Literal-Functional Analysis of Political Speeches and the Case of Political Lexical Creation

Prepared by the researche :Abrar Samir Ghanem – Al-Quds University, Hebron, Palestine

Democratic Arabic Center

Arabic journal for Translation studies : Eighth Issue – July 2024

A Periodical International Journal published by the “Democratic Arab Center” Germany – Berlin

:To download the pdf version of the research papers, please visit the following link

https://democraticac.de/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AC%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%84%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D8%B1%D8%AC%D9%85%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%AF%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AB%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%AA%D9%85%D9%88%D8%B2-%E2%80%93-%D9%8A%D9%88%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%88-2024.pdf

1. Introduction

The word ‘Translation’ in Lexico Dictionary is defined as “written or spoken rendering of the meaning of a word or text in another language”, with its origin meaning from Middle English of Old French, or from Latin ‘translatio’ and the verb ‘translat’ meaning ‘carried across’ and ‘carrying across. However, the word Translation in Ancient Greek is ‘metaphrasis’ meaning ‘speaking across.’ The origin of this magical word explains much of the 20^th and 21^st centuries’ studies and theories in the field of TS, and explains the nature and the supposedly function of the word in today’s Global Societies. Translation is seen as cross-cultural activity that aims at exchanging cultures, in addition to exchanging interests. Thus, as the origin and meaning of the word states, translation has a cross cultural aim and a communicative function. This means that translation, despite the diverse genres it has, is all about thoughts and politics. Whether it be for the spreading of cultures, or the imposing of thoughts and ideologies.

Politics is a vague concept and genre in TS, this is due to the fact that there are many texts classified as types of political texts. Also, as Schäffner (2004) suggests, “any topic can become political, or politicized” and “what is considered “political” depends on the participants in the communicative context” (Schäffner 2004: 119).  Schäffner moves on saying that “there are some types of texts and forms of talk which are political in a more narrow [sic], or prototypical sense”, like those which contain “political ideas, beliefs, and practices of a society or some part of it” or those which are “crucial in constituting a political community or group (e.g. treaties, a manifesto of a political party, a speech by a politician).” (ibid: 119).

The ‘prototypical political texts’ are the interest of many scholars and researchers in the field, since translation is language, and language is human. Speech, according to Aristotle, is what distinguishes man from animal, he says:

man is a political animal [politikon zoon], in a sense in which a bee is not, or any other gregarious animal. Nature, as we say, does nothing without some purpose; and she has endowed man alone among the animals with the power of speech. (Aristotle 1932, cited in Chilton 2004: 5)

So as this Aristotelian quote states, nothing happens for no reason, and every act has a purpose. Politics is the core of humans’ lives, or in other words as Chilton (2004) says:

cultural and culturally transmitted characteristics of human language observably serve (though of course not exclusively) the needs of the political. But the doing of politics is predominantly constituted in language. (ibid: 6)

Political texts have some functions to perform, according to Vermeer in his Skopos Theory, every act of translation has a purpose to perform in the Target Culture (TC). Vermeer states that the function of the ST and its purpose for the Source Culture (SC), may not necessarily be the same in the TC (Munday 2016: 127). For example, a political speech that has a celebrative or persuasive function for the source audience, can have an informative function when translated for the target audience, and this corresponds to “the Aristotelian view, for language would have evolved to perform social functions – social functions that would in fact correspond to what we understand as ‘political’” (Chilton 2004: 6).

Hatim and Mason (1997) rely on, in their definition of the “hybrid genre” political speeches, the fact that political speeches are “part-political, part-religious sermon, and part-legal deontology” (Cited in Kuhiwczak and Littau 2007: 143). Political speeches are those speeches uttered by a country’s king, president, governor, or high-ranking politicians to the target public addressing matters of public concern. A political speech has diverse functions to be performed, but these functions are simply political or social. As Schäffner says “Texts are produced and received with a specific purpose, or function, in mind” (Schäffner 2004: 133).

What distinguishes a political text from other types of texts is ‘Jargon’; terms and concepts, idioms, clichés, metaphors, collocations, and etc. And what distinguishes a political speech from other types of political texts is the directly addressed theme. Political speeches are cultural bound and addressed directly to the public. They contain ideology and social values, and usually affirm on the concepts of social and national unity, and of cultural and national identity. In the corpus of this study, the case of term(s) creation or lexical creation is witnessed. The language of politics tends to create many culture-specific terms constantly. And hence, translations should convey the created target terms appropriately to the TC.

Theories and methods of analysis in the field are many, however, this paper adopts Van Dijk and Schäffner proposed method of Political Discourse Analysis (PDA). PDA focuses on the political nature of the language used in political discourses, in addition to the style and functions of this language.

PDA enables this paper to answer some of the main questions that may face both translators and discourse analysts of political speeches. To start first with questions related to the translation process of political speeches, a translator may ask himself/herself whether the translation should be literal or functional? Or whether the translation should convey words and meanings, or convey messages? The complexity of translating political speeches rises from their nature as direct quoted speeches, according to this paper. Another question may arise in relation to the translation strategy employed in the translation of political speeches is, what is the most appropriate strategy that can be used in the translation of political speeches?

On the other hand, we have a second type of questions that are related to discourse analysts. An analyst or researcher should look for the participants of the speech and have a historical and cultural background knowledge of the SC and Source Language (SL), and then should be able to answer the questions of: “(who is speaking to whom? when? where? Why?)” (Schäffner 1996: 203).

