Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!bes
From: bakken@cs.arizona.edu (Dave Bakken)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Good and bad English translations/interpretations of the Qur'an
Summary: what are they, and why?
Message-ID: <1990Nov1.205630.13179@nntp-server.caltech.edu>
Date: 1 Nov 90 20:56:30 GMT
Sender: bes@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Behnam Sadeghi)
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Lines: 22
Approved: bes@tybalt.caltech.edu


In article <1990Oct30.161211.7903@wpi.WPI.EDU> mayne@sun10.scri.fsu.edu (William (Bill) Mayne) writes:
>(2) I have a copy of the Quoran (sp?). The translation I have is the one
>published by Penquin Classics. I'd be interested in comments on various
>translations into English and suggestions on selected sections to read
>to get a good over view. I have read some, but not systematically.

I second this question.  I have heard bits and pieces here and there
of how some Muslims don't like this translation and do like this one.
I (and probably many others) would appreciate it if some knowledgable
Muslims would help enlighten us on this.  Specifically, could you list
2--3 translations that are among the best, and maybe a few of the
more popular (in terms of printed copies) versions that are considered
poor translations.  More importantly, why are these translations good
or bad?  In general, what sort of things makes a good or bad translation
of the Qur'an from Arabic to English?  Some examples, especially where
a bad translation botched it, would be most illuminating.  Thanks!
-- 
Dave Bakken                     Internet: bakken@cs.arizona.edu 
Dept. of Comp. Sci.; U.of Ariz. UUCP:     uunet!arizona!bakken
Tucson, AZ 85721; USA           Bitnet:   bakken%cs.arizona.edu@Arizrvax
AT&T: +1 602 621 4976           FAX:      +1 602 621 4246