Two translations of Mahfouz’s _Awlad Haratina_ (Children of our Alley): A computational-stylistic analysis

2024

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.22148/001c.116239
Data confidence 85 high
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Comparative studies of different translations for the same source text can be valuable sources of insights relevant to the fluid notion of ‘translation style’. Such studies can employ a wide variety of techniques, including computational analysis which targets specific elements in the text in order to allow for a systematic view of translator style. This study attempts a computational-stylistic analysis of the two English translations of Naguib Mahfouz’s controversial novel _Awlad Haratina_ (literally, Children of our Alley). The aim of the study is two-fold. First, it aims to show how quantifiable computational and distant reading techniques can help identify patterns of stylistic differences between these two translations. Second, it attempts to situate the results of this analysis within the wider social context of the two English translations (Stewart 1981 and Theroux 1996) of one of the most famous modern Arabic novels. The results clearly show patterns of linguistic use specific to each of the two translations highlighting differences in lexical variety and richness, sentence structure, readability level, stylometric analysis as well some lexical choices. These results can be interpreted within the social context of producing those two translations, with particular reference to characteristics of retranslation as discussed in the literature.