture or the situation, it can also be conveyed through body language. Therefore, it can only be interpreted from the texts, knowledge and background. The difference is evident in the following examples: ( Q. 74:04)

The verse literally translates as And your clothes purify. Garments, as claimed by alJurjani and 'Ibn al-Athir refers to the heart and inner self (al-Jurjani 1908; Ibn-al-Atheer 1959). The word garment here is used figuratively as it is an established Arabic kinayah utterance to say one whose garment is clean i.e. he or she is vice-free. (( ) Q. 13:19)

This verse reads: 'Can a man who knows what has been revealed to you from your Lord is the truth, and one who is blind, be the same? They alone who are endowed with minds that receive admonition'. The underlined part is an example of al-ta'rid; the meaning is that those who do not take admonition are not endowed with minds i.e. are like animals which are not capable of making reasoning. Motives for al-Kinayah and al-Ta'rid vs. Euphemism After we have reviewed and examined different scholarly approaches towards al-kinayah and al-ta'rid, we shall now proceed to examine some euphemistic motives for their usage; known in Arabic as 'Aghrad al-kinayah w. al-ta'rid. The aim is to explore how much they correspond with euphemism in English. We will try to compare and contrast the usage of euphemism in both languages and, examine the major challenges they pose for translators. The many definitions of euphemism reflect the different motives behind it. The idea of euphemism is basically employing word choice in order to fulfil certain effects or functions which are normally of social, emotional and aesthetic drives (Linfoot-Ham 2005). Word choice, however, rightly claims Allan and Burridge (1991: 20), depends entirely on context. Context, in a broad sense, plays a definitive role in this process (Warren 1992). It could be widened to encompass historical, cultural, and linguistic accounts of factors, and could also be narrowed down to authors idiosyncratic style. Yet, intention of the writereuphemistic or otherwise- is bound on the recipient to guess with the aid of the contextual clues.

Generally, Arabic and English seem to share a number of themes which are often euphemized for, e.g. addressing and naming, child birth, body effluvia, sex and body parts, death and killing, illness...etc. Yet, one can find other themes which are recurrently euphemised for in one language while being differently dealt with in the other. For example, direct reference to God is a taboo theme in English as it violates the Third Commandment (Lawrence 1973). Instead, euphemisms such as gog, gough, gosse are used to avoid using Gods name in oaths. According to Allan and Burridge (1991: 36), modern European constraints on the use of Gods name hark back to the Semitic founders of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Yet, while this may apply to Christianity and Judaism, the Islamic faith urges Muslims to call upon Allah either with His Exalted names or with His Exalted Attributes. This is made clear in (Q 7:180) which translates: And to Allah belong the best names, so invoke Him by them. And leave [the company of] those who practice deviation concerning His names. They will be recompensed for what they have been doing1. In Arabic however,, given that generosity is a highly valued quality in the Arabic culture, Arabs do euphemize for avarice. Al-Thaalibi (1998) for instance, devotes a chapter in which he quotes a number of Arabic poetry lines which employ al-kinayah and al-ta'rid to scorn the stingy. Moreover, he devotes chapters for ageing and grey hair which are not normally euphemized for in English. Yet, auguring bad omen used once to be a euphemism theme until it was prohibited in Islam. This theme is still pervasive in English which is reflected in the way English euphemizes for disease. Allan and Burridge (1991:172) report that English speakers try to avoid tempting fate by not speaking of misfortune. This is not to be mixed with euphemizing for disease as it is done for both fear and mere distaste (ibid). Not very differently, desert is euphemised for in Arabic with " "i.e. a place where one would win, and similarly euphemise for blind with " "i.e. the sighted. However, this is made for optimism rather for bad omen of the words (Umar 2008: 1752). Scope of the Study and Methodology: Within a linguistic functional approach, this study is examining translations of seven sexrelated euphemistic expressions found in one Quranic verse i.e. (Q. 02:187). The euphemistic expressions are textually and contextually analysed in light of a number of authentic exegetical books. The following five published translations are used for assessment: Pickthall, Asad, Al-Hilali and Khan, Sahih, and Abdel Haleem. These translations are evaluated in terms of their conveyance of the euphemistic effect, and also in terms of the strategy adopted for euphemism translation. Given that euphemism is an intentional choice of words made for a pragmatic purpose (Farghal 1995), the translation approach which is deemed to fulfil the goals of this study is Nords functional theory which defines translation as: the production of a functional target text maintaining a relationship with a given source text that is specified according to the intended or demanded function of the target text (translation skopos) (Nord 1991: 28). It is argued that although the topic of sex is mutually

