Abstract
This study aims to investigate if self-translation is a true interpretation of a Source Text (ST) into a Target Text (TT), or if it is in fact a rewriting process. The study examines Haikal’s self-translation of a book titled ‘Autumn of Fury: T he Assassination of Sadat’ . This self-translation is used as an example due to the modifications and changes made by Haikal, and examines to what extent the translator is faithful to his ST (English version). For the purpose of this study, fifteen examples have been selected from Haikal's version of Autumn of Fury. They are then analysed and compared to their Arabic translations (TT), and the differences are highlighted and discussed. The selected examples include words, phrases, sentences, and sometimes whole paragraphs. The study relies on Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) as a theoretical framework to uncover the hidden ideologies and attitudes behind the modification, manipulation, or rewriting of the ST into Arabic. These examples are analysed from linguistic, political and ideological perspectives. The study finds that Haikal’s self-translation of Autumn of Fury into Arabic was actually a rewriting process rather than a translation process, and that a new book is almost recreated out of the original. Keywords: Self-translation, rewriting, ideology, CDA, Haikal, and Autumn of Fury
Highlights
The practice of self-translation was common in the late Middle Ages and in early modern Europe, focusing mainly on bridging Latin and the vernaculars (Roscoff 2015)
Haikal insisted on self-translating Autumn of Fury to distance himself from critics
This study found that, in the example of Haikal and Autumn of Fury, the author as a translator offers an almost new version of his original, which is demonstrated by the additions, omissions, and completely rewritten parts in the translated version
Summary
The practice of self-translation was common in the late Middle Ages and in early modern Europe, focusing mainly on bridging Latin and the vernaculars (Roscoff 2015). 19) was the first theorist to define self-translation as “the translation of an original work into another language by the author himself.”. Self-translation, or auto-translation, first appeared in the early sixteenth century in Europe, where it was very common for poets to translate their own Latin texts into vernaculars to enrich their works (Grutman 1998). Petrucă (2013) defines self-translation as a creative form of translation that, in some respects, is different from the normal act of translation, and she goes on to describe a selftranslator as an author who has the opportunity to make changes to their work during translation in order to revise and improve the material. She argues that “wars or other conflicts” require some writers to leave their home countries and settle in new countries, where eventually they “acquired a new language, a new different culture and, in the end, they started to write in that language." Another reason cited is that some writers were angered and “not satisfied” with the interpretation of their works by other translators. Petrucă (2013, p. 760) mentions that some writers self-translate their own works “ because they know another language”, and they are keen to improve their bilingualism or multilingualism
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: 3L The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
