This study discusses imperatives in Arabic and English discourses. It tackles the forms of the imperatives. In addition, it emphasizes the explicit meaning of an imperative structure. Furthermore, it analyses the different pragmatic functions of the various imperative forms. Data of this study are extracted from Surat Al-Hashr [59] within the Glorious Qur'an and their translated equivalents into English by Abdel Haleem (2004). This contrastive analysis is done to explore how imperatives are rendered and how they ought to be rendered. It is found that imperatives in this chapter [59] are structured in various forms and employ various pragmatic functions. The overall finding is that the Arabic and English texts of this study use imperative structures mostly to reveal some pragmatic functions other than commanding, ordering or requesting. These functions are to guide, to instruct, to threaten, to supplicate, to seduce, to assure a command, to urge, to emphasize, and to warn. In contrast to this, imperatives are used to order or to command only twice. These discourse functions depend on the context and cotext of the discourse; the context of the discourse determines the pragmatic functions of the imperative sentences. The analysis finds that both Arabic and English are similar; the translator sticks to choose the forms and structures that mostly refer to the same functions of the Arabic text.

A cognitive cultural politic(olinguistic)s of translation involves an investigation of what language, (and literature), translation, culture, cognition and politics are, and how they relate to each other. Any of these constructs, that can hardly be separated, is too much for any single study. The translator's self (perception of a text or discourse, personality, creativity, attitudes and biases), prior text and discourse (formal and informal education), cultural and language patterns all play an important role in translating an ancient text in the same language (intralingual translation) or translating across languages (interlingual translation as well as interpreting). The article attempts a synthesis of those grand constructslanguage, literature, translation, politics, cognition and culture -underscoring their interrelatedness. They are inseparable and what happens to, by, or through one of them inevitably affects what happens to, by, or through the others. This article explores some aspects of and connections between those constructs and investigates their impact on each other in instances of translation between Arabic and English.

This article explores the reasons for variation in rendering the Arabic in/definiteness into English. It presents some of the findings of my Ph. D. dissertation (2015). Three approaches are followed in analyzing data of this study; syntactic, semantic and functional. In terms of syntax, the study is limited to analyzing the in/definite subjects and in/definite predicates. In terms of semantics, it is limited to analyze the functions and purposes of the rhetorical style of in/definiteness in the qur'anic verses of Al-Baqara and Al-A'raf. The study uses Nord's functional approach to translation. The results of this study show that context and the syntactic position in a sentence are influential factors in addressing in/definites. The study also reveals that there are some differences in rendering Arabic in/definite nouns into English. Some reasons for these differences are: unlike Arabic, English can express uniqueness by using a capital letter at the beginning of a unique noun instead of using definite article, can use bare-noun phrases to denote genus, and can use 'all' instead of the definite article when used with plurals to denote real inclusiveness. In addition, English does not use the definite article to denote genus and type in negative sentences however Arabic does. Furthermore, unlike Arabic, English uses the generic indefinite article to pick out a member as representative of a certain class.

No abstract