Pragma-Translation Strategies of Emphasis Constructions in the Holy Quran

This study examines the emphasis constructions used in the Holy Quran and the strategies used to translate them into English. While the Quran's emphasis constructions are considered miraculous, there is a shortage of English-language resources on this topic. The study's goals are to demonstrate the purpose behind the use of emphasis in the Quran and to identify the strategies used to translate emphasis constructions accurately. The analysis of five representative verses in the Quran reveals that Arabic has a stronger emphatic power than English, resulting in potential losses during translation. The study highlights the importance of context in interpreting emphasis devices and offers insights into the training of Quranic translators. Overall, this research sheds light on the translation of emphasis construction in the Holy Quran and emphasizes the need for accurate translations to fully understand Allah's original message.


I. INTRODUCTION
The main goal of this study is to respond to the divine prompting to meditate on the words of the Quran. One of the Quranic miracles is the use of emphasis constructions. However, there is a shortage of Englishlanguage resources on this important aspect of the Quran.
The translation of Quran, which is extensively used by non-Arabic speaking populations around the world, has been a great good contribution to humanity because it is the only method to understand the Quran's message. English is now the world's main language and so many people around the world, Muslim and non-Muslims alike, are acquiring knowledge the message of the Quran through its English translations. Accordingly, there is a pressing need to review and assess the strategies of English translations in order to identify the lexical and morphological issues that lead to semantic loss in the translation of this Holy text, the Quran. Nevertheless, no interpretation can be as accurate as Allah's original message; therefore, errorfree translation is inevitable.
The goal of this study is to look into the translation of the Quran's emphasis constructions in a certain representative verse to have the acceptable strategies of translation. The study's main aims are: 1. Demonstrating that the use of emphasis is employed for a special purpose regardless of the similarities among the synonymous verses, a matter that should be taken into account in translation. 2. finding the various strategies that are used to attempt to translate the emphasis constructions of the Quran. The Quran, Allah's Divine words, is full of wonders, and Arabs and non-Arabs alike are challenged to copy its language. The Quran's Arabic is an extremely rich vocabulary, with many words having multiple shades of meaning that are difficult to find in other languages, including English. As a result, there will be varying degrees of "translation emphasis" as a result of linguistic, morphological, and cultural factors. One of these wonders is the occurrence of emphasis constructions throughout the Quran. It does not induce monotony, as some skeptics say, but rather a pleasant surprise.
In this study, five verses in the holy Quran that tackle the style of emphasis construction are selected and translated, showing the multiple strategies that can be used to yield a successful translation to the phenomenon in question. This paper sheds light on the translation of emphasis construction in the Holy Quran as an important distinction between using the same construct, leaving part of it or changing it for the sake of sound translation.