This paper also tries to answer a core question in relation to political speeches. The question is whether political speeches have further dimensions and goals than the ones mentioned by the speaker. In other words, do political speeches have implicit messages to other nations or to enemies of the country? Understanding the function of any political speech is important for translators and analysts, because knowing the function helps determining the strategy that should be adopted in order to convey the implicit words and messages to the TR. The conveyance of the implicit words and messages, according to this paper, should be implemented without changing the ST and without adding redundant words or undesirable sensitive words.

  The corpus of this study is a political speech that was delivered by King Muhammad VI on the 46^th anniversary of ‘Green March’ in 2021. The study views the four components of Target Language (TL); English, “pragmatics (i.e. the interaction amongst speakers and hearers), semantics (i.e. meanings, the structure of the lexicon), syntax (i.e. the internal organisation of sentences) and phonology/ phonetics (i.e. intonation, stress patterns, pauses)” (Schäffner 1996: 203). The study also views Vinay and Darbelnet’s translation techniques. However, the aim of this current study is to divide Vinay and Darbelnet’s techniques into four types: phonological, semantical, syntactical, and pragmatic. This classification helps the current study, and helps future studies in the field, search more fluently for the appropriate technique(s) to employ in any type of texts.

2. Political Speeches: Nature and Functions

Political discourse is described as “a complex form of human activity” (Chilton and Schäffner 1997:207, cited in Schäffner 2004: 117), this description is “based on the recognition that politics cannot be conducted without language” (ibid: 117). Political discourses are delivered to express the speaker and his people ideology. Ideology is defined by Hatim and Munday (2004) as “a body of ideas that reflects the beliefs and interests of an individual, a group of individuals, a societal institution, and so on, and that ultimately finds expression in language” (Cited in Shahi and Reza 2014: 29). Ideology, according to this study, can be a discoursive function on its own.

Political discourses are delivered through varied events, conferences, or visits to inform the public of important issues on several levels; economic, social, and political levels. This means that these discourses, and despite of the topics they have or the functions they perform, hold diverse social values and ‘national unity and national identity’ concepts. This study suggests that the certain intended political and national concepts a political discourse contains, perform a substantial part of the discourse function. Schäffner (2004) states that there are four strategic functions of political discourses; “(i) coercion; (ii) resistance, opposition and protest; (iii) dissimulation; (iv) legitimisation and delegitimisation” (ibid: 119).

Political speeches are only one type or sub-genre of political texts. Schäffner (1996) differentiates between internal and external political communications. She states that “Internal political communication would refer to all forms of discourse that concern first of all the functioning of politics within political institution” (ibid: 202). Schäffner adds that external political communication “is first of all aimed at the general public” (ibid: 202). Thus, internal and external political communications depend on the purpose and function. Following Schäffner’s political types of communications, this study suggests that political speeches are both internal and external political communication. To explain this further, a researcher may imagine the process of production of political speeches. For example: a political speech by a state president addressing the economic situation for the public to convince them that the state is doing its best, would seem external political communication, but it is not. The same speech has gone through many studies and is built on many information from several state institutions, and then delivered to the president through his trusted individuals to study, view, edit, and perhaps to simplify to adapt it to the public knowledge. This speech has changed from internal political communication between the several state institutions, to external political communication between the president and his public. It should be noted that the function of both communications has also changed, from informative to persuasive informative.

A political speech might seem to be focused directly on a group of people addressing certain occasion for a certain function(s). Nonetheless, it is focused indirectly on other groups of people or nations, for certain purpose(s); warning or menace for example. This means that many people, across the national borders, are watching and hearing the speech, and that language of both ST and TT must be concise, clear, and careful. Consequently, a translator must be of a great awareness of the SC and familiar with the SL, before he starts his mission. A translator must bear in mind that political analysts; political censorship, are the governments’ watchdogs of language(s). Translators must be aware of the nature of language of politics that tend to be both informative and persuasive, but is highly sensitive at the same time.

The nature of the language of politics is only one issue to bear in mind, a second issue is cultural differences. In other words, “Cultural issues in a sociolinguistic context . . . need to be considered” (Munday 2016: 127). Toury’s (2012) concept of ‘Norms’; the “sociocultural constraints specific to a culture, society and time” (ibid: 177) need to be considered as well. Thus, to be able to communicate the political cultural meaning to TRs, translators should distant their translations from mere transference of words, or from word, phrase, clause, and sentence equivalence, to context equivalence or meaning equivalence. As Schäffner states “the notion of “equivalence” is almost a “dirty” word now” (Schäffner 2004: 136). A third issue to be considered by political translators is the sensitivity of language. Schäffner (1997), reviews the issue of sensitive texts that are determined by linguistic aspects. According to Schäffner, the sensitive nature of the language of politics is connected to the audience impression and perception of a political event, and to the function of the text, which is mainly to persuade or to inform (ibid: 132). Schäffner argues that “Sensitivity is a functional concept” and “The best way to understand it is by analyzing texts according to the Skopos Theory” (ibid: 138).

  Understanding the nature of the language used in politics is crucial for translators, because it defines the decision-making process. Chapter 2 below is to view issues related to the analysis and translation processes of political speeches from a translational perspective and point of view.

