A Translator’s Coming of Age by Omaya Ibrahim Khalifa

Through studying the three translations of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet done by Mohammed Enani in 1965, 1986 and 1993 respectively, this study adopts a diachronic approach. In addition to examining the historical dimension, this study attempts to address itself to crucial questions related to the process of translating a literary text. A few of these are: how a translator can approach a given text in three different ways and how each translation changes according to the approach and the methods chosen by the translator. More importantly, the study proposes to discuss the pragmatic conditions governing the act of translation and how far these result in prominent modifications in the relationship between the source and target texts. The first part of this study discusses the problem or problems which confront a translator attempting to transpose Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet into Arabic, and the second analyses the three translations and how each deals with the problems discussed. Mohammed Enani, in his introduction to his third translation of Romeo and Juliet, singles out tone as the main difficulty that faces any translator attempting a rendering of the play. In the Elizabethan era romance was regarded as a subject for comedy and as such allowed playful treatment. Harry Levin explains that Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet was an innovation at the time. He reveals the effect of the play on contemporary audiences as follows:

It is hard for us to realize the full extent of its novelty though scholarship has been reminding us of how it must have struck contemporaries. They would have been surprised and possibly shocked at seeing lovers taken so seriously. Legend … was the proper matter for serious drama; romance was the stuff of the comic stage. (108)

This and the fact that “the sonnet is the channel through which the play flows” as Ralph Berry puts it, explain the playful tone and the light-hearted treatment of the subject (37). F. E. Halliday suggests that the play “reverberate(s) with the sonnet poetry” expressing the same themes and employing the same imagery (76). Thus he emphasizes the dramatic as well as the poetic aspects of the play and regards them inseparable: “a form of drama, half play, half poem..” (88).The play, as Frye affirms, is not simply an archetypal story of youth, love, and death, and hence the subtlety of the language which in turns reflects the complexity of the plot. The audience, for example, gets an unconventional opening following the prologue: the brawl and the bawdy jokes of the servants. However, Frye regards this as an appropriate way to introduce the theme that dominates this play: “the theme of love bound up with, and part of, violent death” (16). “All was not well in Verona”; confusion borders on absurdity (15). Thus Frye suggests that

… love in Romeo and Juliet covers three different forms of a convention. First, the orthodox Petrarchan convention in Romeo’s professed love for Rosaline at the beginning of the play. Second, the less sublimated love for which the only honourable resolution was marriage, represented by the main theme of the play. Third, the more cynical and ribald perspective that we get in Mercutio’s comment, and perhaps those of the nurse as well (20-21).

Accordingly, there are three main styles involving different tones which any translator would endeavour to render: the conventional, the spontaneous and finally the playful including the bawdy. These different styles and tones are intrinsic to the play serving to further the plot and trace the development of the characters. “Shakespeare doesn’t do things for second rate reasons,” Frye writes; “… the action of the play is what is always primary with him, and anything that seems a detour in the action is probably advancing that action on another level ”(17-18). As long as Romeo and Juliet conform to conventions, they are accepted. Once they deviate from the norm using spontaneous expressions, they can no longer communicate with society. Romeo is banished and Juliet can no longer communicate with her parents or even the nurse for that matter. Moreover, the cynical and the ribald intensify the lovers’ tragedy. A comparison of the three distinct translations of Juliet’s lyrical lines as she learns that Romeo is a Montague illustrates Enani’s different approaches to dealing with the problem of tone.

My only love sprung from my only hate ! Too early seen unknown, and known too late ! Prodigious birth of love it is to me, That I must love a loathed enemy. ( I.v.136-139)

1) حبيبى الوحيد هو ابن عدوى الوحيد ! رأيته قبل أن أعرفه ، وعرفته بعد فوات الوقت ! إن هذا الحب نذير شر إذ يكتب على أن أحب عدوى…(ف 1 _ م 5 _ 136_139)

2) أفهذا حبى الأوحد من بيت عدوى الأوحد
مقدور أن أهواه
لم أعرف من يلقانى
لكن أسلمت عنانى مقدور أن أهواه
يا ويح فؤادى يا ويحى
هل هذا حبى وعدوى
مقدور أن أهواه (ص70)

3) أفهذا حبى الأوحد؟
من صلب عدوى الأوحد؟
لم أك أعرف حين رأيت الأملا
والآن عرفت وقد سبق السيف العذلا
ذا مولد حب ينذر بالشر المحتوم
اذ كتب على غرام عدو مذموم (ص 105)

The first is a prose rendering that detracts from the beauty and lyricism of the lines although the translator resorts to grammatical completion to account for the verse form. He also accounts for the antithesis in (belovedحبيبى ) and (enemy وعدوى ) ; (before وقبل ) and (after وبعد). However, the tone transposed is different from that in the original. The rhyme and the meter here are intrinsic to the lines which recall Romeo’s oxymoronic epithets at the outset of the play : “ O brawling love ! O loving hate” (I.i.169). At this stage the lovers are still young and immature expressing their feelings in conventional rhetorical forms. The quick moving meter, the rhyme and the interpolated refrain render the second translation lyrical. Still, however, due to modification and omission; it defies the purpose and the tone of the original. The oxymorons in the first two lines culminate in “Prodigious birth of love” which sounds ominous and echoes “the death marked love” in the prologue. The omission of this line shows that the dramatic aspect of the play which cannot be divorced from its poetic is downplayed. Finally, though the rhythm of the third is slower than that of the second and of the original Shakespearian text, still this translation conveys an impression closer to the original than the first two with its fusion of both the poetic and the dramatic. The first two lines of the second and third translations are identical except for one word “من صلب”(offspring) .The word “sprung” is translated as “from the house of” in the second, but the third renders it “the offspring” which is more in tune with the word “birth” in the third line. From the above it is evident that Enani’s first translation is a very close translation of the original except for the fact that the medium employed by the translator is prose. This translation belongs to the literary tradition of the sixties in Egypt, a tradition venerating accuracy and high seriousness. This literary tradition was originally adopted and then enhanced by the Arab League Project for translating the classics. Since “precision” was their main aim, the Arab League translators and other translators and scholars of the period used prose to translate literary works. Prose, they thought, was a reliable medium. It involved less constraints than verse in the translator’s choices due to the demands of rhythm and rhyme. An example of this approach is the translation of Juliet’s: “You kiss by the book” (I.v.110). This is rendered: قبلة حسب ما يقول كتاب السلوك"(ف1 _م1 _ 110) " in contrast to the more flexible translation of the third version: (لقد قبلت طبقا للاصول. 103) . Paradoxically, however accurate these translations were, still they defied their purpose resulting in poetic and cognitive loss. Thus in spite of its adherence to the original as far as lexis, syntax and stylistic devices are concerned, Enani’s first translation does not overcome the problem of conveying the intended “tone” or “tones”. Prose does not only detract from the beauty and lyricism of the lines, which are intrinsic features of the play, but also sometimes interferes with the tone and accordingly the dramatic function of the lines. Following, for example, is a close rendering of the line uttered by Friar Lawrence, addressing Romeo, after the latter kills Tybalt and is banished by the Prince as follows: Affliction is enamoured of thy parts, And thou art wedded to calamity. (III.iii.2-3)

