2.1 translating words or text from one language into

2.1 An overview of translation             Translation is a means of communication as it removes the obstacles between any two different languages. To achieve successful communication, thorough knowledge of two languages (the source language and the target language) is required. According to Hornby (1988) “translation is a complex act of communication in which the source language–author, the reader as translator and translator as target language–author and the target language–reader interact” (p. 81). This procedure depends on two main features: 1. The meanings of words.2. The structure sentences From these two basic elements, while translating it is clear that the meaning or the thoughts come in the first place. The term “translate” comes from Latin “transferre” and Greek “metapherein which means “carrying something across”. Translation is a form of cross-cultural communication and also an act of translating. “To translate” means to interpret, to transfer, and to change from one language to another. Translation is the act of transferring what is conveyed in one language by means of another language. According to Oxford dictionary (2000) “translation is the process of translating words or text from one language into another. The term translation itself has several meanings: it can refer to the general subject field, the product (the text that has been translated) or the process (the act of producing the translation, otherwise known as translating)” (p. 200). The process of translation between two different written languages includes “the translator changing an original written text (the source text or ST) in the original verbal language (the source language or SL) into a written text (the target text or TT) in a different verbal language (the target language or TL)” (Munday 2008;  p.5).Hatim & Munday (2004) defined a translation from two different viewpoints: firstly as a process and secondly as a product. Translation is an act of taking a text from one language and changing it into another as a process and as a product, it focuses on the results attained by the translator, the concrete product of translation. Another point of view sees translation as:”all the processes and methods used to render and/or transfer the meaning of the source language text into the target language as closely, completely and accurately as possible, using: (1) words/phrases which already have a direct equivalent in Arabic language; (2) new words or terms for which no ready-made equivalent is available in Arabic; (3) foreign words or terms written in Arabic letters as pronounced in their native origin; and (4) foreign words or terms made to fit Arabic pronunciation spelling and grammar” (Ghazala 2008; p.1).Newmark (1988) describes translation as “rendering the meaning of a text into another language in the way that the author intended the text” (p.5). Moreover, translation is “the reproduction in the receptor language of the closest natural equivalent of the source language message, first in terms of meaning, and second in terms of style” (Nida & Taber 2003; p.12). To sum up, all these definitions stressed on the meaning as a major factor in the process of translation. As well as other philosophers and linguists adopt this style and provided numerous concept of translation. Among those, Catford (1965) states that “translation is the replacement of textual material in one language (source language) by equivalent textual material in another language (target language)” p.20. According to Ross (1981) “the most natural view is that translation preserves the meaning of the original in another language or form. It is not a restatement where differences are minimized but highlights certain equivalence in the context of important dissimilarities” (p. 9).  Tytler’s (1978) laws of translation also propose that “1. The translation should give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original work. 2. The style and manner of writing should be of the same character with that of the original. 3. The translation should have all the ease of the original composition” (p. 16). Chaim Rabin in his essay “Linguistics of translation” (1958) says that “translation is a process by which a spoken or written utterance takes place in one language which is intended and presumed to convey the same meaning as the previously existing utterance in another language” (p. 16). It, as a result, comprises of two different elements: a ‘meaning’ and ‘reference to some slice of reality’. De Beaugrande (1978) explains it by saying that “translation should not be studied as a comparing and contrasting of two texts, but as a process of interaction between author, translator, and the reader of the translation.” (p. 13). Translation is the conveyance of meaning from the source language to the target language (Chiyab 2006; p.22). Jakobson (2000) discusses translation in semiotic terms, signifying that translation may occur not only between languages but also within a language and between semiotic systems. Also, many other scholars agreed on the same definition as Jakobson’s semiotic-based definition. Other scholars take translation as the study of signs, symbols, and codes. Likewise, Steiner (1975) says that “Translation is the interpretation of verbal signs in one language by means of verbal signs in another” (p. 414). Also, Frawley (1984) states that “translation will be understood as the final product of problem-solving and sign production of receptor-text (RT) functionally equivalent to a source text (ST), by a human being in a given language for a given group of text receivers” (p. 67). At, almost all the definitions can be incorporated under two definitions. The first definition is the replacement of one written text from one language to another in which the main goal of the translator is meaning. The second is the transmission of a message transferred from one text into a message communicated in another, with a high degree of attaining equivalence of context of the message, components of the original text, and the semiotic elements of the text (Shiyab 2006; p .22). 2.2 Types of translationAs shown above, translation definition varies from one to another, and each philosopher gives his definition according to his own point of view. Because of all this variety, translation in the present day has been divided into different categories, kinds, and conclusive standards. This arrangement appeared to hypothesize for the science of translation and its arts. Similarly, there are different types of translation based on these classifications: Even though there are many studies that dealt with the different types and patterns of translation. A small number of-of these studies have revealed the fact that the Arab was the first to make kinds of the translation and they grounded their classification according to the way of translation. There are two well-known methods which were adopted at that time: Yohana Ibn Al- Batriq and Hunayn Ibn Ishaq Al Zawahiri’s method (2014):• Yohana Ibn Al- Batriq’s technique: called as the word for word translation in which the source text is to break down word by word and try to find the close meaning for each word alone in the target text.