Sahih International Translation

euphemised for in Arabic and English, euphemism translation is still not communicating the same euphemistic function. Data Analysis: As far as translation is concerned, translation of euphemism is similar to translating any other cultural item; it will not be difficult to translate as long as there is an equivalent term in the target language. Nevertheless, this is not always the case as euphemisms are more likely to be culture-specific as we discussed above. For translations of Quranic euphemisms, the problem is hypothesized to be two folds; translator related (e.g. comprehension), and language related (e.g. untranslatability). Provided that translators are dealing with a text that was revealed more than 1400 years ago, and that the very nature of euphemism is the constant change of the signifier or the signified (Levinson 1983; Farghal 1995); translators are likely to miss the euphemistic meaning. The other problem is both language and culturebound; euphemism can either have no target language equivalent, or that the target language equivalent is not conveying the intended euphemistic meaning together with the semantic meaning. This will be further illustrated with examples as follows: ) (Q 2:187) ( SLT no.1: Literally: saying obscene speech to your women Context of the revelation: When fasting was first dictated, Muslims were ordered to abstain from eating, drinking, and having sexual relations while fasting during day time. After sunset, it was made permissible to them to eat, drink and approach their husbands or wives till the time of Isha prayer. The period between sunset i.e. Maghrib prayer time was not long enough for them, so some Sahabah did violate the order with their spouses. Some repented and came to the Prophet, pbuh, asking for Allahs forgiveness. So, the verse was revealed to abrogate the way fasting had been practiced, and to extend the permission period to be the whole night until the time for Fajr i.e. dawn prayer (al-Baidhawi 1999; Bewley 2003; Qutb 2003). Linguistic Analysis: The word - as found in Arabic dictionaries- originally means indecent speech, and as a verb, it means to be obscene (Ridha 1920; Penrice 1970; Ibn-Al-Ha'em 2003). In other contexts, it also refers to precopulatory talks and actions which take place between a husband and wife such as flirtation (i.e. making explicit sexual overtures). It also involves speech which represents their sexual interests and desires in each other (Ridha 1920). In this

instance, being followed by the conjunction the word is found to refer to the actual sexual relation actions in a similar structure to as in the verse (Q 4:21) (Al-Zamakhshari 1998; Al-Suyuti 1999). However, there seems here to be a case of semantic progression or extension of meaning. That is, since it originally meant indecent talk in its general sense and flirtation in some contexts, it took on another sense which is having the sexual relation itself. There also seems to be cause-effect and part-for-the-whole relationships between the literal sense and its euphemistic sense as the process of making love would normally start with that type of talk (the literal meaning- cause) leading to the actual coitus itself (the euphemistic meaning-effect) (Neaman and Silver 1983 p 257). According to Al-Zamakhshari (1998 : 387), this is a type of al-kinayah where we are using a finer expression instead of a despicable one. Interestingly though, Al-Zamakhshari (1998: 389) and al-Baidhawi (1999: 106) agree that the word sounds more negative than other expressions which are used to euphemise for the same purpose such as ) .( ) ,( They both agree that the reason behind using such a negative word is disapproval of what some the Sahabah had committed when they had sexual relations with their wives while it was prohibited to do so. Contextually, the word which is normally translated as betrayal mentioned in a later part of the verse proves as well that the word is occurring in a context of contempt. Moreover, if we are to trace this words occurrence in the Quran, we find that it is mentioned only twice in the entire Holy Quran; namely verses (Q. 2:187 and Q. 2:197) (Al-Ukaili 2008). Let us examine the second verse i.e. (Q 2:197): () (The pilgrimage is [performed during] well-known months, and whoever is minded to perform the pilgrimage therein [let him remember that] there is [to be] no lewdness nor abuse nor angry conversation on the pilgrimage) adapted from Pickthalls Translation. The word -which is translated by Pickthall as lewdness- comes along with two other negative words which are - ,translated as abuse and angry conversation respectively- all happen in a context of prohibition. Ridha (1920) agrees that it is not a plainspoken word nor harsh, but rather a word that refers to a harsh meaning. However, if we examine what it essentially refers to and what other possibilities one could have in that context as opposed to the disagreeable term i.e ,it becomes clear that the word is a typical euphemism which despite its negative denotations fits perfectly for the context. Translation Analysis and Assessment: Pickthall: to go in unto your wives Asad: to go in unto your wives Al-Hilali and Khan: to have sexual relations with your wives Sahih: to go to your wives [for sexual relations]

