Comments on: British Muslim Initiative: We Resent the Evil Jew in Britain

By: Rafi

Rafi — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 14:59:59 +0000

I’ll give this one a stab. I know some Arabic and am near fluent in Hebrew, which has very similar grammatical rules. “Evil Jew” makes little sense grammatically because the word with the root “Jew” is written as an adjective, especially given its placement. However, the idea that Abdullah brought up of separation between “Jewish communities” and “Jewish evil” would not have been so obvious. Perhaps this would be correct if this were a formal document, where grammatical structure would be carefully watched; but this was a speech, and probably given to achieve the greatest auditory effect. Given that factor, the initial translation seems a responsible enough attempt at grasping the sense of what was spoken.

Translating from Arabic to English is difficult enough given that the languages are based off of entirely different systems, and BMI should recognize that Harry’s Place was considerate enough to update their website to include the correction in Al Jazeera. Besides that, Islamists should be happy to see that we’ve gone through an extensive discussion over the merits of a translation from the Arabic language.

The fact that BMI has resorted to threatening legal action against Harry’s Place is disturbing (see further posts on this site regarding the BMI). If this is what they pull against Harry’s Place, I’d hate to see what happened to the poor Al Jazeera typist that transcribed typist in the first place. Given Hamas’s record, I wouldn’t be surprised if Al Jazeera’s executives haven’t been placed on warning for this.

Blogs around the web have jumped on this for good reason. The case is simple. In the most positive light for BMI, Harry’s Place made a strong effort to translate a piece that contained a typographical error produced by Al Jazeera. BMI saw the mistake and got Al Jazeera to correct it, assumed that Harry’s Place was dangerous but a pushover, and tried to force Harry’s Place to apologize for responsible semi-journalistic reporting.

Besides, I think if mistranslation is now a case for legal suit, I think the Jews have a pretty good case against the British crown for the King James translation of the Bible! If that seems ludicrous to you (it does to me), then so is this action by BMI, and it shows the organization’s true colors.

By: yonason

yonason — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 06:36:43 +0000

BEST WISHES FOR SUCCESS AGAINST ISLAMOFASCISTS, HP!

By: TNC

TNC — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 20:42:44 +0000

“A simple typing error…”

Yeah right. The error is allowing these Islamist cretins to organize and operate in your country with impunity. I hope the British public wakes up before it is too late…

By: Anth

Anth — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 07:54:23 +0000

As a linguist of sorts, it bears all the hallmarks of a simple typing error, and one which would have been seen as such by Arabic speakers. There are real issues out there where we will disagree fundamentally, but let’s not fabricate evil where none seems to have been intended.

By: You-Know-Who

You-Know-Who — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 23:29:12 +0000

I was bored so I went through almost all of the comments here, it is now 2:20 am in Syria. Anyway, I will have my say.

Arabic is a flowery language, I mean the standard. The Dilaect tends to be more fun not like the Standrad which gives you a feeling to be more eloquent and to show more respect especially if you are a Muslim (like me). Now those who use the flowery langauge and the most difficult terms are the religious fuckwads here.

Lobbi makes more sense than Wabeel as Abdulla suggests, yet , I will not wonder at all if the BMI has said Wabeel.

You guys all turned into liguistists and forgot the main point of the whole thing. ok, lets say that the BMI didnt say that, surely he will say it once.

I wonder what difference does it make?!

By: Zkharya

Zkharya — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 09:15:23 +0000

It’s odd, isn’t it? The most straightforward thing for Al Jazeera to do would be to issue an apology for any offence caused by writing ‘the baleful Jewish (thing)’ and say what was really intended was ‘the Jewish lobby’.

The problem is, for the most part, most Arab Jews being no longer in the Arab world, there are very few people they would directly offend in either case.

You don’t have to apologise to a constituency that does not, for the most part, exist.

By: Zkharya

Zkharya — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:54:55 +0000

And the original Arabic does have a meaning: ‘the baleful Jewish (thing)’. Adjectives are often used as substantives or nouns in Arabic.

By: Zkharya

Zkharya — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:52:41 +0000

I love the way Selva says “*only* said ‘Jewish lobby’”.

By: Alec Macpherson

Alec Macpherson — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:04:58 +0000

Italian Stallion, you don’t have a point.

What amazes me, Selva, is when non-native speakers of English assume they’re understood but designate their language as inscruitable. It smacks of cultural imperialism.

By: virgil xenophon

virgil xenophon — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 23:33:35 +0000

Following on Pabuiski:”None are so blind as those who will not see.” History shows that there are some who should never, ever, be given the benefit of the doubt.