إن العذاب يعشق طباعك، بل إنك تزوجت كارثة (ف 3 _ م 3 _ 2-3).
The prose, the declamatory tone and the choice of words render the translation not only prosaic and inadequate, but also convey a tone that verges on the absurd; تزوجت كارثة (you married calamity) has a cultural connotation usually associated with criticizing wives seen as calamities. Phonetically, also, the word طباع does not sound poetic. Enani avoids these difficulties in the third verse translation by opting for a different syntax. He also employs سجاياه.instead of طباع which together with the rhyme produces a more poetic impression. The word married is replaced by a less commonly used synonym اقترن which means to marry and to be associated with. Finally, to ensure precise interpretation, the translator adds حياة to qualify calamity. The line thus reads as follows: من يهوى الألم سجاياه . (ص181) واقترن بكارثة حياة

The same approach with its insistence on “precision” is adopted in translating Romeo’s words, which underline the paradox of their situation, to Juliet: “More light and light, more dark and dark our woes” (III.v.36). In the original, rhythm, parallelism and repetition, all contribute to enhancing the meaning and the intended effect.

نورا ونورا مثلما تزيد احزاننا ظلاما وظلاما

(ف 3 _ م 5 _ 36)

Paradoxically, the almost literal rendition does not produce the intended effect in Arabic. A more mature approach is seen in Enani’s second and third translations. The fronting of the verbal clause and the repetition of the verb instead of the repetition of the nouns convey the poetic sense of the original.

كلما ازداد الضياء

زادت الأحزان ظلمة (ص122)

وكلما زاد الضياء زادت الأحزان ظلمة! (ص199)

Also, Juliet’s poetic utterance with its internal rhyme, alliteration and assonance expressing a prophetic vision is rendered very prosaically in the first translation. This is due to the translator’s insistence on copying the syntactical structures of the original using grammatical completion. The original reads as follows:

O God! I have an ill divining soul!

Methinks I see thee, now thou art so low,

As one dead in the bottom of a tomb;

Either my eye sight fails, or thou look’st pale.

(III.v.53-56)

اه ياربى... كم انا متشائمه! لكننى اراك- وقد نزلت الان- ميتا فى اعماق قبر! اما ان بصرى ضعيف او ان لونك شاحب بالفعل (ف 3 م 5 _ 53 _56)

Poor eye sight is an imprecise interpretation of my eye sight fails. In comparison, the second translation renders these lines more accurately, not to mention poetically, in spite of the fact that the approach espoused is different from that adopted in the first translation. The translator replaces the noun by two verbs employing lexical explication to render ill divining soul "أخشى و أستريب" (I dread and I doubt). Then my eye sight fails is translated "زاغ البصر" . Although "خاننى البصر" used in the third translation is more accurate, the choice of "زاغ البصر" conveys a sense closer to illusion than "بصرى ضعيف" in the first. More importantly, the beauty and lyricism of the second rendering of these lines are in tune with Juliet’s language and tone in the original. The translation or rather the poetry reads as follows:

لشد ما أخشى وأستريب! كأنما وأنت تهبط الدرج تغوص فى قبر غريب لربما زاغ البصر او كان يكسوك الشحوب! (ص123 – 124)

As a poet, a Shakespearian scholar and a professional translator, Enani may have been dissatisfied with his early translation of Romeo and Juliet because it deprives the Arabic reader of the lyricism intrinsic to the original Shakespearian text. Accordingly, in 1986 he produced a poetic version of the play. Contrary to the previous translation, this one stressed the poetic and lyrical aspects of the original. The play was intended as a musical, especially adapted for the stage, turning the central scenes of the play into theatrical occasions for singing and dancing. This necessitated the use of light and quick moving metres suitable for songs. It also implied toning down the dramatic aspect of the play since this approach involved omission, condensation, adaptation and even interpolation. The epilogue at the end of the translation, for example, is an interpolated song sung by all the characters underlining the moral of the play. It is noteworthy that even the presumably dead Romeo and Juliet come back to life and take part in this theatrical occasion. In the introduction to the play, Enani explains that this interpolated song was suggested by the director of the performance. A comparison of the translation of Romeo’s words before leaving for the Capulet’s to attend the party - in the second and the third translations –illustrates the approach espoused by Enani in the second translation. Romeo’s ominous utterance addressing his friends reads as follows:

I fear, too early, for my mind misgives
Some consequence, yet hanging in the stars,
Shall bitterly begin his fearful date
With this night’s revels, and expire the term
Of a despised life closed in my breast,
By some vile forfeit of untimely death: But He that hath the steerage of my course Direct my sail. On lusty gentlemen.
(I.v.107-114)

This is translated as follows:

إنى لاوجس خيفة
من حفلة الليل الكتوم
قدر تداريه الغيوم
قدر بأيدى السابحات من نجوم!
وكأنما الموعد حان
لحكاية تنهى مرارتها الحياة
وكانما الأحزان ترقص فى الشفاه
يا من توجه دفتى
أصلح شراع سفينتى!
هيا بنا قبل الأفول! (ص62)

In the second version, the translator employs mixed metres, “Alkamel” and “alragaz”, an uncommon practice in Arabic, to stress the quick moving tempo which is further enhanced by the use of rhyme. In the previous example, he also changes the order of the lines and adds two words: the first, "الكتوم" (close or secretive) to qualify the night and the second, "الغيوم" (clouds). These, however, neither influence the meaning nor the tone of the original, but the interpolated line,"وكأنماالإحزان ترقص فى الشفاة" (as if misfortunes dance on the lips) seems redundant. Thematically, the first line, “I fear too early,” which is dropped is closely related to “untimely death”, a significant motif that runs throughout the play. Also, “of a despised life closed in my breast”, characteristic of Romeo’s exaggerated rhetorical language before he matures and adopts a more spontaneous idiom is dropped. In the third translation, though the rhythm is slower, still the lines are translated in such a way that stresses the lyrical without sacrificing the dramatic:

بل نحن بكرنا كثيرا يا صحاب! فالآن اوجس خيفة مما تخبئه الطوالع فى غدى قدر رهيب بعد هذا الحفل رهن الموعد ولسوف يغشى بالمرارة قصتى حتى نهاية عمرى المحبوس بين جوانحى عمر يضيق بما بيه فاموت قبل زمانيه يا من توجه دفتى أصلح شراع سفينتى هيا بنا فخر الرجال (ص95).