Abdel Haleem: to lie with you wives Assessment: Both Pickthall and Asad (1 and 2 respectively henceforth) translate this part of the verse with the euphemism (to go in unto) which is an established biblical euphemism2 whereas Al-Hilali and Khans, and Sahihs translations (3 and 4 respectively henceforth) translate it with a translation of the meaning that ignores the euphemistic feature of the word and hence exposes the euphemism. This is evident in using the word sexual within the body of the translation or between brackets in 3 and 4 respectively. Unfortunately, I cannot find any evidence to prove that the phrase (sexual relation) is used as a euphemism in English. Quite the contrary, it is often euphemised for with euphemisms such as copulation, making love, sleeping with action etc. (Noble 1982; Neaman and Silver 1983; Allen and Burridge 1991; Holder 2008). Holder (1987: 103) posits that a genteel usage for have relations is using the verb to copulate. He claims that to have sexual relations is more explicit. Therefore, on the grounds that euphemisms are made to cover unacceptable facts or explicit words that are considered to be not suitable for mentioning (Fairclough 2001; Thomas, Wareing et al. 2004), using such an explicit expression contradicts with what a euphemism is essentially made for. Abdel Haleems translation (Number 5 henceforth) is euphemistic where the translator is using the phrase lie with your wives which alludes to sexual relation. According to Neaman and Silver (1983: 10), this process is called semantic shift where we use words naming the larger event in place of more precise references to the sexual relations.... Moreover, the context contains words which would draw the readers mind closer towards recognizing the euphemistic meaning of the euphemism used rather than its literal meaning. That is to say, the words wives and night would help eliminate the readers expectations to the intended euphemized meaning i.e. sexual relation, and would draw the readers mind away from the literal meaning of the verb to lie with. Proposed Translation: to approach your wives My suggested translation does both maintain the euphemistic sense and keep a great deal of the literal meaning of the word i.e. the talk which takes place between a husband and wife. The verb approach could mean one coming near the other or making a proposal or an offer3 which are very similar to the preliminaries of the sexual relation meant by the word . SLT no. 2: Literally: they [wives] are garments for you, and you [husbands] are garments for them. Linguistic analysis:
2

And she said, Behold my maid Bilhah, go in unto her; and she shall bear upon my knees, that I may also have

children by her (King James Bible, Genesis 30:3, Cambridge Ed.)

3

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/approach

This part of the verse presents an image showing how intimate the two spouses are. They are likened in the verse to ones garments which denotes how close the two are associated with each other. Exegetes have seen a number of points of resemblance: This metaphor may be considered as a justification to the reason why it was made allowable for Muslims to approach their wives on the night of the fast as per the beginning of the verse. That is to say; it was allowable for you to sleep with your wives for the reason that they are very close to you, and that it is inevitable for you to avoid mixing with them, so you will not be able to control yourselves (AlZamakhshari 1998; al-Baidhawi 1999). It could also reflect how intimate the two spouses can get when they embrace one another in a way that may be similar to ones own garments which he or she is wearing (Mawdudi 1988; al-Baidhawi 1999). Another meaning that could also be understood from the text is that they are compared to shelters which provide warmth and safety for each other (al-Tabari 1997). This opinion is supported by the verse: (Q. 07:47))( Literally: (It is Him who created you from one soul and created from it its mate to dwell in her). It could possibly allude to them considered to each other as shields from committing sins. What is meant is that you are considered as allowable channels for each other to fulfil your own natural desires (al-Baidhawi 1999; Bewley 2003; Qutb 2003). The above cited opinions all agree that the expression is used in a metaphorical way as the literal meaning is unfeasible i.e. one wears the other. From this, and with the contextual aids, we can conclude that it is a euphemism used in a very fine rhetorical way. Translation Analysis and Assessment: Pickthall: They are raiment for you and ye are raiment for them. Asad: they are as a garment for you, and you are as a garment for them. Al-Hilali and Khan: They are Libas [i.e. body cover, or screen, or Sakan, (i.e. you enjoy the pleasure of living with her - as in Verse 7:189) Tafsir At-Tabari], for you and you are the same for them. Sahih: They are clothing for you and you are clothing for them. Abdel Haleem: they are [close] as garments to you, as you are to them Translations 1, 2, and 4 seem to be translating the verse literally using a number of translation variations for the word i.e. raiment, clothing, and garment respectively. Except from translation 1 choice of the word raiment which sounds fairly poetic and biblical, the other two choices are unfortunately plain and ignorant of the romantic image intended within the