II. LITERATURE REVIEW
The reality that the Qur'an is written in Arabic is an important aspect of its meaning. "The Qur'an is the Arabic Speech (kalam) of Allah, which was discovered to Muhammad (PBUH) in wording and meaning and has been maintained and reached us by constant transmissions and is a challenge to humanity to generate something similar to it," according to many prominent Qur'an scholars, such as AI-Zarqani. The Quran itself refers to this revelation from Allah to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) by the moniker Quran (Reading/Recitation), which appears 23 times in the Quran (Omer, 2012, p.3).
Furthermore, the Qur'an is the source of various fields of Arabic literature, and the Qur'anic style has been and continues to be the gold standard in literary Arabic, as well as the primary source of many linguistic concerns. Its language became the criterion by which other literary attempts were judged. The Qur'an is so vast that even non-Muslim Arabs regard it as the highest power and reference text for Arabic rhetoric, grammar, and syntax. The Qur'anic patterns demonstrate a clever and striking use of language, as well as the existence of completely harmonized ideas and thoughts (Omer, 2012, p.3).
Translation is one of the most difficult tasks since it entails attempting to communicate a message accurately while also paying attention to the form. In most cases, a translator's attempt to achieve form makes achieving meaning more difficult. As a result, a translator is usually forced to choose between form and meaning. In other words, a translator's success in retaining both form and meaning is unusual, especially when dealing with two distant languages like Arabic and English. A dilemma like this is related to the subject of what makes a good interpretation (Schulte, 2002), this can be seen in the various definitions of translation.
Nida and Taber (1974) describe translation, for example, as the reproduction of a source language's content in a target language's message while maintaining similar meaning and style. Style can relate to grammatical and syntactic patterns in this context. In Arabic, for instance, the technique is to put the most significant information in the foreground and the least vital things in the background in a given situation. In English, however, there are established grammatical rules that demand a subject to come before the verb or the object. Newmark (1988) suggested different concepts of interpretation, he described translation as the approximate equivalent of two languages at various levels, the most essential of which are cognition and linguistic form. Newmark's concept is comparable to Nida and Taber's, in that they both emphasize the significance of linguistic form equivalence. Catford (1965), on the other hand, saw translation as the substitution of equal textual material in one language (SL) by equivalent textual material in another language (TL). These conceptions of translation often emphasize two key concepts: meaning and linguistic form, leading to the creation of many systems of thought on translation centered on meaning and form. Larson (1984), for instance, distinguished among meaning-based and form-based translation.
The Quranic scripture was first translated from a message conveyed in the form of letters by the Prophet Muhammad to the rulers of neighboring countries, urging them to formally accept Islam. Due to the diversity of languages spoken by these surrounding cultures, the messengers were unable to relay the text, which was written in Arabic but received in the native tongue of the receivers. The meaning of Sourat of Al Fatiha was first translated into Persian by Salman AI-Farsi. 'Amr ibn Ummayyah' translated to the King of Abyssinia, Negus, some lines regarding Jesus Christ and his mother Mary, known as 'Ayahs' (Yahaghi, 2002, pp.105-109) Muslim academics began preaching the moral norms to non-Arabic-speaking audiences as Islam extended beyond the borders of Arabia. (İhsanoǧlu, 1986, p.15) discusses that "There are Syriac interpretations done by non-Muslims in the second half of the first century AH [7th AD]". Aside from a Berber translation from 127 AH, the Quran was translated into Persian and Indian around the years 961-976 AD, and the Quranic translation into Chinese is thought to have taken place around 713 AD (Abou Sheishaa, 2001, p.1). Early Quran translations into European languages were based on a few translations that were partly useful for some clergy learning Islam for missionary purposes.
By the early 1900s, Muslims, on the other hand, had recognized the necessity for accurate translations into English and other European languages (Ali, 2002, p. 10). Indeed, during the reign of Caliph Haroun Al-Rashid, who admired the work of interpreters, the Arabs' concern in translation became a religious and political matter. As stated by Kidwai (2007), for various reasons, the number of editions of Quran interpretations increased from 296 in 1980 to 890 in 2002. Recent events, including 9/11 and the Americanbacked forces' conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, have increased public awareness of the Quran's power and its reader's ideas.

A. Definition of Translation
According to the literature, a Quran translation is simply a try to get as near to the text as conceivable in order to generate a periphrastic copy of it rather than the precise text. (Burman, 1998, p. 713) According to him, literalism gives "more of the Quran's feeling and form." The grammatical and stylistic difficulties of interpreting the Quran, as well as the constraints of the Quranic text's literal translatability, have been discussed in a number of studies. (Abdul-Raof, 2004). Abdul-Raof (2005) concentrates on the interpretation of cultural references from the Quran or stylistic aspects of the Quran, while Ali (1992) referring to the elliptical structures and prepositional sentences in the Quran. There has been no systematic comparison of the result of various interpreters coping with the same linguistic characteristic in the same target language (TL) in the Quran interpretation literature, nor has the question of the translator's style been addressed. Meanwhile, syntactic issues and grammatical asymmetries, as the most distinctive aspects of the Quranic style, have received little systematic attention from scholars interested in syntactic problems relating to the translation of the Quran (Dkhissi, 2018, p. 43). Hatim and Munday (2004, p.6) defined translation as "The process of transferring written words from a source language (SL) to a target language (TL)" is defined as translating a written text from a source language (SL) to a target language (TL). They don't say directly in this definition that the thing being communicated is meaning or message. They place a strong focus on translation as a method. Nida and Taber (1982, p. 12), on the other hand, that "translating includes constructing the receiver language text's closest natural equivalent of the source language text." This is a more complete definition than the previous ones. Translation, according to Nida and Taber, is clearly linked to issues of language, meaning, and equivalence. (Newmark, (1988, p.5) Providing the meaning of a text into another language in the way that the writer desires the text," says one of the most well-known definitions of translation. This definition focuses on translating the meaning of the source language material into the target language text as the author intended.

