Rendering Islamic Politeness Markers into English

By: Prof. Dr. Muhammad-Reza Fakhr-Rohani
The genre of Islamic, particularly Shiite, religious and/or devotional discourse is used for the sake of talking favorably about Islamic/Shiite high-ranking religious dignitaries. These dignitaries hierarchically consist of God, the prophets of all other divine religions (specifically the Prophet Muhammad), the Ahl al-Bayt[1] of the Prophet Muhammad, the twelve Infallible imams (including their close relatives and companions), the ulema, and whoever has spent her or his life in dissemination of religious doctrines. According to a Divine directive in the Holy Quran, God and the angels pay their salaams, viz. benedictions, unto the Prophet Muhammad; therefore, the believers, viz. Muslims, are strongly recommended to do so.[2] That is, they are urged to invoke God’s benedictions unto him, too. In a like manner, this rule also applies to the Ahl al-Bayt and the Infallible Imams. By the same token, whoever is associated with, or in line with, the true and orthodox religious mainstream deserves praise. It is this rule that counts for people’s respect for the ulema, Shiite clerics.
This doctrinal injunction finds expression in the use of several honorific terms. Such honorifics, positive or negative,[3] appear in collocation with the names of the dignitaries. Titular honorifics, e.g. Imam and Hazrat,[4] appear before the names or appellations of the dignitaries, while optative sentences follow them. It is items fitting in with the latter category, viz. ‘optative sentences’, which appear in orthographical abbreviations. (For some previous literature, see Fakhr-Rohani [2003, 2005].)
Use of such honorifics and/or optative sentences, as well as their abbreviated forms, fulfills two functions. Religiously, it manifests the speaker/writer’s discharging respect for the dignitaries in question. Pragmatically, they can be regarded as performative speech acts. Here, they are instances of Austin’s notion of ‘behabitives’, for they “have to do with attitudes and social behaviour” [original italics] (Austin, 1975, p. 152), and mirror the speaker/writer’s “reaction to other people’s behaviour and fortunes and of attitudes and expressions of attitudes to someone else’s past conduct or imminent conduct.” (ibid., p. 160). As use of behabitives invites us to practice “like conduct, by implication” (ibid., p. 159), by cursing and expression of our renunciation of the Infallibles’ foes’ conduct, we “adopt an attitude” to the Infallibles’ “past conduct”, and simultaneously make it binding on ourselves “only to avoid like conduct” (ibid.) of their foes.
Translating classical, Islamic Arabic orthographical abbreviations into English poses a few problems. Charged with an honorific-cum-optative load, these Arabic orthographical abbreviations have been subject to two trends regarding translating them. A version of the first trend favors translating their full form into English. An example of this can be the sentence “May God the Almighty hasten his graceful reappearance.” The Arabic original of this sentence[5] is uttered or written whenever the name of Imam al-Mahdi,[6] the Twelfth Infallible Imam, is mentioned.
Another version favors abbreviating the English translation of such optative sentences. A good example of this case is the abbreviation “PBUH”, a short form of “Peace be upon him.”[7] Although this abbreviation has not been recorded in any standard dictionary of English, it has made its way into some publications of Oxford University Press[8] as well as some English poems composed in praise of Imam al-Husayn[9].
The third version favors abbreviating the Arabic honorific-cum-optative sentences, transliterated in Roman script. Examples of such abbreviations include S.W.T. (for Subhanah wa ta‘aalaa “He [God] is Glorious and Exalted.”), A.S. (for ‘Alayh al-salaam “May Grace and Peace be bestowed on him.”), and R. A. (for Rahmah Allah ‘Alayh “May the Grace of God be bestowed on him.”). Needless to say, no English dictionary has recorded any of these abbreviations with the meanings specified above, yet they appear in some English publications or websites.[10]
Use of the above honorific-cum-optative abbreviations comes from a religio-ideological concern. That is, Muslims are instructed to observe politeness when talking about religious dignitaries: the higher a personality, the more honorific term must be used.[11] However, English stylistic considerations come into play, and to some extent in conflict, with the above doctrinal injunction in the sense that not only no title is used for the deceased in English, but the above abbreviations make almost no sense for the non-Muslim English-speaking person. Hence, a typical religious Muslim writer, who produces a text in English, might find her- or himself quite baffled and perplexed at using, or not using, some of the above post-nominal abbreviations, where necessary. Obviously, no sign of impoliteness or impudence, leave alone insult, could be intended or made.