metaphor in the source language. Translation 4 does also adopt the same literal methodology, but yet it is giving more options of interpretations to the reader to learn. The risk in such a translation is that readers can get this literal translation as literally as it may sound, at the expense of the intended message which gets blurred and lost. Translation 5, however, sounds pragmatically clearer adding the word [close] to the translation. Euphemistically, adding the word close would draw the readers attention towards imagining how a husband and wife would be as close as ones garment would be close to his or her body. Hence, supported by the point of resemblance, the image is more likely to get across to the readers mind. Thus, when hints are seeded into the translation, the reader is left with less distracters of the intended meaning. Proposed translation: You seek shelter in each others arm. Our proposed translation used a target language oriented expressions that corresponds a great deal to the source language meaning. On the other hand, the style sounds similarly as poetic as the SL metaphor. This idiomatic expression conveys the meaning both pragmatically and euphemistically, and at the same time disregards the literal meaning which may hinder the reader from recognizing the intended euphemistic meaning. SLT no. 3: Literally, and now, you may physically contact them and seek what Allah has written for you. Textual and contextual analysis: There are two euphemistic expressions in the above part of the verse; and , euphemisms one and two respectively henceforth. The verb in euphemism one is derived from the word i.e. human skin. The literal meaning of it implies a physical contact between the husband and wife skins (Bewley 2003). However, there have been two opinions regarding the interpretation of it. One opinion restricts the meaning to the literal interpretation of the word mubashara i.e. skin to skin contact. Therefore, according to this opinion, the meaning is restricted to sexual actions which do not involve intercourse (al-Razi 1981). However, a stronger opinion extends the meaning of mubashara to include actual sexual intercourse (al-Tabari 1973; Ibn-Al-Ha'em 2003; al-Wahidi 2010). The second opinion is supported by the context as the part translated as it was made allowed...etc supports that what is meant here is actual intercourse. Part for the whole is the technique employed here as physical skin contact is an initial part of the whole process. Euphemism two is translated as (and seek what Allah has written for you). Exegetes cite a number of interpretations which could be understood from the verse (alTabari 1973; al-Razi 1981; al-Baidhawi 1999; Bewley 2003): First Opinion: the Night of Power Second Opinion: sexual relation

Third Opinion: it could mean What Allah has permitted to you and commanded you to do Fourth Opinion: seeking to beget and conceive offspring Fifth Opinion: the Quran i.e. follow what Allah has written for you in the Quran i.e. permissions and prohibitions (Ibn-al-Jawzi 1984, p 192). Syntactically, this part is linked with the conjunction ( )with the verb which means to have sexual relations as stated above. The first and fifth opinions, therefore, are both cotextually and contextually invalid as there is no meaning relevance between part one and part two. The second opinion is a repetition of the meaning of euphemism number one; hence, it is not valid either as the ( )conjunction suggests difference in meaning. The third opinion is still unclear as it is simply interpreting the euphemism with another euphemism that is lacking elaboration and needs to be further explained i.e. what is meant by what Allah had permitted and commanded? The fourth opinion is preponderantly acceptable as one of the main wisdoms behind having sexual relations is normally having children. The technique used here is generalisation as the pronominal suggests.4 Translation Assessment: Pickthall: So hold intercourse with them and seek that which Allah hath ordained for you Asad: Now, then, you may lie with them skin to skin, and avail yourselves of that which God has ordained for you. Al-Hilali and Khan: So now have sexual relations with them and seek that which Allah has ordained for you (offspring) Sahih: So now, have relations with them and seek that which Allah has decreed for you Abdel Haleem: Now you can lie with them- seek what God has ordained for you Euphemism number 1 was translated with an array of euphemisms in all the above translations. Yet, translation number 1 used an obsolete euphemism (Holder 2008), while 3 used an exposed sort of euphemism. Interestingly though, Asad attempted to translate the euphemism literally hoping such a literal translation would convey both the metaphorical and euphemistic functions. Despite it is not a well-established euphemism in English, Asads translation succeeds to present both formal and functional equivalences; the whole image of one lying with another, skin to skin collectively hints at the intended meaning in ST. Clipping the word sexual off the word relation in Sahihs translation make it euphemistic. Euphemism number 2 however is translated literally. The same strategy used for euphemism formation in the SLT is repeated in the translation i.e. semantic shift or synecdoche. SLT 4:

Literally: Those are Allahs limits; do not get close to them Textual and contextual analysis: There are two parts in this verse that we need to analyse in his verse: and . Lexically, the word singular of can mean the extreme end of something, boundary, borderline...etc but is it is metaphorically used here in the verse to refer to something else. We can see the image of a protected entity surrounded with boundaries; the boundaries have repulsive domain so that no one can get near this entity. Yet, tracing exegetical opinions on the semantic scope of the phrase ( i.e. the bounds set by Allah), one could find a number of opinions. Ibn Abbas, for instance, comprehends that it stands for obeying Allah. However, his opinion is not contextually supported as the following part clearly says do not come near it. Thus, the verse according to Ibn Abbas interpretation would sound like do not come near obeying Allah. Yet, there are two other groups who hint at its euphemistic function: a group, including Ibn Kathir, al-Shawkani, and al-Qurtubi posit that it is inclusive of the commands and obligations mentioned in the verse i.e. fasting, itikaf, and copulation during this period (Ridha 1920). This opinion is contextually supported and proves that it is partly euphemistic. Another group including Muqatil and al-Dahhak are for the opinion which says it is exclusive to copulation during itikaf (al-Shawkani 2004). Thereupon, they approve of the phrase euphemistic function as the actions are not worded. The second phrase i.e. literally translated as do not come near them i.e. warns against proximity of the legal zone. It is dependent on the interpretation of the first phrase. That is if the first phrase is interpreted as a euphemism, the second phrase would also be a euphemism. In other words, if the boundaries set by Allah which are mentioned in the verse include ones sexual relation, then even advancing towards the direction of such boundaries is prohibited. If the euphemistic wording used in the verse is compared with a blunter wording such as: do not have sex with your wives while making itikaf, or do not come near your wives lest you have sex with them while making itikaf, one would vividly see how the Quran has euphemised for such an action. Translation Assessment: Pickthall: These are the limits imposed by Allah, so approach them not. Asad: These are the bounds set by God: do not, then, offend against them Al-Hilali and Khan: These are the limits (set) by Allah, so approach them not. Sahih: These are the limits [set by] Allah, so do not approach them. Abdel Haleem: These are the bounds set by God, so do not go near them. Translators have varied in translating these two euphemisms. Yet, their lexical variations were only two for the first euphemism i.e. limits and bounds for ,whereas three lexical

variations are used for the translation of euphemism number two: approach, offend against, and go near. They have all adopted a literal translation strategy for both euphemisms and it seems to have worked well for the conveyance of the meaning. The reason behind successfulness of translation is that English seems to accept the usage of the word boundaries with words like approach or drawing near. This is what Nida (1964: 159) calls formal equivalence which adheres to both form and content in both source and target language. This can also work for metaphors such as he has a heart of stone which can be literally translated into Arabic as , and I am all ears translated literally as . Conclusion: From the above analysis, we can draw the following conclusion: Quran translators endeavour to adhere to both form and content of the ST unless they figure out that such a strategy would rather result in deviation from the intended meaning. With a semantically complex text such as the Quran, full of nuances and connotations, translators pick as much as they can convey of these connotations. Yet, they often arrive at a crossway where they need to decide to pursue a certain path over another. This often appears when a translator follows a certain exegetical opinion. Rendering Quranic euphemisms with Biblical ones may sound classic and vintage. Yet, translators have to be aware that Biblical terms may sound archaic to contemporary English users. Translating a metaphorical euphemism with a metaphor is more likely to attract the reader and consequently would draw his or her attention towards recognition of the euphemistic effect of the expression as in SLT 4 euphemism no. 1. In order to make such formal rendering functional, both languages need to share similar word connotations (cf. SLT 4). Metaphorical euphemisms which are language or culture specific such as can either be translated literally with hints added in brackets or by translation of the intended meaning. Translators added hints help to direct the reader into their intended translation meaning (cf. Abdel Haleems translation in SLT 2). Literal translation which ignores the euphemistic meaning and focus only on the form fail the text; only the literal meaning is transferred in this type of translation while the intended meaning is lost and no air of euphemism is felt from the readers side as in: They are clothing for you and you are clothing for them". " Yet, literal translation may successfully conveys the meaning; a translation may sound very much literal but happens to convey both the literal and the intended meaning euphemistically. This can only happen if the source and target word share not only the literal meaning but also the euphemistic connotations. To illustrate this, let us take the English verb to sleep, and equivalent word in Arabic " ,"both share the same dictionary meaning i.e. take the rest afforded by a suspension of voluntary bodily functions. Yet, they both euphemise for the same thing in both languages i.e. to have sex.