• Ibn Ishaq Al-Jawahiri’s technique: known as the sense for sense translation in which the whole sentence in the source text is studied to find the equivalence in the target text in order to convey the intended meaning of the text.Certainly, the second way was adopted widely as it overcomes the mistakes that could occur from the use of the metaphorical expression in the source text and what makes the first way weak is the fact that you cannot find equivalence between the source language and the target language. As well, the structure, syntax, and grammar vary from one language to another. The Arab in the past mentioned to make a difference between written and oral translation. We see that clearly in using the terms: translator “?????” and interpreter “??????”. As it is earlier said that the Arab made an abundant evolvement in their classification of translation and they based it on many levels, for example, word & sentence level, complete and partial study of the text etc. Unfortunately, very few studies point out the role played by the Arab in the field of translation, despite the fact that most of this categorization made today is to be based upon the principles made by the Arab. Today, translation is categorized into different types that could be characterized according to a variety of standards. The different types of translation are discussed as under: The two primary types of translation are “Literal” versus “Free” translations. The free versus literal translation is perhaps the most often encountered in traditional accounts of translation. Both “concerns the semantic, often syntactic closeness between the source and target texts literalists tend to make form inseparable from content, while partisans of free translation tend to believe the same message can be conveyed in what is perhaps a radically different form” (Rose 1981; p.31). Alternatively, the two prominent types of translation are “literary” and “Non-literary” translation. As a point of agreements between those two, we can state that they “denote what is being translated, how the text is classified to begin with” (ibid; p. 34). On the one hand, literary translation is “concerned with both ‘sense’ and ‘style'” (Bijay Kumar Das 2008; p.27). On the other hand, the emphasis in Non-literary translation “was on sense” (ibid). So, literal translation deals with the translation of literature, but non-literary only deals with the translation of texts not related to literature. Furthermore, translation can also be classified as written versus oral translation. Written translation deals with written texts and to transfer them to another language limiting the basis of complete translation which means that the translator must not neglect any part or any items of the source text which is left untranslated. Oral translation, on the other hand, is older than the first one since the verbal communication between human being is the oldest. This kind is all about understanding the translation which is heard directly from the translator and the meaning will be in spoken form. This kind is affected by many reasons especially time where the translator needs to do the direct translation for the meaning and mostly, this type use partial translation where some items are left untranslated in order to transfer the original meaning of the text. Catford also make an extensive divergence and organization of the types of translation in his prominent book “A Linguistic Theory of Translation” (1965) in which he describes the types according to three terms: the extent, level, and rank of translation, but the two most important of them are full translation and partial translation. Full versus partial translation: Catford (1965) defines these two according to the extent of source language text. He explains full translation by saying that “the entire text is submitted to the translation process: that is, every part of the source language text is replaced by the target language text material” (p .21). In this type, every single detail of the source language text is rendered; every single feature is transported into the target language. For Partial translation, he said that in this kind, “some part or parts of the source language text are left untranslated” (ibid). Here, it is entirely the opposing idea with the previously mentioned type, where some parts of the text deliberately left untranslated, and this makes the process of transfer into the target language simpler. Catford (1965) carries on his classification moving to other types. At the levels of language, he said, translation is divided into two kinds, Total versus Restricted. The total translation is the type that occurs on all the levels of language as Catford (1965) defines total translation as “the replacement of source language grammar and lexis by the equivalent target language grammar and lexis with consequential replacement of source language phonology/graphology by (non-equivalent) target language phonology/graphology” (p.22). Restricted translation is the opposite of the Total translation as it takes place at one level. He defines it as the “replacement of source language textual material by the equivalent target language textual material, at only one level” (ibid). Another Eminent three classes of the translation made by Roman Jakobson in his seminal paper “On linguistic aspects of translation” (1959) are:• Intralingual translation: interpreting of verbal signs in the same language.• Interlingual translation: an interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other languages. • Intersemiotic translation: or (transmutation) or elucidation of verbal signs by means of nonverbal signs system. Munday (2008) explained above types as “Intralingual translation would occur, for example, when we rephrase an expression or when we summarize or otherwise rewrite a text in the same language. Intersemiotic translation would occur if a written text were translated, for example, into music, film, or painting. It is an interlingual translation, between two different verbal languages, which is the traditional, although by no means exclusive, the focus of translation studies” (p.5). 2.3 History of translation  The appearance of translation as an active human movement go along with the social progress as it remained the means of communication between the people for a long period. The translation came out as a result of human activity (Business, Religion, Military etc.). The very first form of translation was the oral one which is due to the simple language system and the non-existence of writing yet. 2.3.1 In the western worldA lot of western translators appeared in prehistoric and modern times. Cicero and Horace (first century BC) were the old schools of translation. They differentiate between the word for word translation and sense for sense translation. St Jerome (fourth century CE) who was renowned for his translation of the Greek Septuagint Bible into Latin and he was the first who proposed the separation between the translation of religious texts and other texts. He makes it clear that the correct translation is based on translator’s understanding of the original text and the degree of mastering target language. Translation for many years kept in the subject of religious translation till the sixteenth century when translation began to change into other domain and fields of study (politic, war, literature, etc.).