This research investigates the phenomenon of explicitation in translating argumentative texts from English into Arabic focusing on how translators employ various types of explicitation to enhance clarity and cohesion, with particular attention to how meaning is clarified, emphasized, or culturally adapted during the translation process. Based on Klaudy’s (1998) typology which distinguishes between obligatory, optional, pragmatic, and translation-inherent explicitations and Hatim and Mason’s (1990) text-type model, the research explores how translators intervene in resolving ambiguity in rendering political persuasive content. The data draws on one text-typological focus of argumentative text taken from Time magazine article issued in the year (2024) translated by three M.A. holders from the department of translation, college of Arts and University of Mosul. The analysis identifies and classifies representative cases of explicitation and categorizes them according to their type and appropriateness. The findings reveal that explicitation largely occurs to accommodate syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic mismatches between English and Arabic and favors the obligatory type of explicitation in argumentative text-types. In addition, translators make mindful decisions to enhance coherence, readability and persuasive forces for target audiences. It also serves not merely as a default strategy but as a deliberate tool to support the above-mentioned processes. It concludes that explicitation is a purposeful process that shapes meaning, style, and cultural accessibility in translation.
Fannoush et al. (Sun,) studied this question.