Euphemisms are known to lose their euphemistic meanings over time as they catch on bad connotations from the signified with excessive usage. This is termed as euphemism treadmill and needs to be considered by translators before they set off for translation. Thus, they first need to historically contextualise the SLT, and then aim at producing a contemporary euphemism in the translation if it is meant to communicate a euphemistic function to a contemporary audience.

al-Baidhawi, N. (1999). Tafsir al-Baidhawi Beirut, Dar al-Kotob al-Ilmiyah. al-Jurjani, A.-Q. (2004). Dala'il Al-i'jaz. Cairo, Maktabat Al-khanji al-Jurjani, A. a.-A. (1908). Al-muntakhab min kinayat al-'ulam' wa 'irshadt al-bulagh'. Cairo, Dar Al-sa'adah Publishing House. al-Khouli, I. (2004). Al-Ta'ridh fi al-Qur'an al-Kareem. Cairo, Dar al-Basaa'ir. Al-Qadi, N. (2009). "A Sociolinguistic Comparison of Euphemisms in English and Arabic." Journal of King Saud University, Languages and Translation 21: 13-22. al-Razi, M. F. (1981). Tafseer Al-Fakhr Al-Razi (Al-Tafseer Al-Kabeer). Beirut, Dar Al-Fikr. al-Shawkani, M. (2004). Fat-h al-Qadeer. Beirut, Dr al-Ma'rifah. Al-Suyuti, J. D. (1999). Al-Itqan fi Ulum Al-Quran F. Z. (editor). Beirut, Dar al-Kitab alArabi. 2. al-Tabari, M. B.-J. (1973). Tafseer Al-Tabari, Jami' al-Bayan 'an Ta'weel Aay al-Qur'an. M. M. Shaker and A. M. Shaker, Maktabat Ibn Taymeyyah. 3. al-Tabari, M. b. J. (1997). Tafseer Al-Tabari, Jami' al-Bayan 'an Ta'weel Aay al-Qur'an, Taqreeb wa Tahdheeb S. Al-khaldi and I. Al-Ali. Damascus & Beirut, Dar al-Qalam & Dar al-Shamiyyah. 1. al-Tha'alibi, A. M. (1998). Al-Kinayah wa al-Ta'ridh. Cairo, Dar Qubaa'

al-Tha'alibi, A. M. (2000). Fiqh Al-lughah wa Asrar Al-arabiyyah. Beirut, al-Maktabah alAsriyyah. Al-Ukaili, H. M. (2008). "Linguistic System of Holy Qur'an." Faculty of Education Journal, Al-Jami'ah Al-Mustansiriyyah(4): 93-109. al-Wahidi, A. (2010). Al-Tafseer Al-Baseet. Silsilat Al-Rasa'el al-Jami'eyyah. M. AlKidhairi. Riyadh, Imam University 3.