"أموت قبل زمانيه" is a very dexterous rendering of “untimely death,” emphasizing the significance of time lexically as well as thematically. Accordingly, the pragmatic conditions governing the translation process of the second version is an evidence of what Andre Lefevere terms the influence of “patronage.” Patronage exemplified in the director of the play, on the one hand, and the audience, on the other hand, determines the choices of the translator and influences the relationship between the source and the target texts. “Acceptance of patronage”, according to Lefevere, “implies that writers and rewriters work within the parameters set by their patrons” (18). Hence, the approach Enani adopts in the second version is that of a fluent translation, stressing the acceptability factor. Lawrence Venuti in The Translator’s Invisibility defines fluent translations as those which are “written in current, widely used and standard language.” They are devoid of foreign words and depend on a “syntax that… unfolds continuously and easily to ensure semantic precision with some rhythmic definition” and “a sense of closure” (4-5). Enani, thus, substitutes cultural elements for foreign ones. For example, he uses colloquial register, Arabic collocations, Arabic proverbs and Qur’anic allusions which are all avoided in the third translation. An example of the first is the translation of Romeo’s words to Juliet:

Look thou but sweet And I am proof against their enmity. (II.i.114-115)

فإذا تعطفت بنظرة
لم أخش أخطار الممات!(ص75)

In the third version, the translator prefers "فلتبد لى عين الرضا"(ص119) which is as idiomatic but not as overused. “vaulty heaven”(III.v.22) is rendered using an Arabic collocation in the second, "كبد السماء"(ص121) , but in the third version the translator employs a close translation,(ص198)“قبة السماء” . Also, “They stumble that run fast” (II.ii.94) is rendered using an Arabic proverb, "ففى العجلة الندامة" (88ص). In the third translation domestication is avoided by rephrasing the familiar proverb as follows: "من يتعجل قد يتعثر" (ص134). Qur’anic allusions are found in the three translations, but appear more in the second one. For example, in rendering “Alive in triumph! And Mercutio slain!” (III.i.118), a Qur’anic allusion is used in the second translation but is avoided in the third as follows: "مزهوا بانتصاره؟ حيا يرزق ومركوشيو مقتول؟" (ص100) . The third reads, "مزهوا بالنصر ومركوشيو مقتول؟ "(ص167) . The second version emphasizes dominant cultural values. Thus “I pray come and crush a cup of wine” (I.ii.83) is modified as follows: "فلم لا تأتى أنت أيضا لتناول العشاء؟" (ص51) , where to an Egyptian audience a party implies an invitation to dinner and not to “a cup of wine”. Needless to say, the third translation which espouses a more faithful approach does not resort to modification: " فأرجو أن تأتى أنت أيضا وتفوز بكأس من النبيذ"(ص77).
The second translation also attempts to appease an audience that is largely conservative. Thus Juliet’s “I’ll to my wedding bed/ And death, not Romeo, take my maidenhead” (III.ii.136-7) is translated accurately avoiding the literal rendering of “take my maidenhead”: "سأذهب إلى فراش عرسى ليتزوجنى الموت بدلا من روميو"(ص109) . The third translation does not avoid it, but gives a tactful rendering that does not seem to offend the reader :

إذ سوف يأتى الموت لا روميو
ليقطف زهرة العذراء عندى ها هنا!(ص180)

Capulet’s language, addressing Paris when the latter asks for Juliet’s hand in marriage, is an example of the Veronese conventional idiom.

My child is yet a stranger in the world; She hath not seen the change of fourteen years. (I.ii.8-9)

The translation sacrifices that idiom and the emphasis on Juliet’s age and innocence for the sake of a fluent translation:
(Juliet is still young)"إن جولييت ما تزال صغيرة"(ص48) . The third version is closer to the meaning and the feeling of the original :

إن طفلتى ما تزال غريبة عن الدنيا
ولم تكد تتم الرابعة عشرة(ص73)

Thus the approach adopted in the second version shuns passages and lines that are “not amenable to fluent translating” (Venuti 17). Most of the oaths, mythological allusions and cultural concepts such as, “star-crossed lovers and “humour”, are ignored. “Black and portentous must this humour prove” (I.i.132) is translated in the second version avoiding the cultural concept as follows:

وحالته لا تبشر بخير مطلقا(ص41)

The third version, however, takes account of the cultural concept transposing it intelligibly:

لا شك بأن مزاج اليافع أسود ينذر بالشر(ص65)

Also, Romeo’s “My bosom’s lord sits lightly in his throne”(V.i.3) is dropped in the second version but retained in the third.

ورب صدرى جالس فى عرشه فى خفة الهواء (ص245)

This is, however, followed by a footnote that explains that “my bosom’s love” is a reference to love or the god of love, Cupid, and so the throne is the heart. Another example dropped on account of its difficulty is:

Can I go forward when my heart is here? Turn back, dull earth, and find thy centre out. (II.i.1-2)

Centre means heart. It was believed that everything tended towards its centre. Accordingly, Romeo says that he moves towards Juliet. The third version offers the Arabic reader an intelligible and lyrical translation of the lines:
كيف أمضى وقلبى هنا؟ لا!
فلتعد أيها الصلصال يا جسدى وفتش عن فؤادك!(ص109)

Here, the translator adds "يا جسدى" ( my body) for the sake of clarification (explicitation). Toning down the dramatic aspect by omission, condensation or modification influences the “tone” in the original. Two significant motifs are poison and death closely associated with love. Benvolio playfully introduces the first in his advice to Romeo at the outset of the play:

Take thou some new infection to thy eye And the rank poison of the old will die (I.ii.48-49)

While this is ignored in the second translation, the metaphor is cleverly rendered in the third as follows:

فانشد لعيونك عدوى حب آخر
تهلك ما خلفه الحب السالف من سم ناقع!(ص75)

The motif is stressed again in Friar Lawrence’s speech at the outset of Act II, scene ii; it is also deleted in the second version but translated in the third:

Within the infant rind of this weak flower Poison hath residence and medicine power: …… Two such opposed kings encamp them still In man as well as herbs, grace and rude will; And where the worser is predominant, Full soon the canker death eats up that plant. ( 23-24,27-30)

فى داخل قشرة هذه البرعمة الهشة سم ناقع
ودواء ناجع
.........
هذان الملكان إذن ما انفكا يصطرعان
ويرابط جيشهما فى الأعشاب وفى الإنسان
الأول ملك الشهوات الدنيا
فإذا انتصر الملك السىء نخر السوس البرعم والتهمه!(ص129-130)

The dramatic purpose of this highly poetic speech is to shed light on the speaker and the crucial role he plays in furthering the plot. The speech also comments on the two kinds of love referred to in the play, sensuous love and true love. Friar Lawrence’s highly rhetorical language is beautifully rendered in the third translation emphasizing the imagery of light and darkness that runs throughout the play. This imagery, as many critics have commented, intensifies “the imaginative unity” and gives the play its peculiar atmosphere, an atmosphere of “prevailing darkness pierced by brilliant light ”(Halliday 88). Also, Friar Lawrence’s use of key words such as “tomb” in line 9, “grave” in line 10 and “death” dramatize the theme of death closely “bound up with love and part of, violent death” in the play ( Frye 20). This also appears in the dialogue between Friar Lawrence and Romeo when the latter says, “And bad’st me bury love”, Friar Lawrence says, “To lay one in, another out to have.”((83-84), meaning that he did not advise Romeo to bury one love in order to give birth to another. This is also ignored in the second translation, but accurately translated in the third:

روميو:وطلبت كذا دفن غرامى!
القس: لم أطلب أن تدخل فى القبر غراما وتعوضه بغرام آخر(ص133)

This theme is stated explicitly in Paris’s cry. Thinking Juliet is dead, he addresses death saying:

Most detestable Death, by thee beguiled; By cruel, cruel thee quite overthrown! O love! O life! Not life, but love in death! (IV.v.55-57)
Love in death does not appear in the second translation:

أيها الموت الكريه... لقد خدعتنى. أيها القاسى... لقد هزمتنى (ص143)

The third translation accounts for it poetically as follows:

يا أبغض شىء نعرفه يا موت خدعت النفس
وأطحت بقلبى وكيانى يا عاتى البأس
يا حبى وحياتى لا بل يا حبى الباقى فى الموت(ص237)

The comic and the cynical tones are also functional in the original. These are almost dispensed with since the second translation drops most puns and ignores most of the comic lines and episodes. An example is the episode at the beginning of Act II, scene i, where Benvolio and Mercutio go looking for Romeo. Mercutio mocks Romeo and expresses his cynical view of love. This conversation is dramatically significant since Mercutio’s bawdy language contrasts with Romeo’s lofty lyricism as he encounters Juliet following his friends’ departure. The translation also drops Act II, scene iv, with its witty repartee. Benvolio informs Mercutio of the letter sent by Tybalt challenging Romeo to a fight. Mercutio in turn ridicules Tybalt’s affected manners. When Romeo enters, Mercutio in an attempt to make him forget his love for Rosaline engages him in a battle of wits. Mercutio’s “ ‘cause’ of being is to serve as foil to Romeo in a multiplicity of ways: his frank bawdry is a contrast, his quick wit a messmate, and his violent, pitiful unnecessary death a foreshadowing of the hero’s ”( Bradbrook 118). The rest of the scene where Romeo instructs the Nurse to tell Juliet to come that afternoon to Friar Lawrence’s cell is also omitted. In addition, many of the nurse’s lines and the musician’s episode following the discovery of Juliet’s assumed death are omitted. The conventional tone parodying courtly love tradition in exaggerated Petrarchan idiom and hackneyed rhymes is toned down due to omission. Earlier in the play, Mercutio’s words referring to Romeo, emphasize that the conventional idiom of love was associated with Petrarchan poetry: “Now is he for the numbers that Petrarch flowed in!” (II.iv.34) This is accounted for in the third version, but not in the second. Also, Romeo’s address to Juliet as “dear saint” (II.i.97) is also omitted in the second. Most importantly, Romeo’s significant speech expressing his love for Rosaline is dropped in the second version. Benvolio tries to persuade Romeo that at the Capulet’s ball, the latter will discover that compared to other young ladies, Rosaline is a “crow”. Romeo’s belief in the supremacy of Rosaline’s beauty is like a firmly held religious faith:

When the devout religion of mine eye Maintains such falsehood, then turn tears to fire:
And these, who, often drowned, could never die, Transparent heretics, be burnt for liars, One fairer than my love? The all-seeing sun Never saw her match since first the world begun. (I.ii.90-95)

The religious idiom is ignored in the second translation:

إمرأة أجمل من حبيبتى! إن الشمس التى رأي كل
أهل الأرض لم تر أجمل منها! (ص51)

Conversely, almost the same idiom and tone are transposed in the third version as follows:

إن حل الباطل فى عينىَ محل الإيمان الصادق
فلتتحول عبراتى لجحيم حارق
تُرمى فيه العينان الكاذبتان
الصافيتان الصابئتان وتحترقان
وهما من أُغرقتا _
لكن ماماتت أيهما _ بالدمع الدافق
أفتاة أجمل من فاتنتى؟
قد رأت الشمس جميع الخلق ولم تر أجمل منه من أول يوم خلق الناس الخالق!(ص78)

The parallelism of this speech and Romeo’s words when he first sees Juliet intensifies the effect of dramatic irony, which in turns enhances the tragedy of Romeo and Juliet. Also, the contrast between Romeo’s artificial language at the beginning of the play and his spontaneous idiom after he matures is intrinsic to the play. Hence omission modifies the dramatic design intended by Shakespeare. “By producing the illusion of transparency,” as Venuti suggests, “a fluent translation masquerades as true semantic equivalence when it in fact inscribes the foreign text with a partial interpretation…” (21). Thus although the “poetic version” conveys the lyricism of the original, it does not adequately represent the intended tone or tones of the source text since the dramatic as well as the cultural aspects of the play cannot be divorced from the lyrical. Venuti, in The Translator’s Invisibility, explains that a fluent strategy acculturates the ST by opting for “a domesticating method” which involves “an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text to target-language cultural values (20). (italics mine) In the third version, Enani resists the constraints of pragmatic conditions and reproduces the Shakespearean text in all its formal, stylistic and semantic components. This, however, does not imply that the translation creates an impression of alienation or minimizes the involvement of the Arabic reader. The target text is rendered linguistically and artistically in a framework true to the Arabic language and the Arabic reader. Thus the translator manages to strike a compromise between source text rhetorical meaning and target text rhetorical conventions. The following famous lines are an illustration. Romeo addresses Juliet:

Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon, Who is already sick and pale with grief That thou her maid art far more fair than she. Be not her maid, since she is envious; Her vestal livery is but sick and green, And none but fools do wear it; cast it off. (II.i.49-51)

The translation dexterously resolves many difficulties. Among these, the moon which is masculine in Arabic is feminine in English. Also the lines are loaded with cultural allusions. “Maid” refers the reader to unmarried maidens, the servants of Diana, the virgin goddess of the moon. This is explained by the translator in the end-notes. The lines also refer to the dress (livery) worn by Diana’s servants (vestals) which is sickly green in colour. Envious people were said to be “green with envy” (greensickness or lack of blood). Finally, the jester or fool usually wore green. The translation reads:

هيا اسطعى شمسى الجميلة وامحقى البدر الحسود
لقد بدا الشحوب فى محياه العليل أسفا
إذ إن إحدى راهباته فاقته حسنا
فلتتركيه إذن لأنه يغار منك
بل إن أثواب العذارى ذات لون أصفر سقيم
فلتخلعى ذاك الرداء لأنه ثوب الغباء!(ص113-114)

The translator easily overcomes the problem of gender since in Arabic fair girls are compared to the moon even though it is masculine. “Maid” is translated as “one of his nuns”, but to account for the fact that Diana’s maids were unmarried maidens, vestal livery is translated as virgins’ dress. A slight modification is made by the translator, altering green into yellow. Due to the difficulty in accounting for the cultural allusion associating green to envy, this has no effect on the source text. However, this compromise is made because in the Egyptian culture yellow may describe an ill person who looks pale, and sometimes it indicates jealousy. Green, on the other hand, is a pleasing colour. To emphasize its unpleasant significance, the translator uses the word "سقيم" (sickly) to qualify yellow. Finally, the syntax of the last line is changed, fronting the independent clause and thereby emphasizing “cast it (that dress) off”. This does not influence the rhetorical meaning of the original; it still conveys Romeo’s suggestion that anyone who decides never to marry is a fool. Without sacrificing lexical and syntactic cohesion or alienating the Arabic reader, the translation registers linguistic and cultural differences by accounting for the foreign components, concepts and styles. This is illustrated by the translator’s dexterity in rendering the different verse forms that develop the drama of Romeo and Juliet, “a play in which the related lyric utterance of the sonnet, aubade, epithalamium and elegy are the interwoven music of a symphony” (Halliday 88). The prologue is written in the form of an English sonnet of fourteen lines: three quatrains and a concluding couplet, presenting an outline of the play. The third version adheres, to a great extent, to the same verse form as far as the stanziac units and the total number of the lines are concerned. It is a close translation of the original with three stanzas, each handling one idea, and ending in a couplet addressing the audience. Most importantly, the translation conveys an impression very similar to the one conveyed in the original with the emphasis on the tragedy of the star-crossed lovers. A comparison of the third translation and the original is illustrative:

Two households, both alike in dignity, In fair Verona where we lay our scene, From ancient grudge break to new mutiny, Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean.

The first quatrain is translated as follows:

فى بلدة فيرونا الحسناء (حيث المشهد)
عائلتان يزينهما كرم المحتد،
تصحو عندهما أحقاد الماضى الهوجاء
فيلوث دم أهل البلدة أيدى الشرفاء!

The translation changes the order of the first and the second lines and adds "الهوجاء"(reckless) to qualify grudge. The translator explains in the end-notes that the pun on civil cannot be transposed.

From forth the fatal loins of these two foes A pair of star-crossed lovers take their life: Whose misadventured piteous overthrows Doth with their death bury their parents’ strife.

This is translated in five lines as follows:

لكن من أصلاب الخصمين الرعناء
يخرج للنور حبيبان
تعبس لهما الأفلاك
وتذيقهما أسواط هلاك
فتوارى فى الأرض بموتهما حقد الآباء!

The translator ingeniously transposes the compound adjective star-crossed using a verbal clause. A precise rendering is crucial as this is not merely an adjective but a motif that runs throughout the play. Closely associated with the previous motif is “misadventured piteous overthrows” (unfortunate and pitiful downfall) which again is translated as doomed to scourges of perdition, producing the same horrifying expectation. The only word that is added is "الرعناء" (thoughtless), a synonym of "الهوجاء" , used appropriately to qualify foes "الخصمين". Also, the fact that the two synonyms rhyme together enhances the meaning and creates unity and cohesion. The fearful passage of their death-marked love, And the continuance of their parents’ rage, Which, but their children’s end, nought could remove, Is now the two hours’ traffic of our stage;

The translation reads as follows:

ولسوف نصور هذى الساعة فوق المسرح
قصة حب ذى أهوال يترصده الموت
ونزاع شيوخ لم تدفنه سوى مأساة الأبناء

In the end-notes, Enani points to the change he made translating two hours into this hour, where in both cases the reference is to a certain period of time not a definitive one. This reveals the translator’s extreme honesty. The translation also changes the order of the lines, but since the unit is the quatrain, this does not influence the meaning or the tone of the source text. Again the compound adjective, “death-marked”, which is another motif closely associated with star-crossed in the previous stanza, is cleverly rendered using a clause, "يترصده الموت" ( death lies in wait for their love). Finally, both the prologue and the translation end the sonnet in a couplet addressing the audience.:

The which, if you with patient ears attend, What here shall miss, our toil shall strive to mend.