B. Definition of Translation
The word 'translation' derives from the Latin word translates, which means 'to transfer' (Simpson and Weiner (1989, p. 410). The translation is defined by them as: a) "The... transformation of one language into another." b) "The representation of something in a different media or form." (Hornby, (2010(Hornby, ( , p. 1646) describe the verb translate as: a) "To translate the meaning of a speech or writing into another language." b) "To translate from one language to another." Apparently, these definitions are sufficient to investigate the strategies and construction in this paper. Newmark (1988, p. 81) discusses that "While translation methods apply to entire texts, translation procedures apply to sentences and other smaller units of language," states the author. The following is a breakdown of the various types and methods of translation. Newmark goes on to mention the following translation methods:

C. Methods of Translation
1. Word-for-word translation: the SL word order is retained, and the words are interpreted individually by their most common meanings. 2. Literally translation: the SL grammatical structures are transformed to their closest TL equivalents, while the lexical words are interpreted individually, out of context. 3. Accurate translation: it tries to reproduce the original's accurate contextual meaning within the restrictions of TL grammatical structures. 4. Semantic translation varies from "faithful translation" only in that it must take into account the SL text's aesthetic value. 5. Concepts, figures, and storylines are usually kept, the SL culture is translated to the TL culture, and the text is rewritten in adaptation, which is the most liberated form of translation. It is primarily utilized for plays (comedies) and poetry. 6. Free translation: it generates the TL text without the original's manner, structure, or substance. 7. Idiomatic translation: it reproduces the original message, but it seeks to distort nuances of meaning by favoring colloquialisms and idioms in places where they don't exist in the original. 8. Communicative translation aims to represent the original's exact contextual meaning in such a way that both the content and the language are easily accepted and understood by the reader. (Newmark, (1988, pp. 45-47).

D. Strategies of Translation
In the context of "translation strategies," the phrase "strategy" is frequently interchanged with terms like "process," "technique," "approach," "tactic," "approach," and so on. Their meanings are ambiguous, and translation experts describe them in a variety of ways. Although the terminological ambiguity, translation tactics have been discussed since Cicero's advocacy of sense-for-sense translation in 46 BC and are regularly addressed in translation textbooks for their instructional value. This subject also has significant theoretical implications in translation studies. Researchers have sought to differentiate translation technique from synonyms and to construct their own categorization based on their findings. Lörscher's (1991) categorization, for example, is based on a cognitive approach, whereas Chesterman's (1997) classification is based on a textual approach. Despite this, the conceptual ambiguity remains.
This item aims to differentiate translation tactics, techniques, and procedures, as well as to bring together existing categorization. Clear explanations of these concepts appear to be less effective than prototype definitions. The two prototype translation strategies, according to most scholars, are literal translation and free translation. The former is concerned with the level of words, whereas the latter is concerned with the production of a target text that sounds natural in the target language. Word-for-word translation versus sense-for-sense translation; source-oriented translation versus target-oriented translation; direct translation versus oblique translation; adequacy versus acceptability; formal equivalence versus dynamic equivalence; semantic translation versus communicative translation; overt translation versus covert translation; overt translation versus covert Despite the fact that these binary oppositions have a lot in common, they reflect various views and stress different translation purposes and outcomes (Sun, 2012, p.2).
Word-for-word and sense-for-sense translation, for example, are text-level or segment-level techniques. Nida's (1964) Both tactics have an impact on the text to be translated as well as the translation process. The foreignizing approach, according to Venuti, is used to "record the linguistic and cultural peculiarities of the foreign text." (1995, p. 81) and to counter readers' cultural domination in dominant societies like the United States. One of the key concerns in translation theory and criticism throughout history has been the "literal vs. free" argument. Nevertheless, it is now widely assumed that this binary argument is sterile, as the two tactics are now seen as part of a continuum (Hatim & Munday, 2004, p. 230).
Strategies A translation method covers a variety of textual approaches and strategies used to move a text from a source language to a target language in the context of a translation assignment and a communication circumstance. The method is chosen before beginning the translation process, and it is determined by a number of criteria. As discussed by Schaffner (199, p.:9), The act of interpreting is managed before and during the process by fundamental standards, preliminary rules, and procedural rules. Preliminary norms will define why a particular text is chosen for interpretation, main standards will decide whether general strategy (foreignization or domestication) will be utilized, and procedural norms will determine the microtechniques used at the word and sentence levels. Han (2012, p. 306) states that "Translation techniques are employed for sentences and smaller units of language, whereas translation methods are utilized for full texts", he uses terms like "word-for-word translation", "literal translation", "equivalence", "faithful translation", "semantic translation", "adaptation", "free translation", "idiomatic translation", and "communicative translation" to describe various translation methods.
As stated by Zhou and Jiang (2012, p. 708), The interpretation tactics were divided into two categories: global strategies (those that apply to the entire task, such as style, reader, and so on) and local strategies (applying to specific items, namely lexical searches). Professionals and semi-professionals (translator trainees) use global tactics far more frequently than non-professionals, according to her.