There is a pragmatic consideration in the use of honorifics in Islamic contexts. The scope of using honorifics in Islamic contexts lies far beyond the present theories of politeness. Whereas (dominantly) Western theories of linguistic politeness concern use of face-saving, negative or positive forms, whether address forms, terms of reference, or honorifics (for those who are alive, whether absent or present in the immediate context of utterance),[12] the Islamic contexts show, and shed light on, the phenomenon of expressing deference toward religious dignitaries not only alive but also deceased. Perhaps a major drawback of the Western theories of politeness is that they show inadequacy to describe Muslims’ deference for the deceased dignitaries.
A solution to this problem can be sought in resorting to a ‘politeness license’ principle. Here the term ‘politeness license’ is devised on analogy with ‘poetic license’.[13] In such cultural contexts where failure to mention the correct honorifics might be interpreted as the speaker/writer’s inattentiveness, only a politeness license seems to solve the problem. As such cultural contexts cannot be confined to merely Oriental languages or the languages and vernaculars of the Muslim population; rather, they are functions of the genres,[14] hence such contexts are extendable to other languages, e.g. English. A conclusion to be drawn is that such honorifics can emerge as normal features of Islamic texts produced in, or translated into, English. On the basis of this politeness license, it is justified and correct to use honorifics, whether in full form or in abbreviation, for the Holy Prophet Muhammad as well as other praiseworthy Infallibles. As such uses stand in harmony with “politic behaviour”, that is “that behaviour, linguistic or non-linguistic, which the participants construct as being appropriate to the ongoing social interaction” (Watts 2003: 276), they are quite justified types of behavior, linguistic or cultural. An extension to make is that Watts’s “politic behaviour” concerns “ongoing social interaction”, that is communication between human beings, while the case at issue here concerns the respect paid to the dignitaries not present in the immediate context of conversation or writing; they may be either no longer alive or not physically present near the speaker/writer.
There remain some desiderata to be dealt with. First, the Arabic pre-nominal honorifics as well as post-nominal honorific-cum-optative sentences must be re-translated[15] with a view to remove the items which make the language sound odd, and perhaps ungrammatical. Secondly, appropriate abbreviations must be devised for them. Finally, they must find their ways into English dictionaries, hence registered as part of the language.

Bibliography
Nota Bene:
1) Throughout this bibliography, the Prophetic descendant honorific title Sayyed (var. Sayyid or Syed) is spelt in full form. It is not abbreviated as S. because S., as an English abbreviation, does not stand for this honorific title in the Islamic culture, nor could this title, and accordingly its abbreviation, be regarded as an initial of a personal name, or even on a par with it. More specifically, it is spelt in full to venerate the Prophet Muhammad and his descendants. The term “descendant honorific title” is what I coined and introduced, inter alia, (Fakhr-Rohani, 2006) for the first time at the University of Delhi.
2) The forms of the name (al-)Husayn and/or it variant form (al-)Husain refer to the same person, that is the Third Infallible Imam who was martyred in Karbala, Iraq, in 61AH/680 CE. Most venerated, he is regarded in Shiite literature as “The Prince of Martyrs”.