فإذا أصغيتم وصبرتم يا سادتنا
فلسوف نعوض ما فاتكمو من قصتنا (ص53)

Form, sound and sense are transposed adequately in the third translation. The second version is a free translation that maintains the content but not the form. The unit of translation is not the quatrain, as in the third version. Although examples of modification, omission and addition are not many, still the translation creates an impression different from that conveyed in the original and successfully captured in the third version. For example the emphasis on “star- crossed” as ill fated disappears and so does death-marked love. According to the translation “bad luck” ended their love story which is described as bloody. “Death” an important motif is avoided. Mahood explains, “A leitmotiv of the play is Death as Juliet’s bridegroom..”(57). Also “where civil blood makes civil hands unclean” which is dramatically crucial to the plot and the theme is omitted. Finally, the last two lines are an interpolation which sounds epigrammatic but is not functional. The translation employs a quick tempo and a rhyme scheme that appeals to the taste of the Arabic audience. Following is the lyrical second translation of the prologue:

فى بلدة فيرونا الفيحاء
يقع المشهد
وهنا فى المسرح كل مساء
نروى ما يحدث فى بيتين
يزينهما كرم المحتد!
إذ أن قديم الأحقاد
هبت عاصفة رعناء
فى أبناء العائلتين
لتودى بحياة الأحياء!
لكن من نسل الآباء
يخرج للنور حبيبان
ما كادا يلتقيان
حتى كان الحظ العاثر
يطوى حبهما الطاهر
ويوارى معه حقد الآباء
ولسوف نصور فى مسرحنا كل مساء
قصة هذا الحب الدامى
وصراعا لم تدفنه سوى مأساة الأبناء!
الصبر إذن يا سادتنا
حتى تنساب حكايتنا
وإذا كنا قد أسرعنا
فنسينا أو أخطأنا
فالواقع أن النسيان
من شيم الإنسان!(ص33)

The sonnet idiom and themes recur especially in the first part of the play. Of these themes is carpe diem (seize the day), one of the most significant themes in Shakespeare’s sonnets. This is expressed by Romeo referring to Rosaline:

O, she is rich in beauty, only poor That when she dies, with beauty dies her store. (I.i.208-9)
This is accounted for in the third translation as follows:

اذا كانت اليوم ذات ثراء من الحسن زاه وفير
فسوف يموت اذا ما مضت...ومن ثم فهو جمال فقير.(ص69)

The third version carefully renders other verse forms such as Mercutio’s rhapsody on Queen Mab, Juliet’s epithalamium in Act III, scene ii, the aubade in Act III, scene v and Paris’s elegy in Act V. Some of the best poetry is found in both translations of Mercutio’s rhapsody. The second, however, is written in the form of a lyrical poem with its quick rhythm and rhyming pattern. It also drops some lines due to their indecent or offensive allusions:

O’er ladies lips, who straight on kisses dream, Which oft the angry Mab with blisters plagues, Because their breaths with sweetmeats tainted are. (I.iv.74-76)
The second and third lines are deleted:

وبالشفاه حين تحلم البنات بالقبل (ص61)

Aso lines 93-95 are dropped for their bawdry. These, however, are accounted for in the third translation as tactfully as possible:

This is the hag, when maids lie on their backs, That presses them and learns them first to bear. (I.v.92-93)

هذى هى الشمطاء تأتى للبنات إذا رقدن حتى تعلمهن فن الحمل أول مرة (ص93)

Domestication in the second version also appears in condensing some lines for the sake of fluency and using Qur’anic idiom. The following example is illustrative:

Sometime she driveth o’er a soldier’s neck’ And then dreams he of cutting foreign throats, … Drums in his ears, at which he starts and wakes, And being thus frighted, swears a prayer or two, And sleeps again. (I.v.83-84,87-89)

أما إذا مرت على الجنود تهب فيهم نخوة مثل الاسود
...
انظر إلى الجندى حينئذ يهب فى فزع
يستغفر الله القدير ثم يظهر الورع (ص61)

In the first line “neck” is dropped and a cultural image is added comparing the soldier’s courage to that of lions. The second line is also deleted. A Qur’anic allusion is employed to render “swears a prayer or two”. The third translation, however, captures the same tone as follows:

أو ربما مرت على جيد المقاتل فانثنى
يشتاق أن يجتر أعناق الأعادى
...
وعندما تعلو طبول الحرب فى أذنيه
يهب فى فزع ليتلو دعوة أو دعوتين
ويعود للنوم الهنىء! (ص93)

The translator writes in the end-notes that he rendered courtier as minister and that he preferred to employ a cultural equivalent to render Spanish blades: المهند. In Act III, scene ii, Juliet’s epithalamium is an invocation to the night to come quickly so that Romeo may join her unseen. This is translated very skillfully and closely in the same number of lines. However, slight changes are made to strike a balance between the rhetorical meaning of the original and the cultural idiom of the target text. The translation, for example, shuns the mythological allusion in the first two lines.“Fiery-footed” steeds refers to the horses which draw the chariot of Phoebus, the Greek sun-god, from the east to his resting place (lodging) in the west. This is translated as the steeds of time and Phoebus is rendered the sun. Also, the reference to Phaeton, Phoebus’ son, is avoided. This, however, does not detract from the rhetorical excellence of the original.

Gallop apace, you fiery-footed steeds, Towards Phoebus’ lodging! Such a waggoner As Phaeton would whip you to the west, And bring in cloudy night immediately. (1-4)

هيا اركضى خيل الزمان! وبالحوافر التى كالنار أسرعى لمنزل الشمس البعيد! إذ يلهب الظهور بالسياط سائق همام يحثكن نحو الغرب كى تأتين فورا بالمساء ذى الغمام (ص173)

Another example of striking a balance between domestication and foreignization is discussed by the translator himself in his illuminating book, The Comparative Tone, commenting on rendering the following lines:

Come, civil night, Thou sober-suited matron all in black, And learn me how to lose a winning match Played for a pair of stainless maidenhoods. Hood my unmanned blood, bating in my cheeks, With thy black mantle… (11-15)

Enani explains his approach as follows:

The ‘black mantle’ of line 15 is therefore a continuation of the earlier metaphor (a variation on ‘black’ and ‘mask’) which further confirms the colour as belonging to attire not to complexion : in Shakespeare, the night is a matron, wearing the garb of wisdom (sober-suited) which is black! Thus far the translator has established the cultural equivalent by turning the matron into a patrician, or an old sage, whose help is invoked by the little wife on her wedding night (42).