3. How to Analyse and Translate Political Speeches?

Translation after the cultural turn is “no longer concerned with examining whether a translation has been ““faithful” to a source text” (Schäffner 2004: 136). Translation now focuses on the “social, cultural, and communicative practices, on the cultural and ideological significance of translating and of translations, on the external politics of translation, on the relationship between translation behavior and socio-cultural factors” (ibid: 136). In other words, translation is concerned with agents, activists, or political actors, with agency, with ideology, with power relations and domination, and with discourse analysis. The field of translation is concerned with linguistic structures that are used “to get politically relevant messages across to the addressees in order to fulfil a specific function” (Schäffner, 1996: 201).

Before starting to discuss issues related to the translation of political speeches, this chapter views the importance of language and translation in politics. In relation to language and power, Pierre Bourdieu in his ‘Language and Symbolic Power’ said that “There is no social agent who does not aspire…to have the power to name and to create the world through naming: gossip, slander, lies, insults, commendations. criticisms, arguments and praises” (Bourdieu 000: 105). Such social agents see language as an instrument of domination or of persuasion. This emphasises on the role of translation as a cross-cultural communication. Without translation information would not be available to TCs and TRs “beyond national borders” (Schäffner 2004: 120). Thus, translation is mediation that provides information and evoke behaviors and reactions between cultures, to serve certain purposes by engaging more people in “political actions” (Schäffner 1996: 201).

There are many analytic methods that can be applied in analysing political speeches, like Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Political Discourse Analysis (PDA). CDA and PDA are almost the same and share same linguistic analytic criteria. Both look for the change in language components of the ST and TT, for the translations of certain words and semantic structures, and for the purposes behind such translations. However, this paper is to apply PDA as a method for the analysis of its corpus. PDA is a better method for this paper and for the analysis of translations of political speeches, because it helps translators understand better the reasons behind the production of such speeches and the production of their translations. PDA helps analyse political speeches better by examining the agents who perform such speeches, the audiences, the reasons behind their productions, the hidden or indirect messages in them, the translators, and the publishing houses. PDA also helps search for the historical backgrounds of the SC and analyse speeches accordingly (Schäffner 2004, and Schäffner 2012).

To answer the question of ‘How to Translate Political Speeches?’, one simple issue should be kept in mind, which is the nature of the language used in political speeches. In other words, a political speech should be considered a texts rather than a speech or a direct quote. Translations of political speeches should not be literal nor functional. Literal translation could be used as a mean of manipulation and mock if translators from ‘The Other’ intentionally look for certain external and superficial meanings to be translated, instead of translating the intended internal meanings by the speaker. On the other hand, functional translation could be used as a mean of intervention, particularly by specialised political translators who would not miss a chance of adding certain careful equivalences and meanings for certain goals. However, the translation of political speeches should be both literal; transferring source meanings and messages without changes, and functional; communicates literal meanings and messages to target audiences without causing confusion. In addition, translators should keep the nature of political language in their minds.

Before the translation process of any political speech takes place, analysis process should be a primitive-stage for translators. Van Dijk (1998) proposes some categories that help this paper deepen the understanding of its corpus on one hand, and broaden the definition of political speeches on the other hand (Van Dijk 1998: 15-19). Categories are viewed and applied below on the corpus; King Muhammad VI speech on the 46^th anniversary of ‘Green March,’ these categories include:

– Domain: Politics.

– System: Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy.

– Institution: Royal Palace.

– Values and ideologies: Freedom, Independence, Unity, and Justice.

– Organisations: the speech includes the sum of efforts of all country’s organisations and institutions, but the speech has no direct organisations involved. However, the country’s King thanked the following direct organisations: The United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO), Elected Western Sahara Councils, Royal Armed Forces, Royal Gendarmerie, National Security Forces, Auxiliary Forces, local government authorities, and Emergency Services.

– Political actors: in addition to those mentioned in ‘Organisations’ category above, political actors include the French and Spanish colonisation of Morocco, Popular Front for the Liberation of Saguia el-Hamra and Río de Oro (POLISARIO) or (Polisario Front), and participants of ‘Green March.’

– Political relations: Freedom and National Protection.

– Political process: Governing, solidarity, and National Security.

– Political action: celebrating the 46^th anniversary of ‘Green March.’

– Political discourse: political speech.

– Political cognitions: of issues related to the Moroccan Sahara (Moroccan Desert).

  Within Van Dijk categories, this paper defines political speeches as speeches that are directed to the public by considerable politicians who evoke certain values and ideologies in the target audiences, using certain contexts and events.

  The current study suggests that understanding language components of the TT is helpful if certain confusing words that exist in the ST confront translators. Language components include pragmatics, semantics, syntax, and phonology. The comparison of language components of the ST and TT in this paper will be divided to include Vinay and Darbelnet’s techniques of “Direct translation” and “Oblique translation” (Munday 2016: 88-91). The linguistic comparison in this paper aims at showing how do politicians achieve their goals by words; by language, and what function(s) do their words perform. Vinay and Darbelnet’s techniques of direct translation are: literal translation or word-for-word; calque; and borrowing. While their techniques of oblique or free translation are: transposition; modulation; equivalence; and adaptation. This study suggests the following division for Vinay and Darbelnet’s techniques:

• Phonology: borrowing on the sound level.
• Semantics: literal, claque, and equivalence.
• Syntax: transposition.
• Pragmatics: modulation and adaptation.

