This paper is an attempt to shed light on questions such as culture, translation and the strategies used for translating culture -specific items (CSIs). Examples of culture-specific items are presented following which the strategies and processes developed and employed in order to produce an acceptable translation in the target language of CSIs found in the source language texts will be discussed. The paper concludes presenting instances of extreme adjustment and adaptation of CSIs found in the western literature as were translated by Iranian translators during Qajar Era in late 19thcentury and early 20thc century.

Today neither linguists nor specialists in comparative literature are not unaware of the importance of researches in translation studies. The role played by a literary translation in the target culture is no longer considered less important than that of the original in the source culture, hence the importance of a microstructural translatology aimed at the purely linguistic issues of translation, and more particularly those of literary masterpieces. In this work we try to analyze the semantic and translational issues of metaphor and metonymy in the “ Divan” of Hafiz translated into French by Charles-Henri de Fouché cour. This translation is made from the version of the Divan corrected by Parviz Natel-Khanlari. In this article we have studied the semantic dimension of the translation of figures of speech. After having analyzed a large part of the Divan's metonymies and metaphors, we have chosen about fifty to present them in detail in this study. By adopting an approach derived from Lexicosemantics, the latter have been subjected to translational analyzes according to the theories of Antoine Berman. The results of this research demonstrate that we cannot expect an exhaustive transmission of these figures of speech in the translation of the Divan, as far as the figurative and their own meanings are concerned, except in very few cases. In most cases, it is the literal meaning of the figures that is translated to the detriment of the figurative meaning. The translator remedies this breach by means of detailed comments which escape the textual framework of the poems.

The translator is the first person for linguistic signs, cultural notions and sociolinguistic aspects, play an important role in the transmission of images and the poetic conceptions. The method of the translator is to approach as possible as to the two visions of world, it means two languages whit all their around. But if we certify that, like supporters of the idea of impossibility of translation, especially the idea of who that think the translation is a treason, the translation is only an application or a change of form and the linguistic signs, in this case, the work of the translator will be to invent, to make and to find the equivalents in his/her language source. But if we follow the idea of G. Mounin and E. Nida about the existence of universal terms in the languages and the possibility of translation, at least by an indirect translation, the work of the translator will be to interpret the target text and not the signs obviously. Whatever is his/her method, the translator will follow a contrastive approach in his/her processes. This idea will be developed in this article and it will be illustrated by the Persian and French examples.   French: Approche contrastive du traducteur: traduisibilite et intraduisibilite Le traducteur, etant le premier filtre des signes linguistiques, des notions culturelles et des aspects sociolinguistiques, joue un role crucial dans la transmission des images et des conceptions poetiques. Sa methode est de rapprocher autant que possible deux visions du monde, c’est-a-dire deux langues, l’une de l’autre, avec tout ce qui est considere comme ses entours. Mais si, avec les tenants des idees de l' impossibilite de la traduction, surtout avec celles de ceux qui considerent la traduction comme une trahison, nous constatons que la traduction n’ est qu’ une application ou du changement de forme et des signes linguistiques, le travail du traducteur serait d’ inventer, de fabriquer et de trouver des equivalents dans sa langue de source, mais si nous suivons les idees de G. Mounin et E. Nida concernant l' existence des universaux dans les langues et la possibilite de la traduction, ne serait ce que par le biais d' une application oblique, la tache du traducteur serait d' interpreter le texte cible et pas les signes evidemment. Quelle que soit sa methode, le traducteur suivra une approche dite contrastive dans sa demarche. Cette idee sera developpee dans cet article tout en etant illustre par des exemples probants des textes persans et francais.Keywords: Traduction, Traducteur, Traduisibilite, Universaux, Approche Contrastive

Contemporary Parisian literature, especially, on the eve of the Constitutional Movement (1905- 9) and afterwards, considers "satire" as a literary genre in which social and political injustice and flaws are underscored in a humorous language. This article, on the basis of Nida’s "principle of equivalent effect" (1966), asks if satire can transcend the geographical and cultural frontiers. The author maintains that, from a translational perspective, texts of satire may be divided into two main groups:.' Form-oriented' and 'meaning-oriented' - the former, usually containing figures of speech, bardly translatable. The discussion proceeds by presenting instances of satire in both English and Persian and the difficulties on the way of translators.