CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
TOWARD HERMENEUTICS AS THE THEORY OF TRANSLATION
1.1. Background
Translation constitutes a fundamental process as to the transmission of knowledge from an advanced civilization to a developing one. The difference in the
use of language as a medium of communication is believed to be the primary factor of why such an activity shows its importance. The Islamic civilization, for example,
reached its glory from the 8
th
to the 15
th
centuries since in its early phases they developed the translation of the Greek works on Philosophy into Arabic.
1
The Western also achieved its triumph since the 16
th
centuries because they initially emphasized the translation of Islamic civilization works on many fields of study into
European languages. It has been accepted that the sacred texts are regarded as the most wanted
works to translate. The attempt of evangelism is certainly followed by the translation of a Holy text into local languages. This, together with all other acts of translation, is
1
See De Lacy OLeary, How Greek Science Passed to the Arabs, London: Routledge Keagn
Paul, 1980, especially Chapter 12 : Translation into Arabic, p. 155-175,
2
to make local people easily understand what the works say without having difficulties in mastering the foreign language. Nevertheless, the term
translation is frequently difficult to understand if it is contrasted to any other similar terms, such as
interpretation. The unclear distinction between the two possibly becomes an
important factor in suggesting that many scholars overlook their difference in use, especially in the field of hermeneutics.
The term “hermeneutics” originates in the Greek verb hermêneuein, which
commonly means “to interpret,” and the noun hermêneia, “interpretation.” Richard E.
Palmer, in Hermeneutics: Interpretation Theory in Schleiermacher, Dilthey,
Heidegger, and Gadamer,
2
contends that hermeneutics in its modern form refers to
the process of “bringing to understanding. This process is clear when language as a medium is involved in it.
Such a process of course includes all three basic meanings that hermêneuein
v and hermêneia n usually refer to in ancient usage. As for the use of the verb
hermêneuein, these three basic meanings are to express, to explain, and to translate. According to Palmer, all three meanings can be represented by the English verb “to
interpret.” Yet, he admits that each has its own independent meaning of interpretation. As a result, says Palmer, the act of interpretation itself points to three
different manners: a[n] oral recitation, reasonable explanation, and translation.
3
When we use the term “to interpret,” as Palmer argued, to represent the Greek verb
hermêneuein, a crucial problem comes up concerning the certainty meaning of
2
Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1969.
3
Palmer, Hermeneutics, p. 13.
3
the term “to interpret” compared to hermêneuein. Nevertheless, it has been generally
accepted that hermeneutics acts widely as the theory of interpretation. Moreover, the task of hermeneutics is to bring something foreign, strange, separated in time, space
or experience to be familiar, understandable, and comprehensive. Hence, the terms “expression,” “explanation,” and “translation” automatically play the same role.
4
There are, of course, no two words that are fully the same in meaning. As stated above, the term
translation is a part of interpretation, which means that someone who is translating is at the same time considered to be an interpretation. Yet,
such two words cannot be fully regarded as two synonymous words. Translation constitutes the act of understanding that involves two different languages, the
language that the writer used [in linguistics: Source Language] and the language that
the translator used for the translation [ Receptor Language]. This fact points to a
uniqueness of the term translation compared to the term interpretation.
Despite the fact that translation and interpretation constitute two different things, hermeneutics is widely accepted as the field for the theory of interpretation
and has in large extent ignored the importance of the theory of translation and related methods. Since such a theory has been less developed in hermeneutics, we should
take into consideration hermeneutics as a theory of translation as well. This study is thus meant to answer some primary questions as follow: [1] Can a translation be
considered an interpretation?; [2] What are the effects might come up behind the
4
Palmer, Hermeneutics, p. 13.
4
process of working translation?; and [3] What are the factors behind the use of certain
[un]translatable words in attempt of understanding the Qur’ân?
1.2. Methodology