The translation reads:

هيا إذا يا أيها الليل الرزين
يا ذا العباءة التى تلف بالسواد حكمة السنين
قل كيف أخسر المباراة التى ربحتها
ما بين عذراء وبكر طاهرين!
واحجب دما فى وجنتى يدف كالصقر السجين
بوشاحك الأسود ...(ص174)

The translator also renders black-browed into "أسمرالجبهة" which is more acceptable and appropriate. The second translation is a lyrical rendering in forty-five short lines in the form of a song sung by Juliet with the refrain:

أسرعى خيل الزمان
أحضرى ليل الغمام
(ص102-103)

The skillful rendering of the sound, sense and tone of the aubade of Act III, scene v is another example of the translator’s linguistic and artistic ability. The aubade is a dawn song after a night of love. In the courtly love poem, the lover leaves at dawn because secrecy is part of the code, but Romeo leaves because his life is at risk. The third translation conveys to the Arabic reader the beauty of the verse in almost the same tone and form. Nevertheless, few modifications are necessary. Following is an example:

It is some meteor that the sun exhales To be to thee this night a torch-bearer And light thee on thy way to Mantua. (13-15)

قل إنه شهاب أرسلته الشمس كى يضىء شعلتك
فى ليلة كهذه وأنت ذاهب لمانتوا(ص198)

It was believed that meteors were caused by the sun drawing up (exhaling) gases from the earth and setting fire to them with its heat. Since the cultural allusion cannot be conveyed, Enani prefers to translate exhale into sent by. In the end-notes he refers to the fact that Shakespeare uses "نفثته". Also, the mythological allusion, “Cynthia’s brow” is rendered as the moon:"القمر" in the second and "البدر" in the third, and the cultural allusion to the song “ hunt’s-up to the day” is avoided in both translations. A final example of a verse form which is cleverly rendered especially in the third translation is Paris’ elegy. It is translated in the same number of lines. Each line comprises the same idea expressed in the original except for the last two lines where the couplet is regarded as a unit.

Sweet flower, with flowers thy bridal bed I strew - O woe, thy canopy is dust and stones – Which with sweet water nightly I will dew, Or, wanting that, with tears distilled by moans. The obsequies that I for thee will keep, Nightly shall be to strew thy grave and weep. (V.iii.11-17)

يا زهرتى على فراش عرسك الجميل أنثر الزهر
ويحى لقد صار الغطاء من تراب والفراش من حجر
فسأنثر الأنداء كل ليلة عليه من مائى العطر
إن ام أجد فسأنثر الدمع المقطر فى لظى الأنات
شعائر العزاء كل ليلة إذن أن أذرف العبرات
وأنثر الورود فوقه هنا وعاطر الزهرات (ص254)

The translation with its rhythm and rhyme scheme uses Arabic poetic conventions skillfully to render the elegy as closely as possible. Necessary modifications do not seem to interfere with the tone and effect conveyed. For example, canopy is rendered using two words, bed (الفراش ) and bed-cover(الغطاء ) and tears distilled by moans is rendered as distilled tears in the blaze of moans adding an appropriate word, blaze. The translator also uses “explicitation” where he resorts to interpolation to render “to strew thy grave”: with roses and sweet smelling flowers. The second translation is a lyrical domestication of the original rendering it in quick rhythm and short lines ending in a rhyming couplet as follows:

يا زهرتى الرقيقة
هذى زهور عرسنا
أنثرها على فراشنا
قد أصبح الغطاء من تراب
والفراش من حجر
لكننى أرويه
بالندى العطر
وبالدموع
كل مساء
شعائر العزاء. (ص158-159)

Finally, due to the dramatic function of wordplay in Romeo and Juliet, in the third translation, the translator takes great pains to reproduce it whenever possible. M.M. Mahood emphasizes the importance of wordplay in this play in particular showing that it is “one of Shakespeare’s most punning plays.” She underlines the dramatic function of wordplay suggesting that it “holds together the play’s imagery in a rich pattern and gives an outlet to the tumultuous feelings of the central characters.” He adds that it “sharpens the plays dramatic irony”; most importantly, it “clarifies the conflict of incompatible truths and helps to establish their final equipoise” (56). Following are some illustrative examples which appear in the third translation. The translation adds a pun which is appropriately employed to translate Mercutio’s idiolect:

And but one word with one of us? Couple it with something: Make it a word and a blow. (III.i.37-38)

تتكلم فقط مع أحدنا؟
ولماذا لا يصاحب الكلام شىء آخر؟
كلمة ولكمة!(ص163)

The lovelorn Romeo objects to Benvolio’s use of the words “sadly” and “sadness” because they remind him of his sorrow. By “in sadness” and “sadly”, Benvolio means seriously, but Romeo pretends to misunderstand the word and uses it to mean sadness.

Benvolio: Tell me in sadness, who is that you love? ………… But sadly tell me who. Romeo: A sick man in sadness makes his will – A word ill urged to one so ill. In sadness, cousin, I do love a woman. (I.i.192, 194-97)

: دع الهزل واذكر لنا من تحب ... ألا بحت لى باسمها دون هزل؟ : أتطلب منى الهزيل العليل بأن أترك الهزل وقت الوصية؟ ألا ساء ما تبتغيه لمن ساء حاله! سالتزم الجد يابن العمومة إنى أحب امرأة. (ص69)

The translator accounts for the pun using "هزل" and"هزيل". The play on sick and ill however is difficult to render. Still the translation manages to convey the intended tone accounting also for ill-urged and ill employing a play on the word "ساء" . Another interesting example of the translator’s ingenuity in rendering puns is the translation of Romeo’s and Mercutio’s witty repartee:

Mercutio: Nay, I am the very pink of courtesy. Romeo: Pink for flower. Mercutio: Right. Romeo: Why, then is my pump well-favoured. (II.iv.55-58)

Romeo and Mercutio play on the word pink which means perfection, but it is also the name of a flower. To pink is to cut holes in cloth or leather as an ornament. When Romeo says his “pump” (his single-soled shoe) is “well favoured”, he means that it has been pinked in this way. The translation reads:

: ولم لا ... وأنا أكثر المؤدبين تفتحا
: إن التفتح للزهور.
: هذا صحيح .
: ولكن حذائى قد تفتح أيضا... بالثقوب!(ص140)

The translator uses paranomasia. The first "تفتُح" means broad- minded, the second means to bloom and the third to be full of holes. The idea of harmony disrupted by the family feud is emphasized by references to music. Trying to anger Tybalt, Mercutio purposely misunderstands him, taking “consort” in its other meaning, “combine in musical harmony”. He pretends that Tybalt has insulted him by calling him a hired musician.The third translation conveys the tone and the sense:

Consort? What, dost thou make us minstrels? And thou make minstrels of us, look to here Nothing but discords. Here’s my fiddlestick; Here’s that shall make you dance. Zounds, consort! (III.i.43-46)

بمصاحبته؟ هل جعلت منا منشدين يعزف أحدنا بمصاحبة
الآخر؟ إذا كنا منشدين فلن تسمع إلا النشاز! ها هى قوس الكمان .. (يخرج سيفه) هذه هى التى ستجعلك ترقص..
هيا.. لمصاحبتى! (ص163)

Another example is the musicians’ humour in Act IV., scene v.:

I’ll re you, I’ll fa you. Do you note me? (113-115)

Note here means to take note and also a musical note. Though difficult to render as a pun, this is accounted for by adding “understand”: Did you understand this note? The translation also adds and I’ll beat you with the key of sol. Interpolation here serves to convey the intended tone.

