Tasnif Style Guide

Tasnif Style Guide — Page 119

CHAPTER 12: TRANSLATION GUIDE 119 that they are not writing the book; they are translating it. It is absolutely imperative that insofar as possible, every word in the original source text is accounted for in the English. Summaries of long Urdu or Arabic phrases are unacceptable. Although a sum- marised translation may convey the general sense of the original sentence's meaning, this can hardly be deemed a translation of the original. There will, of course, be exceptions, and for this, one must use their better judgement. This does not mean, ,however, that translators should employ an overly literal approach to translation. An overly literal transla- tion may lack eloquence and readability. A balance must be man- aged as no two languages are exactly alike; therefore, it is impos- sible to produce an exact replica of the original source text in the English language. The writing style of the 1800s was far more verbose than our contemporary standards. This is reflected in the writings of the Promised Messiah as well, and his sentences tend to run long. The translations of these should be literal unless where it jeopardizes the eloquence. Thus, if the literal translation flows well and con- veys a coherent message for the context, the translator should opt for it. Where sentences run so long that comprehension may be impaired, the translator may apply grammatical techniques such as commas, semicolons, em-dashes, etc. to allow for natural pauses and enhanced readability. In other more extreme cases, sentences can be broken, but with due care so as not to jeopardize the flow of the message or the point being made. Attempts should be made to reflect the style and sentence structure of the original text. On many occasions, an individual may find that certain English words cover the meaning of two words in a particular Urdu