Al-Zamakhshari, J.-A. (1998). al-kashaf 'an Haqa'eq Ghawamedh al-Tanzeel wa Oyoun alAqaweel fi Wojooh al-Ta'weel. Riyadh, Al-Obeikan. al-Zamkhshari, J. (1998). Al-kashaf. Riyadh, Maktabat Al-obaikan. Ali, S. S. (1996). "Euphemism in translation: a comparative study of euphemistic expressions in two translations of the Holy Qur'an." Turjuman: revue de traduction et d'interprtation 5(1): 23-37. Allan, K. and K. Burridge (1991). Euphemism & dysphemism: language used as shield and weapon, Oxford University Press, USA. Allen, K. and K. Burridge (1991). Euphemism and Dysphemism, Language Used as Shield and Weapon. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Bewley, A. H. (2003). Tafsir al-Qurtubi: classical commentary of the Holy Quran. London, Dar al-Taqwa. El-Zeiny, N. T. (2009). Euphemism in Prophetic Hadith: Domestication or Foreignisation 3rd Languages and Translation Conference and Exhibition on Translation and Arabization in Saudi Arabia. Riyadh, Al-Imam Mohammed bin Saud University: 165-265. Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power. Essex, Pearson Education Limited. Farghal, M. (1995). "Euphemism in Arabic: a Gricean interpretation." Anthropological linguistics 37(3): 366-378. Holder, R. W. (1987). A dictionary of American and British euphemisms: the language of evasion, hypocrisy, prudery and deceit. Bath, Bath University Press. Holder, R. W. (2008). How not to say what you mean: a dictionary of euphemisms. Oxford Oxford University Press. House, J. (2002). "Universality versus culture specificity in translation." Translation Studies: Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline, Cambridge University Press, pgs: 92-110. Ibn-al-Atheer, D.-u. (1959). Al-Mathal al-Sa'ir fi Adab al-Katib wa al-Sha'ir. Al-Fajalah, Egypt, Dar Nahdat Masr. Ibn-Al-Ha'em, S. (2003). Al-Tibyan fi Bayan Ghareeb al-Qur'an. D. A. Mohammed. Beirut, Dar al-Gharb al-Islami.

Ibn-al-Jawzi, J. (1984). Zad al-Maseer fi 'ilm al-Tafseer Beirut & Damascus, Al-Maktab al-Islami. Lawrence, J. (1973). Unmentionables, and other euphemisms, Gentry Books. Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics, Cambridge University Press. Linfoot-Ham, K. (2005). "The linguistics of euphemism: a diachronic study of euphemism formation." Journal of Language and Linguistics 4(2): 227-263. Mawdudi, S. A. A. (1988). Towards Understanding the Quran. Leicester, Islamic Foundation. Neaman, J. S. and C. G. Silver (1983). Kind words: A thesaurus of euphemisms. New York, Facts on File, Inc. Nida, E. (1964). Towards a science of translating. Leiden, E. J. Brill. Noble, V. (1982). Speak softly : euphemisms and such Sheffield, Centre for English Cultural Tradition and Language, University of Sheffield. Noble, V. (1982). Speak softly: Euphemisms and such. Sheffield, The Centre for English Cultural Tradition and Language, University of Sheffield Nord, C. (1991). Text analysis in translation. Amsterdam, Rodopi. Penrice, J. (1970). A Dictionary and Glossary of the Koran: With Copious Grammatical References and Explanations of the Text. London and Dublin, Curzon Press. Qutb, S. (2003). In the Shade of the Qur'an. Nairobi, The Islamic Foundation. Rawson, H. (1983). A Dictionary of Euphemisms and Other Doubletalk: Being a Compilation of Linguistic Fig Leaves and Verbal Flourishes for Artful Users of the English Language, Macdonald & Co. Ridha, M. R. (1920). Tafseer Al-Qur'an Al-Hakeem. Cairo, Maktabat Al-Manar.

Stefanowitsch, A. (2005). "The function of metaphor: Developing a corpus-based perspective." International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 10(2): 161-198. Thomas, L., S. Wareing, et al. (2004). Language, society and power: an introduction. London, Routledge. Umar, A. M. (1998). 'Ilm Al-dalalah. Cairo, Aalam Al-kutub publishing house. Umar, A. M. (1998). 'Ilm Al-dalalah. Cairo, Aalam Al-kutub Publishing House. Umar, A. M. (2008). Mu'jam al-Lughah al-'arabiyyah al-Mu'asirah. Cairo, Aalam al-Kutub. 3. Warren, B. (1992). "WHAT EUPHEMISMS TELL US ABOUT THE INTERPRETATION OF WORDS*." Studia Linguistica 46(2): 128-172.