i) Dictionaries and Style Guide
The Oxford Dictionary of Abbreviations. 1998. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The Oxford Dictionary for Writers and Editors. 2nd ed. 2000. Ed. by R. M. Ritter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd ed. 1989. 20 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The Oxford Guide to Style. 2002. By J. M. Ritter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The Penguin Dictionary of Literary Terms and Literary Theory. 4th ed. 1999 [1998]. By J. A. Cuddon, rev. by C. E. Preston. London: Penguin.

ii) Linguistic and Literary works
Austin, J. L. 1975. How to Do Things with Words. 2nd ed. Ed. by J. O. Urmson and M. Sbisa. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Azadarmaki, T., C. Balay, and M. Bozdemir, eds. 2005. Contact des Langues dans l’Espace Arabo-Turco-Persan. Paris: Institut National des Langues et Civilisations Orientale; Tehran: Institut Francais de Recherche en Iran et Universite de Teheran.
Baumgardner, R., ed. 1993. The English Language in Pakistan. Karachi: Oxford University Press.
Baumgardner, R., A. E. H. Kennedy, and F. Shamim. 1993. “The Urduization of English in Pakistan.” In Baumgarner, ed., pp. 83-203.
Brown, P., and S. C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Culler, J. 1997. Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Eelen, G. 1999. “Ideology in Politeness: A Critical Analysis/Ideologie on Politeness: Een Kritische Analyse.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Antwerp, Belgium: University of Antwerp.
Eelen, G. 2001. A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester, UK: St. Jerome.
Fakhr-Rohani, M.-R. 2003. “A Pragmatic Study of Religious Honorifics in Contemporary Persian Shiite Discourse.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Tehran. [In Persian, with an abstract in English]
Fakhr-Rohani, M.-R. 2005. “Persian Religious Honorifics: A Preliminary Pragmatic Inquiry into the Linguistic Manifestations of Two Islamic Articles of Faith”. In Azadarmaki, Balay, and Bozdemir, eds., pp. 37-43.
Fakhr-Rohani, M.-R. 2006, 18 August. “Honorifics in Mazandarani: The Case of Pilgrim Honorifics.” Lecture delivered at the Department of Linguistics, University of Delhi.
Fakhr-Rohani, M.-R., comp. 2007. Ashura Poems in English, Explained and Annotated, vol. 1. Karbala, Iraq: Imam al-Husain’s Sacred Sanctuary.
Fowler, R., ed. 1987. A Dictionary of Critical Terms. Rev. ed. London: Routledge.
Frow, J. 1980. “Discourse genres”, Journal of Literary Semantics 9.2: 73-81.
Frow, J. 2006. Genre. London: Routledge.
Imbrie, A. E. 1986. “Defining nonfiction genres.” In Lewalski, ed., pp. 45-69.
Lewalski, B. K., ed. 1986. Renaissance Genres: Essays on Theory, History, and Interpretation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Schlegel, F. 1957. Literary Notebooks 1797-1801. Ed. by H. Eicher. London: Athlone.
Watts, R. J. 2003. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

iii) Other Literature
Ahmed, A. S. 2004. “Faith and Suffering in Shia Islam.” In Madan, ed., pp. 150-163.
Burke, S. M., and S. Quraishi. 1997. Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah: His Personality and His Politics. Karachi: Oxford University Press.
Jafri, Syed H. M. 2000 [1979]. The Origins and Early Development of Shi‘i Islam. London: Longman; Beirut: Librairie du Liban; repr. Karachi: Oxford University Press.
Madan, T. N., ed. 2004. India’s Religions: Perspectives from Sociology and History. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Acknowledgments
I should like to thank the following for their help while the present paper was in gestation: Mr. Abdol-Huseyn Tale’ie for religious queries, Mr. Hamed Akhyani for reading earlier drafts of this paper, and Prof. Dr. Tatiana Dubrovskaya for much-needed editorial directions. I wish to extend my most heartfelt regards to my beloved wife for making a fitting atmosphere to develop this paper.