E. Types of Translation
According to Barnwell (1986, p. 13), there are two types of translations with different definitions: literal translation and meaning-based translation.
1. A literal translation is one that tries to match the original message's language form as nearly as possible. 2. A meaning-based translation seeks to convey the actual meaning of the source communication in a natural way in the target language. The steps of translation are clearly depicted in Fig. 1. We can see in stage 1 that the first stage in picking the source language to be used is to figure out what it means. Following the acquisition of meaning, the translator attempted to complete the second phase, which is re-expressing the meaning in the target language.  The form of the shape from step 1 to step 2 is what should be concentrated on here. As can be seen in step 1, the form begins as a square and then transforms into an octagon when interpreted. But one thing remains constant: the meaning of the circle inside. So, based on the diagram above, we can assume that the form (target language or known as product) in target language makes no difference since the meaning is the most important factor to consider. Because each language has its own framework, the target language will take on a variety of forms. It means that the original meaning must be preserved, or at the very least, the interpreter must attempt to substitute it with the nearest natural meaning/equivalent.

A. Data Analysis
The Holy Quran has always faced a number of challenges, the most serious of which are the linguistic differences between the two languages, as well as a variety of cultural distinctions and problems resulting from what should be translated, whether the translator should stick to a word-for-word translation of this sacred text, or whether the translator should look into the meanings behind the words and re-express those meanings in the translation ( Alsharou, 2016, p.11).
The relationship between content and form was restored by Al Jurjani's construction theory. Most prior writers' opinions were centered on the duality of meaning in terms of meaning ‫ا‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫ﻤ‬ ‫ﻌ‬ ‫ﻨ‬ ‫ﻰ‬ versus 'form' ‫ا‬ ‫ﻟ‬ ‫ﻠ‬ ‫ﻔ‬ ‫ﻆ‬ , these two aspects are clearly differentiated. Some theorists even claimed that the Quran's inimitability was owing to its 'meanings,' while others said that it was due to its 'forms' (i.e. words) Al Jurjani, on the other hand, promoted a quite different school of thought, arguing that the Quran's inimitability is the result of the interaction of forms and meanings when ordered un a certain, syntactically distinct, arrangement. With concepts such as 'arrangement' ‫ﻧ‬ ‫ﻈ‬ ‫ﻢ‬ , Al Jurjani in effect created an alternative ideology of denotation: meaning within meaning, or that kind of meaning which can be gleaned only from seeing text in context. In dealing with Al Jurjani's thought, I have relied heavily on commentaries inspired by two major works by the author:  (Alsharou, 2016, p.11). In linguistics, there is a large literature on emphasis. It is sufficient for now to mention that Taglicht (1984, pp. 213-230), For instance, used the term "emphasis" to describe the use of syntactic or pragmatic methods to lend importance to a certain item. In a similar vein, two distinct types of emphases have been found Lester (1971, p.175): (1) complete sentence emphasis, in which the entire sentence's truth value is asserted; and (2) When a word or grammatical element is picked out for special attention, it is called element emphasis.
Al Jurjani's emphasis on syntactic implications transformed the way most researchers and academics thought throughout his lifetime. The concept of diversity in Kalamu Allah (God's Word) is obvious in his assessment of poetic imagery. It also serves as the foundation for his multi-meanings theory, which ties the format of an image with the arrangement of a statement. His purpose was to refute the prevailing dualistic belief that the Quran's tone was based on words that were unrelated to their content. Al Jurjani developed a unique idea, Nazm (structural arrangement), based on his literal understanding of meaning, that judges the worth of a literary masterpiece, which is applicable not only to the Quran but to all forms of literary content (Alsharou, 2016, p.14).
Emphasis is an all-pervasive language characteristic in the Holy Quran. It is created through the use of several rhetorical or grammatical emphasis particles. Unlike English, which lacks a comprehensive system of emphaticness, the Arabic language tends to demonstrate a defined power. When the attention patterns are switched from the SL to the TL, this results in massive losses. This loss is primarily caused by differences in linguistic systems; nevertheless, translators are somewhat to blame for this loss. The loss happens when emphatic devices, such as following emphatic devices, are used to indicate grammatical emphasis: , instead of reflecting rhetorical emphasis such as the use of rhetorical questions, unique forms, or repetition. Despite the fact that there are a number of Arabic emphasizers that have no English equivalents, translators can compensate for the emphatic effect by using English tools and emphasizers (Hatim, 1997, p. 334).
For example, the background of a circumstance influences the language output of the participants in a Quranic debate. One of the most significant linguistic characteristics is emphasis, which is always determined by context. Sometimes a specific context necessitates a large number of emphasizers to support a given thesis; other times, none are required. However, the number of emphasizers needed is not random. When the receiver conveys (or is in the circumstance of expressing) uncertainty, rejection, or openmindedness to a notion communicated by the speaker or writer, we find emphatic particles to match: few, if any, for the open-minded or hesitant, many for the denier. The analysis of various Quranic discourses in this thesis highlights these phenomena (of less or more focus) (Alsharou, 2016, p.30).