  The techniques’ division above can overlap. For example, one translation technique can be classified as both semantical and pragmatic. However, this division aims at providing a short method for translators of any text in general, and for translators of political texts in particular. The following analysis will further elaborate on this.

4. King Muhammad VI Speech on the 46^th Anniversary of ‘Green March’

On 6 Nov, 2021, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Morocco published the latest speech on the anniversary of ‘Green March’ in four languages on its official website. The languages are Arabic, Spanish, French, and English. The speech was published on several official government websites in different languages, like for example: the official website of the Supreme Council of the Judiciary of Morocco in Arabic, and the official website of the Prime Minister’s Government of Morocco in Arabic and French, in addition to several other websites and agencies. However, the corpus of the current study is the one published by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in four languages.

Prior to the analysis process of the speech, a short historical background of the conflict over the Moroccan Sahara is viewed by the study. This historical background is significant for three reasons. First, providing a historical background of the conflict helps this study analyse the corpus better and reach its aims. Second, linking the historical background of the conflict to the situation now, answers the questions of why there appears an English translation of the speech? And who is/are responsible for the translation? Third, having a historical background by political translators is essential to communicate the source message effectively to the target audience(s), and to retain the tone of the ST.

The Moroccan Desert is part of the Moroccan territories that are inhabited by nomads. The conflict over the Desert goes back to the last two decades of the nineteenth century until today. The conflict started when Spain invaded Morocco and changed the desert name into “the Spanish Desert” in 1934. In 1975, the Spanish invaders withdrew from the Moroccan Sahara after the Green March, which was a mass demonstration that was coordinated by the Moroccan King then, King Hasan II. However, a second conflict began between Morocco, Polisario, and Mauritania, and ended with the Mauritanian withdrawal and Moroccan retrieval of its Saharan territories. A third and final conflict began and remained until today between Morocco (which controls 80% of its Sahara) and Polisario (which controls less than 20% of the Sahara, and which has the Algerian financial and diplomatic support).

To answer the questions of why there appears an English translation of the speech? And who is/are responsible for the translation? This paper starts with the fact that Arabic is the official language and mother tongue of Morocco, besides French that is considered second official language. Spanish is a foreign third language in Morocco, besides English as a fourth foreign language. The importance of translating the original Arabic speech in these three languages depends on the political purposes behind the Moroccan relations with the governments that belongs to the three languages. However, providing an English TT of the speech, or providing an English version of the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs lies in two issues, the first is the importance of English language globally, on both, the communicative and the political level. While the second is the US attitude toward the Moroccan Sahara, and the importance of this attitude.

This paper only studies the English translation of the speech. It studies certain terms and phrases chosen for the TT, by comparing them with the ST terms and phrases. The comparison method is Vinay and Darbelnet’s techniques of direct and oblique translation. This paper aims at classifying Vinay and Darbelnet techniques into four main types; phonological, semantical, syntactical, and pragmatic.

5. Translation Techniques:

5.1 Phonology

The technique that can be classified as a phonological one is Borrowing. Borrowing in Table 1 below is on the sound level.

Table 1:

Table one views some of the selected borrowed phrases found in King Muhammad VI speech.

The above translations of مغربية الصحراء (Maghrebiat as-Sahra’), صحرائنا (Sahra’ouna), بمعبر الكركرات (Ma’bar al-Gargarat), مدينتي العيون والداخلة (Madentay Laayun and Dakhla), لشعوبنا المغاربية (lshu’oubna al-Magharebia) are borrowed from Arabic. They are translated in English as Moroccanness of the Sahara, Saharan territories, the Guerguerat crossing, cities of Laayun and Dakhla, Maghreb countries respectively. These words are proper names except for (Sahara and Saharan) which mean (desert as a noun and desert as an adjective) in Arabic. As for (Maghreb) and (Moroccanness), the first means (Westerns) describing the Arab countries in northernmost part of Africa. While the second is derived from the adjective (Moroccan – Maghrebi [masculine] or Magharebia [feminine] in Arabic) which is also an adjective, but it is used nowadays in politics to emphasise (Moroccan). The word Moroccanness is borrowed from Arabic ‘Maghrebiat’ and then created in English to show that something is Moroccan and belongs to Morocco. The last borrowed translation is (Wassalamu alaikum warahmatullah wabarakatuh) which is a borrowed clause meaning (Peace be with you) or (Hello – Goodbye). In political speeches, this clause is equivalent to (Thank you), and said after the speaker ends his speech.

The translator here, did not choose the techniques of equivalence, literal, or Venuti’s (1998) Domestication. The translator rather chose Venuti’s Foreignisation. A question may arise concerning the creation of the above lexical items, especially that some of them are not proper names and have equivalences in English. The answer is related to the translator, his/her choice and aim, and whether he/she translated the speech from Arabic or from another translation available; from Spanish or French. However, two facts can help answer the question. The first fact is that of globalisation and the fast massive interaction between people from varied cultures. This interaction affected languages and allowed people to understand some popular and simple words related to different cultures. For example: Haram and Salamu alaikum in Arabic, bonjour and la vie in French, Bueno and Gracias in Spanish, or hello and take-away in English. The second fact is that of politics and agenda. The newly created items in English (Moroccanness of the Sahara and Saharan territories) aims at affecting target audiences and have their attention on something of highly importance, a conflict that has been neglected for many decades or a century, by creating an equivalent word for desert, that has an associative meaning with Morocco in particular, or with the Northern-African regions in general.