ساحاربكم ب"رى"
"وفا" وأضربكم بمفتاح "صول"!
هل فهمتم هذه "النوتة"؟(ص240)

Juliet’s witty and light- hearted speech addressing the nurse, which is deleted in the second translation, is functional as it dramatizes the theme of harmony as opposed to discord through the metaphor employed:

O Lord, why lookest thou sad? Though news be sad, yet tell them merrily: If good, thou shamest the music of sweet news By playing it to me with so sour a face. (II.v.21-24)

The third translation conveys not only Juliet’s idiosyncratic tone, but it also transmits the distinctive themes and characterization of the play:

لاداعى للحزن أبدا – فاذا كانت الأخبار سيئة،
فخففى من وقعها ببعض المرح! وإذا كانت حسنة
فأنت تفسدين أنغامها حين تعزفينها.(150)

Finally, the rapid repartee between Juliet and Paris also sheds light on both their characters. Her formal manner contrasts sharply with the language she uses in the previous example. The translator accounts for the varieties of dialogue and tones of utterance which serve a dramatic as well as a poetic purpose. The dialogue presents the audience with a self-assured Paris and a serious but witty Juliet:

Paris: Come you to make confession to this father? Juliet: To answer that, I should confess to you. Paris: Do not deny to him that you love me. Juliet: I will confess to you that I love him. Paris: So will ye, I am sure, that you love me. Juliet: If I do so, it will be of more price, Being spoke behind your back, than to your face. (II.v.21-24)

: فهل أتيت للأب القدسى كى تعترفى؟
: إجابتى هذا السؤال تعنى الأعتراف لك!
: لا تنكرى أمامه حبك لى!
: بل أعترف أمامك بالحب له
: وبحبك لى دون جدال!
: إن أفعل ذلك زادت قيمة أقوالى وارتفعت
إذ تصدر فى غيبتك وليس أمامك (ص214)

In conclusion, the above discussion has attempted to identify some historical and pragmatic factors such as the poetics of a certain period, the dominant current definition of translation or the influence of patronage, and how these may influence and govern the choices made by the translator. One of the factors influencing the discourse which has dominated Arabic literary translation in different periods is the theory of translation in the west. Venuti, in the introduction to The Translation Studies Reader underlines concepts influencing the translator’s choices:

The history of translation theory can in fact be imagined as a set of changing relationships between the relative autonomy of the translated text, or the translator’s actions, and two other concepts: equivalence and function. (5)

He then adds two other concepts: the instrumental and the hermeneutic.
Theories that opt for the instrumental concept “privilege the communication of objective information…, minimizing and sometimes excluding altogether any question of function beyond communication.” On the other hand, theories which espouse the hermeneutic concept “privilege the interpretation of creative values and therefore describe the target-language inscription in the foreign text, often explaining it on the social functions and effects” (6). Venuti writes that in the 1960s and 1970s the concept of equivalence was more dominant, whereas in the 1980 and 1990s, the “autonomy” of translation “is limited by the dominance of functionalisms, and equivalence is rethought to embrace what were previously treated as shifts or deviations from the foreign text.” The choices made by the translator in the first version were thus influenced by translation theories stressing equivalence-- regarded as accuracy and precision-- rather than function which is more concerned with effect. Its literary discourse belongs to the category of the instrumental with emphasis on communication. On the contrary, the influence of translation theories embracing function with its emphasis on “the potentiality of the translated text to release diverse effects, beginning with the communication of information and the production of a response comparable to the one produced by the foreign text in its culture” is evident in the second and the third versions (5). Their literary discourse falls into the category of the hermeneutic with its emphasis on interpretation taking the social and cultural components into consideration. However the second and third versions present two different interpretations of the original. The discourse of each is coloured by the tradition, tastes of the time and pragmatic conditions. The discourse of the second translation conveys an accommodation to target language linguistic, aesthetic and cultural models accounting for the poetic effect but sacrificing some elements of the dramatic in the original. The third translation attempts a compromise between ST rhetorical meaning and themes and TT rhetorical conventions. Venuti believes that a translation can “communicate to its readers the understanding of the foreign text that the foreign readers have.” He maintains that “any communication through translating.., will involve the release of a domestic remainder..” .The translator attempts “to invent domestic analogues for foreign forms and themes” (471).The third version is an example of such a translation which “includes an inscription of the foreign context in which the text first emerged.” It does not only communicate “dictionary meanings” or “ the basic elements” of the dramatic form, “but an interpretation” , “ that is shared by the foreign-language readers for whom the text was written.” This kind of translation fosters “ a common understanding with and of the foreign culture, an understanding that in part restores the historical context of the foreign text- although for domestic readers” (473). Translations such as the third translation of Romeo and Juliet promote what Venuti terms “the utopian dream of common understanding between foreign and domestic cultures”(487). Works Cited
Primary Sources:

شيكسبير، وليمز "روميو وجولييت ." ترجمة محمد محمد عنانى. مجلة المسرح. ابريل 1965.
شكسبير، وليم. روميو و جولييت. ترجمة محمد محمد عنانى.القاهرة: دار غريب للطباعة، 1986.
شيكسبير، وليم. روميو وجولييت. ترجمة محمد محمد عنانى. القاهرة: الهيئة المصرية العامة للكتاب، 1993.

Secondary Sources

Berry, Ralph. The Shakespearean Metaphor: Studies in Language and Form. London and Basingstone: The Macmillan Press Ltd, 1980.
Bradbrook, M.C. Shakespeare and Elizabethan Poetry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1979.
Enani, M.M. The Comparative Tone. Cairo: General Egyptian Book Organization, 1995.
Evans, G.B. ed. Romeo and Juliet. Cambridge: New Cambridge Shakespeare, 1984.
Frye, Northrop. Northrop Frye on Shakespeare. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1986.
Halliday, F.E. The Poetry of Shakespeare’s Plays. New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc, 1964.
Lefevere, Andre. Translating, Rewriting, and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London and New York: Routledge, 1992.
Levin, Harry. Shakespeare and the Revolution of the Times: Perspectives And Commentaries. New York: Oxford University Press, 1976.
Mahood, M.M. Shakespeare’s Wordplay. London and New York: Methuen,1979.
Venuti, Lawrence. The Translator’s Invisibility. London and New York: Routledge,1995. , ed. The Translation Studies Reader. London: Routledge, 2000.