B. Emphasis Devices Encountered 1) The negative exceptive style
This is a rhetorical strategy in which the speaker makes a negative statement and then makes an exception for the point they wish to make. This device is an example of this: We see thee but a mortal like us (Pickthall, 1930).

2) Repetition
It's when you employ the same term or phrase more than once to emphasize or explain a point. There are many different sorts of repetition. When it comes to rhetoric, repetition might take the form of a single word, a phrase, or even a complete sentence. This is more of a rhetorical device than a figure of speech, in my opinion. Repetition is the most common technique used as an accentuating tool in the data. The use of repetition can be seen in the following example: O my people! Serve Allah O my people! I ask of you no reward for it (Pickthall,1930).

3) Rhetorical question
This is a type of question for which the speaker does not require a response or for which no answer exists. In other circumstances, rhetorical questions are those that have no answers and are asked just to emphasize a point or a concept, to persuade the audience, or to achieve literary effect. In the data that was evaluated, this device was found twice. The following is an example of this: Ye have no other Allah save Him. Will ye not ward off (evil)? (Pickthall, 1930). )) Which of you is the demented).
Despite the fact that it was used less frequently than other rhetorical devices, but it is an important rhetorical device for expressing emphasis.

6) The insertion of special words
A speaker may use words that do not carry emphasis in and of themselves, but which are used to convey emphasis in a particular context. The following verse is an example of this: So (try to) circumvent me, all of you, give me no respite (Pickthall, 1970).

The word
‫ﺟ‬ ‫ﻤ‬ ‫ﯿ‬ ‫ﻌ‬ ‫ﺎ‬ (all) is not an emphasis device in and of itself. However, in this case, the usage of this specific word provides an emphasis effect 7) The emphatic inne The particle "Inna" is used with a nominal sentence that has a subject and a predicate. The addition of "inna" transforms the sentence's neutral propositional meaning into a more intense propositional content.
Here is an example of ‫إ‬ ‫ن‬ We said: Fear not! Lo! thou art the higher (Pickthall, 1970).

8) The emphatic noon
To emphasize the meaning of the verb and to refer to the future, it is suffixed to it. One of the characteristics that distinguishes the verb from other parts of speech, according to Ibn Hisham, is that, unlike other parts of speech, the verb permits being connected to the heavy or light emphatic noon ‫ﻧ‬ ‫ﻮ‬ ‫ن‬ .For example: And now if he refuses to obey my order, he shall certainly be cast into prison and will be one of those who are disgraced (Pickthall,1970).
Hud emphasizes that his call for Allah's worship has no alternative motive and that his only goal is to lead his people along the correct road. So, Hud's sincerity is demonstrated by the fact that he demands no recompense from them for his message, preferring to earn his reward from Allah on the Day of Judgment. To persuade his people to follow his call, Hud uses logical argument to criticize them for their lack of common sense and sound reasoning, saying: ‫ا‬ ‫ﻓ‬ ‫ﻼ‬ ‫ﺗ‬ ‫ﻌ‬ ‫ﻘ‬ ‫ﻠ‬ ‫ﻮ‬ ‫ن‬ " " ,will you not then understand!" (Hilali & Khan, 2000, p. 256 ) "that I am right in forbidding you from worshipping these idols" . The word in is repeated several times. The preceding verse impresses upon the hearer the following fact: Hud is honest in his call since he seeks neither gain nor profit from anybody but Allah (Alsharou, 2016, p.28).
Hud emphasizes his case by bringing forward further support to give his people a feeling of direction, as well as mentioning specific prizes that are dependent on the accomplishment of particular commands, after translator's ability to go beyond mastery of the source language and target language systems to concerns of syntax and higher-level rhetoric (including, for example, emphasis). 6. The above examples demonstrate the need of context in comprehending and interpreting the meaning of emphasis devices faced. 7. This research can serve as a beneficial module in the training of Quranic translators, particularly those who utilize a contextual approach as a strategy of translation. It can assist them in comprehending the relationship between context and meaning, as well as how understanding the context and the listener's/text receiver's status can change the interpreter's perspective on the text in order to gain a better comprehension of the intended meaning.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Authors declare that they do not have any conflict of interest.