5.2 Semantics

The following techniques can be classified as semantical ones:

5.2.1 Literal translation or word-for-word translation

Table 2:

Table two views some of the selected literal or word-for-word translations found in King Muhammad VI speech.

The above translations of في سياق  (fi syaq), بالعديد من المكاسب والتحديات (bil-a’deed minal maqaseb wal tahdyat), للاستفزازات والاعتداءات، التي سبق للمغرب أن أثار انتباه المجتمع الدولي (lil-istifzazat wal-i’tidaat, al-lati sabaq lil-Maghreb an athar intibah al-mojtamaa’ al-dowali), أمن واستقرار المنطقة (‘men waistiqrar al-mantiqa), بالقرار السيادي (bil-qarar as-siyadi), التي اعترفت بالسيادة الكاملة للمغرب على صحرائه (al-lati i‘tarafat bis-siyada al-kamela lil-Maghreb ‘la Sahra’eh), نهضة تنموية شاملة (nahda tanmawiya shamela), and بنيات تحتية ، ومشاريع اقتصادية واجتماعية (bonyat tahtiya, wa mashare’ iqtisadiya wa ijtima’ya) are literally translated as, in a context, by many accomplishments as well as challenges, to serious provocations and aggressions to which Morocco had drawn the attention of the international community, security and stability in the region, whereby it has recognized Morocco’s full sovereignty over its Sahara, comprehensive development, infrastructure, and economic and social projects.

The above phrases and clauses are literally translated, but at the same time communicate the intended meaning of the ST. However, there are some parts of the clauses that tend to be functional rather than literal. The following words and clauses are examples: (maqaseb) is functionally translated as accomplishments, while the literal meaning of the Arabic word is (gains). However, the correct translation is accomplishments. This is due to the fact that the Arab world speaks many Arabic dialects when it comes to spoken, slang, or informal Arabic language. For example, people of Levant and Egypt are not able to understand Maghreb dialects, and people of Maghreb countries are not able to understand Omani or Iraqi dialects, and vice versa. But when it comes to formal or standard Arabic, they all speak the same standard language, with a very slight difference in the usage of words or their synonyms, and in the degree of formality of standard Arabic and the usage of ancient Arabic terms. This helps understanding why the plural word (maqaseb) is translated as accomplishments, which is the intended meaning by the speaker. In other words, if the same word is delivered by a politician in Levant or Egypt, it would be translated as (gains).

A second example is (al-lati sabaq lil-Maghreb an athar), this clause is translated as to which Morocco had drawn, but the literal meaning of the word is (that already Morocco has drawn). A third and last example is (bis-siyada al-kamela lil-Maghreb), this clause is translated as Morocco’s full sovereignty, while the literal translation is (sovereignty full to Morocco). If the previous translations were translated literally, they would change the purpose of translation from a mean of communication to a mean of miscommunication. Literal translation with these two examples, would cause a huge confusion by TRs whose language structure is not the same. Arabic and English Languages come from completely different families and have completely different language systems. Arabic and English differ in letters, sounds, words (semantics), or grammar (sentence structure- syntax). Hence, even though literal translation works, it should consider the change of sentence structure and sentence tense.

5.2.2 Calque

Table 3:

Table three views some of the selected calque translations found in King Muhammad VI speech.

Claque is loan translation or borrowed translation on the concept level. The following examples can best exemplify this technique in political speeches. The translations of الحمد لله، والصلاة والسلام على مولانا رسول لله وآله وصحبه (Al-Hamdu Li-Lah, Was-Salatu Was-Salamu ‘la Mawlana Rasoolan Li-Lah Wa Aleh Wa Sabeh), فهذا التوجه (fhatha at-tawajoh), حل نهائي (hal niha’i), دورها البناء (dawroha al-bana’), فالدينامية الإيجابية (fal-dinameya al-ijabiya), للمسيرة الخضراء (lil-Maserati al-Khara’), ليس صريحا أو ملموسا (laysa sarehan aw malmosan), and في إطار من الوضوح والشفافية (fi etaren minal-wodohi wal- shafafiya) are respectively translated as, Praise be to God, May peace and blessings be upon the Prophet, His Kith and Kin, This trend, final solution, constructive role, The positive dynamic, of the Green March, is not explicit or tangible, and in a clear, transparent environment.

The messages delivered by these calque translations in the TT are understood as expected and desired by the audience, and do not implicate any change of meanings of the ST. For example, the translation of the Islamic greeting as Praise be to God, May peace and blessings be upon the Prophet, His Kith and Kin has no borrowed items in the TC, although they are Islamic phrases. In other words, the Islamic phrases above do not have any culture or religion specific terms in the TC, because they are either used by the TC, or are anciently exchanged between the SC and TC and are thus understood by the TC. Another example is of the Green March; the term refers to a specific event in Morocco’s modern history. The term is literally translated into different languages to form a Morocco related calque term. All the above translations generate cohesive clauses that are close to SC, except for one phrase; The positive dynamic. The word dynamic is an adjective that must be followed by a noun, but in the translation above, it is followed by a verb characterizing. This can be fixed by changing dynamic into dynamicity, and thus, avoid confusion by TRs.

5.2.3 Equivalence

Table 4:

Table four views some of the selected equivalent target lexical items found in King Muhammad VI speech.