Dedication
For Hamed Akhyani, my dearest student who always asks very thought-provoking questions.
Endnotes:
[1] The Ahl al-Bayt literally means the ‘household’; however, according to the interpretation of the Quranic verse in the Sura 33: Verse 33 [viz. the Verse of the Purification], it refers to “[the Prophet] Muhammad’s daughter Fatima, his cousin and son-in-law ‘Ali, and his two beloved grandsons, Hasan and Husayn.” See, Jafri (2000 [1979], p. 16). The above verse reads as follows: “God desires to remove impurities from you, O inmates of this house, and to cleanse and bring out the best in you.” The Holy Quran 33:33.
[2] “God and His angels shower their blessings on the Prophet. O believers, you should also send your blessings on him, and salute him with a worthy greeting.” The Holy Quran, 33:56.
[3] By ‘negative honorifics’, it is meant terms of la‘n, that is, renunciation, cursing, and anathema.
[4] See, for example, Ahmed (2004, p. 151).
[5] The original formulaic sentence in Arabic is as follows: ‘Ajjalallahu ta‘aalaa farajahu al-sharif.
[6] It deserves an explanation that “al-Mahdi” is a common appellation of the Twelfth Imam; his name is the same as that of the Prophet Muhammad. However, according to Islamic teachings, his name must not be uttered so long as he is in the state of his major occultation. In order to only graphically record his name in Arabic script, only the consonant of his name is recorded, separated either by space or by hyphen, thus: M-H-M-D, and pronounced as single letters, that is “Meem-Haa-Meem-Daal”. This case can be regarded as a positive taboo.
[7] There remain at least two problems with the sentence “Peace be upon him.” The Arabic word “salaam” is already in the stock of English words. Moreover, according to the Oxford English Dictionary (s. v. peace), the correct preposition for the word “peace” is “with”, not “upon”. It seems that “upon” must be a literal rendering of the Arabic preposition “ ‘ala”.
[8] See Ritter (2002, p. 462) where such abbreviations as s.w.t., s.a.w.s., p.b.u.h., and r. are mentioned; quite interestingly, these abbreviations are absent from Ritter’s volume The Oxford Dictionary for Writers and Editors (2nd ed., 2000). Also, mention must be made of Burke and Quraishi (1997, pp. 2-4), and Baumgardner, Kennedy, and Shamim (1993, p. 132), to mention just a few.
[9] See the anonymous poem “A Journey” as anthologized verbatim in Fakhr-Rohani (2007, pp. 59-62).
[10] See, for instance, the email updates distributed by www.imamreza.net/eng
[11] For a pragmatic study of the grammar of such honorifics and mechanisms of honorification, see Fakhr-Rohani (2003 and 2005).
[12] See, for instance, Brown and Levinson (1987), Eelen (1999, 2001), and Watts (2003).
[13] Cuddon (1999 [1998]) defines poetic license as “[t]he liberty allowed to the poet to wrest the language according to his needs […]”. Fowler’s (1987) definition reads as the poet’s freedom “to relax some of the normal restrictions of his language-system.”
[14] Here “genre” refers to texts with the same “thematic content” and “expressive capacity” (Frow 2006, pp. 64, 72) which meet certain “sets of conventions and expectations” (Culler 1997, p. 72), hence “appropriate to a type of situation” (Frow 1980, p. 78). Granted that “every work is its own genre, is sui generic” (Schlegel [1957, p. 116]; qtd. in Frow [2006, p. 26]), “genre is defined ‘by the way it expresses human experience (subject matter) through an identifiable form (formal character) that clarifies or discovers the values in or attitude toward that experience (generic attitude)’.”(Imbrie [1986, p. 60]; qtd. in Frow [2006, p. 73]).
[15] Obviously, Oriental loan words like the honorific terms “Hajji” and “Sayyid” which are already recorded in English dictionaries need no translation. Needless to say, these honorific terms may appear in variant spellings, too.