Because the Koran is held untranslatable, translations must mimic Arabic structures literally.

Evidence

The Spanish Muslim translators were taking this process of linguistic mimicry many stages further, making their “translation” mirror the original as closely as possible in every way. It might be objected that what they produced as a translation would not be readily comprehensible to a native speaker of Spanish, so that it was not a translation at all. To say that would be to miss the point. If one regards the Koran as untranslatable, and that is indeed the orthodox Muslim doctrine, then what an approximation to a translation (the best that one can hope for) into any other language must do, above all else, is to adhere as closely as possible to the original. — L. P. Harvey, Muslims in Spain, 1500 to 1614, 670

Categorization

• DEFINE: Explains the Islamic doctrine of the Koran’s untranslatability and how it logically produces ultra-literal calqued translations.
• XREF: Parallels the King James Bible translators’ Hebrew calquing mentioned in the same passage; also connects to translation theory debates about literal vs. domesticating translation.