Here, the translations of النزاع الإقليمي المفتعل (an-niza’ al-iqlimi al-mofta’al), بالمسار السياسي الأممي (bil-masar as-siyasi al-Umami), في نطاق اختصاصاتها المحددة (fi nitaq ikhtisasatiha al-mohadada), عن دعمنا الكامل للجهود، التي يقوم بها (‘an da’mina al-kamel lil-juhood, al-lati yaqoum biha), في أسرع وقت ممكن (fi asra’ waqt momken) are respectively translated as, artificial regional dispute, to a political settlement, under the aegis of the United Nations, within the remit of its specified mandate, of our full support for the efforts the UN Secretary-General is making, and as soon as possible.

The above four examples have three clear clausal equivalences, one idiom equivalence, and one interesting phrase translation or phrase equivalence. To start with the first three clausal equivalences, they carry the meaning in a clear political manner, and tend to manage the meaning by adding some required missing words into the TT. For example: (bil-masar as-siyasi al-Umami) is translated as to a political settlement, under the aegis of the United Nations. However, (bil-masar as-siyasi) in Arabic means to a political track, but the intended meaning is political settlement, and (al-Umami) literally means (National), but the intended meaning is the political solution by the UN, or as translated above under the aegis of the United Nations. The second example is (fi nitaq ikhtisasatiha al-mohadada), which literally means within its competence, but it was translated in a clearer and more communicative manner as within the remit of its specified mandate. The target translation of within the remit of its specified mandate aims to make the TT as formal as possible to deliver the meaning in consonance with the type of language used in politics. The third example is (‘an da’mina al-kamel lil-juhood, al-lati yaqoum biha), which literally means of our full support for the efforts it/he is making. However, it was managed as of our full support for the efforts the UN Secretary-General is making, the translator added the subject again, which is the UN Secretary-General, to avoid confusion by the TR. In Arabic, it is acceptable not to mention the subject or object many times, because Arabic speakers are able to understand repetitive similar pronouns. However, in English it is not. In English, speakers may be confused if more than two pronouns are used without any indication or reference to the subject or the object they refer to in the same sentence, or in at least the previous sentence.

Equivalence can be best seen in idioms and metaphors. However, within the political arena, politicians tend to use as much less idioms and metaphors as possible. This is due to the official language they use, and to the seriousness of their job. In the corpus of this paper, there is only one idiom found, which is (fi asra’ waqt momken) that is clearly translated as, as soon as possible.

The last example is (an-niza’ al-iqlimi al-mofta’al). This phrase is translated as artificial regional dispute. The message this three-word phrase carries for its audience is interesting. As previously said, political speeches have a function to perform that can simply be persuasive, informative, or celebrative. Here, this phrase distinctly states that this speech is not only celebrative, but also persuasive, and holds a third function, as shall be seen below. The phrase artificial regional dispute would have been translated as planned territorial dispute or intentional territorial dispute by translators from other Arab countries. On the ministry’s website, the Spanish and French translations of the speech used the same phrase; artificial diferendo regional, and conflit régional artificial, the use of the adjective artificial instead of planned or intentional is due to the formality of the language used, and the deep knowledge of the translator of the field and of the language and its formality.

• Syntax

Transposition is considered a syntactical technique. This paper studies two transpositions; the first is pronouns, while the second is sentence structure.

5.3.1 Transposition

5.3.1.1 Pronouns

Table 5:

Table five views some of the selected grammatical shifts found in King Muhammad VI speech.

In these examples, the translation fails to communicate the intended message fully as hoped, by not paying attention to the importance these pronouns have, on the political level. The pronoun (NA or NAHNU) in Arabic is equivalent to WE in English. It is mistranslated seven times in the speech into ‘I,’ as shown above. And is only twice translated as intended by the speaker; WE. WE in political speeches do not mean the speaker; WE mean the speaker, his government, and his people. Furthermore, WE represent positive utterance and good actions, unlike THEY that represent negative utterance and bad actions. Van Dijk (2000) states that:

Whereas WE are democratic, THEY are not, and whereas Our soldiers, or those who share our cause, are freedom fighters, those of the Others are obviously terrorists (Chomsky 1985, 1987; van Dijk 1995a). The same is true for our policies and political decisions, which will invariably benefit the country and all citizens, whereas those of the Others will not . . . Moreover, given the nature of political polarization in the political process, we may further expect the typical positive evaluation of us and OUR actions in positive terms and of THEM and THEIR actions in negative terms. (ibid: 44)

  Hence, the use of لأصحاب (li-ashab = those) by the speaker hold bad connotation about ‘The Other.’ The literal translation of (li-ashab) as Those further communicate the meaning and deliver the intended message by the negative terms used in the ST and TT as well. THOSE in the speech represent artificial regional dispute.

5.3.1.2 Syntactic Typology: Sentence Structure

Table 6:

Table six views some of the selected syntactical shifts found in King Muhammad VI speech.

