School of Modern Languages and Cultures

Research Student Review Pro-forma

(NB: ALL ENTRIES ON THIS FORM MUST BE TYPE-WRITTEN)

Name of student: / Lamis OMAR
Course: / PhD Arabic
Year of course, f/t or p/t / p/t, 4th Year
Supervisor: / Prof Daniel NEWMAN
Title of project: / The Translation of Metaphor in Shakespeare’s Drama from English into Arabic
Type of review: / 12 month (part time) review
Last review: / 16 December 2008
Date of this review: / 18 December 2009

Summary of supervisor’s report: The supervisor’s report is extremely positive. Professor Newman notes that Lamis has submitted a revised version of Chapters I–IV and a draft of Chapter V (‘Research Methodology & Framework’), as well as a revised TOC and bibliography (a total of approx. 72,000 words), on all of which she has received feedback. As usual, the quality of her work is very high. She is currently working on the revisions of chapters submitted this session, as well as on a sample analysis of metaphors in her corpus (Shakespearean plays and their Arabic translations). Professor Newman has no doubt that Lamis will be able successfully to complete her PhD by 2012, and that her dissertation will make a significant contribution to her field of study; he adds only that it is imperative she does not lose momentum during her stay in Syria.

Progress on action points from last review: Action points from the last review were discussed again in the course of the current review (see below).

Comments on materials submitted by the candidate (e.g. written work, bibliography, thesis plan, etc): The written work submitted (draft of Chapter V: Research Methodology and Framework, plus Bibliography, Detailed Plan, and Timetable for Completion) was, as last year, substantial and very well written. Some modifications to her original plan were noted in discussion, in terms of the number and arrangement of the translations to be treated in the thesis. As in her last review, she discussed her topic and her submitted materials not only intelligently but also creatively and with evident enthusiasm.

Agreed action points (e.g. modifications, targets, library visits, suggestions for attendance at conferences, etc): (i) The reviewers’ main worry was the length of the thesis. Lamis had written over70, 000 words, close to the volume of a whole thesis in itself. It was important that she left herself sufficient space for her text and data analysis; therefore, some compression of the material already completed was therefore highly likely to be required. (ii) As at the previous review, there was discussion of the balance between the qualitative and quantitative analysis, which would continue to need to be kept under review; (iii) Lamis was now thought to be well prepared for attendance at, and contribution to, confferences. DC would keep her in touch with a proposed metaphor conference to be held in Durham.

Signed: Paul Starkey (First Reviewer) Date: 4.2.2010

------

Signed: David Cowling (Second Reviewer) Date: 5.2.2010

------

Student’s comments:

Signed: (Student) Date:

------

______

ON COMPLETION OF THE FORM THE STUDENT AND THE TWO REVIEWERS MUST SIGN IT. THE FIRST REVIEWER MUST THEN GIVE A COPY OF THE SIGNED FORM TO

a)  THE DIRECTOR OF POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH

b)  LUCIA LUCK (A32)

c)  THE STUDENT’S SUPERVISOR

d)  THE STUDENT

By:

Professor David Cowling,

Professor Paul Starkey,

Professor Daniel Newman,