In English grammar, the phrase ‘Dear Citizens’ is a ‘Salutation or Greeting.’ The phrase is used only once before any discourse takes place. The original Arabic phrase is شعبي العزيز (Sha’biya al-Aziz), which literally means (Dear People). In the Spanish and French translations of the speech, the phrase is translated as (Dear People) Querido pueblo, and Cher peuple, respectively. However, the English TT translation is Dear Citizens, this reflects the translator choice in relation to the degree of formality of English political language. The current study argues that ‘Dear people’ is the translation that should be adopted in any speech delivered by His Majesty King Muhammed VI due to two reasons. First, ‘Dear People’ is the English equivalent of the Arabic phrase (Sha’biya al-Aziz) that was used by the speaker. Second, the phrase ‘Dear People’ has a more powerful and cordial impact than ‘Dear Citizens’; ‘Dear People’ shows that the King is addressing his people as one body that speaks the same language despite the different ethnic and religious minorities they come from or belong to. Another issue related to Dear Citizens phrase is repetition. The phrase is repeated five times during the speech, and is translated five times as well, despite the fact that repetition in English is a rare phenomenon. Here, repetition has a function, it is used to draw the audience’s attention to the next idea. It is also used as a cohesive device, for the progression of ideas.

In the second example, the Arabic clause لقد سجلنا تطورات هادئة وملموسة (laqad sajalna tataworat hade’a wa malmosa) which literally means we have just scored quiet and tangible developments, is translated as there have been quiet, tangible developments. And in the third example, the clause التي تربطها بالمغرب اتفاقيات وشراكات، والتي تعتبر أقاليمنا الجنوبية (al-lati tarbotoha bil-Maghreb itifaqiyat wa shrakat, wal-lati ta’taber aqlemina al-janobeya) that literally means that have with Morocco agreements or partnerships, and that consider our southern provinces, is translated as which Morocco has agreements or partnerships, and which consider our southern provinces. The translations of the second example and the first clause of the third one tend to be syntactically functional considering the difference between Arabic and English systems. While the second clause of the third example; and which consider our southern provinces, seems to be literal, but at it communicates the meaning effectively.

• Pragmatics

The techniques of Modulation and Adaptation can be considered pragmatic ones.

5.4.1 Modulation

Table 7:

Table seven views some of the selected modulated phrases found in King Muhammad VI speech.

Due to the cultural difference between English and Arabic, the translation of بخصوص قضية الوحدة الترابية للمملكة (bikhosos qadeyat al-wihda at-turabeya lil-mamlaka) regarding the territorial integrity of our country omitted the word (qadeyat = case) and changed (lil-mamlaka = of the Kingdom) into (of the country). This cultural and aesthetic change aims at domesticating the term by resorting to existed political target term in the TC, in which the target audience is familiar with, and in which confusion can be avoided. Another example is كل من موقعه (kolon min mawke’eh), that is translated as each in his or her respective field of competence, while its literal translation would be each of his site.

The following example is also modulated by using a semantic equivalence, in which the target audience is familiar with; بأقاليم وجهات الصحراء (bakalem wa jihat as-Sahra’) in the Saharan provinces and regions. The word (jihat) for many Arab countries, means (nahiyat = side or direction), and in many dictionaries it also means (side or direction). However, it means (provinces) for Maghreb countries. This is quite interesting, not only regarding translation, but also regarding the confusion this word may hold for non-Maghreb Arab countries. In other words, non-Maghreb audiences may refer to the English or French version to understand the exact meaning of the word. Another example of this phenomenon is, مواصلة التعبئة واليقظة (Mowasalat at-ta’biaa wal-yaqatha) which means to remain mobilized and vigilant. Most Arab countries refer to the word (at-ta’biaa = mobilized) as (tanabuh – readiness or preparedness). A third and last example is, والإدارة الترابية (wal-idara at-turabeya) which means the local government authorities. The phrase (wal-idara at-turabeya) means السلطات المحلية (as-sultat al-mahaliya = local authorities) in non-Maghreb countries.

5.4.2 Adaptation

Table 8:

Table eight views some of the selected adapted translations found in King Muhammad VI speech.

Vinay and Darbelnet’s Adaptation is close to Venuti’s (1998) Domestication, both strategies aim at creating a relevant target message that is related to the source message. Adaptation and domestication leave “the reader in peace as much as possible” and bring “the writer toward him” (Schleiermacher 2012: 49, cited in Munday 2016: 48). The clause نحتفل اليوم، بكامل الاعتزاز (nahtafelu al-yawma bi-kameli al-itizaz) is translated as Today, we take no small measure of pride in celebrating. However, the literal meaning of the clause is (we celebrate today with full pride). The syntactical change and semantical term addition give more aesthetic rhythm related to the nature of the language used in politics, and help retain the formality of this language. The changes above draw the reader’s attention to the coming utterances, and make the speech more coherent. Another example is أكرم الله مثواه (Akram Allah mathwah) which is translated as, may he rest in peace. If this sentence was literally translated, then it would be (May God bless his final destination ‘in the hereafter’); and it will be confusing and less coherent to the TC.

6. Conclusion

The language of political speeches is characterised by three issues, it is highly official language, socially purposeful language, and delivered by high profile or high-ranking politicians. Translation, suggested by this paper, should be neither functional, nor literal; it should be communicative and contains no message change to the TC. In other words, the translation of this ‘sub-genre’ can be literal and functional at the same time, as long as they communicate meanings, deliver messages, retain language nature of the ST, and do not change the ST. Translators of political speeches should bear in mind that the intended functions toward target audiences are different from intended functions toward the source audiences. However, translators should bear in mind too that their translations of speeches should be equal to the source by creating same ‘sub-genre’; with same meanings and messages. As the corpus of this paper shows, the purpose of the source speech sounds celebrative, resistant, encouraging, and informative. Nonetheless, the purpose of the target text is only encouraging and informative. The source audience is also crucial in understanding hidden or indirect messages political speeches have, and the emotions such speeches try to evoke and arouse. The source audience have a strong and full historical background of their region’s conflicts, and of the nearby regions’ conflicts as well. However, the target audience (and target governments) may or may not be crucial.

Political speeches hold social values, religious beliefs, and social-political ideologies. Hence, official translations of speeches should hold same values, beliefs, and ideologies. In addition, governments employ translators who hold the same values and ideology, and who are considered trusted to transfer these values and ideology into identical translations; that do not cause any confusion to the TC at the same time. Interference is a good idea in literary works, but it is not in politics. As this paper shows, there is no interference from the translator side, and the translation is ‘literal-functional.’ Despite the diverse techniques used by the translator, they all function as ‘meaning-maintenance’ and ‘message-maintenance’ of the source political text. Also, the vagueness of some structures is a regular strategy used by politicians. For example, information on countries or organisations who are involved in fueling the Saharan conflict is left implicit, and only can be recognised by the pronouns ‘I’ and ‘those.’ Here, the translator’s historical and social backgrounds about the Saharan conflict, make his translation less fully functional, to avoid any unnecessary intervention, like ‘addition and omission.’ The unnecessary intervention may be unintended by the translator, but it still causes miscommunication, and may create journalistic improper analysis, or ‘journalistic misanalysis.’

Notes

1. Lebert, Marie (2 November 2016): A short history of translation through the ages. Visited on 2 January 2022, < https://www.iapti.org/iaptiarticle/a-short-history-of-translation-through-the-ages-marie-lebert-2/ >
2. Supreme Council of the Judicial Power (6 November 2021): جلالة الملك يوجه خطابا ساميا إلى الأمة بمناسبة الذكرى السادسة والأربعين للمسيرة الخضراء المظفرة [His Majesty the King Delivers Speech to Nation on 46^th Anniversary of Green March]. Visited on 27 December 2021, < https://www.cspj.ma/filecontent/getfile?filename=2021%2F5.pdf >
3. Royaume du Maroc, Le Chef du Gouvernment (6 November 2021): SM le Roi adresse un discours à la Nation à l’occasion du 46ème anniversaire de la Marche verte. Visited on 27 December 2021, < https://www.cg.gov.ma/fr/node/10473 >

Bibliography List

Primary Sources

• Ministry of Foreign Affairs, African Cooperation and Moroccan Expatriate website (6 November 2021): HIS MAJESTY THE KING DELIVERS SPEECH TO NATION ON 46TH ANNIVERSARY OF GREEN MARCH. Visited on 25 December 2021, < https://www.diplomatie.ma/en/his-majesty-king-delivers-speech-nation-46th-anniversary-green-march >
• Ministry of Foreign Affairs, African Cooperation and Moroccan Expatriate website (6 November 2021): جلالة الملك يوجه خطابا ساميا إلى الأمة بمناسبة الذكرى السادسة والأربعين للمسيرة الخضراء المظفرة [His Majesty the King Delivers Speech to Nation on 46th Anniversary of Green March]. Visited on 25 December 2021, < جلالة الملك يوجه خطابا ساميا إلى الأمة بمناسبة الذكرى السادسة والأربعين للمسيرة الخضراء المظفرة  المملكة المغربية وزارة الشؤون الخارجية و التعاون الإفريقي و المغاربة المقيمين بالخارج (diplomatie.ma)  >

Bibliography

• Baker, Mona. (2013). Translation as an Alternative Space for Political Action. Social Movement Studies, 12(1), 23-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2012.685624
• Bourdieu, P. In Thompson, J. B., Raymond, G., & Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power.
• Chilton, Paul. (2004). Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.
• Fawcett, Peter. (1998). Ideology and Translation. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, Mona Baker (ed.), 106–111. London/New York: Routledge.
• Kuhiwczak, P., & Littau, K. (2007). A companion to translation studies. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
• Maria, Tymoczko. (2000). Translation and Political Engagement. The Translator, 6(1), 23-47.
• Munday, Jeremy. (2016). Introducing Translation Studies. Routledge, London.
• Schäffner, Christina. (1997). Where is the Source Text? In G. Wotjak & H. Schmidt (Ed.), Modelle der Translation: Models of Translation: Festschrift für Albrecht Neubert(pp. 193-212). Frankfurt a. M., Madrid: Vervuert Verlagsgesellschaft. https://doi.org/10.31819/9783964567468-012
• Schaffner, C. (1996). Political speeches and discourse analysis. Current issues in language & society, 3(3), 201-204.
• Schäffner, Christina. (2003). Metaphor and translation: some implications of a cognitive approach. Aston University. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(7); 1253-1269.
• Schäffner, Christina. (2004). Political Discourse Analysis. Aston University. Journal of Language and Politics, 3(1), 117 -150.
• Schäffner, Christina. (2012). Unknown agents in translated political discourse. Aston University. Target, 24(1).
• Shahi, M., & Talebinejad, M. R. (2014). Frame labeling of competing narratives in journalistic translation. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 5(2), 23-40.
• Simms, Karl. (1997). Translating sensitive texts: Linguistic aspects. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
• Van Dijk, T. A. (1995). Aims of critical discourse analysis. Japanese discourse, 1(1), 17-28.
• Van Dijk, T. A. (1997). What is political discourse analysis. Belgian journal of linguistics, 11(1), 11-52.
• Van Dijk, T. A. (2000). Ideology and Discourse. Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona.