Sayyab Transla on Studies Series, Book No.

Series Editors
Said Faiq, the American University of Sharjah, UAE
Rifaat Ebied, University of Sydney, Australia

Associate Editors
Alya’ Al-Rubai’i, University of Baghdad, Iraq
Allen Clark, University of Mississippi, USA

Series founder
Ali Al-Manna’, Ph.D –researcher, University of Durham, UK

Advisory Board
Roger Allen, University of Pennsylvania, USA
Rasoul al-Khafaji, Petra University, Jordan
Mohammad Farghal, Kuwait University, Kuwait
Ovidi Carbonell, University of Salamanca, Spain
Abdullah Shannaq, Yarmouk University, Jordan
Hasan Ghazala, Umm al-Qura University, Saudia
Dinha Gorgis, Jadara University, Jordan
Raymond Chakhachiro, University of Western Sydney, Australia
Zouhair Maalej, king Saud University, Saudia
Kadhim al-Ali, Basra University, Iraq
Abdulfattah al-Jabr, Bahrain University, Bahrain
Kadhim Bakir, Al-Ain University, UAE
Mustapha Taibi, University of Western Sydney, Australia
Jamal Gaber, Academy of Graduate Studies, Libya

1
2
 Think–Aloud Protocols:
Translating Proverbs
APPLYING THINK-ALOUD PROTOCOLS TO HADHRAMI
PROVERBS: TOWARDS A DESCRIPTIVE MODEL OF THE
TRANSLATION PROCESS

Adel Salem Bahameed

Hadhramaut University of Science and Technology, Yemen

Sayyab Books – London

Printing, Publishing & Distribution

3
Published by Sayyab Books
EBC House, Ranelagh Gardens,
Fulham SW6 3PA,
London – UK
www.sayyab.co.uk
contact@sayyab.co.uk
+ 44 790 441 604
+ 44 9066 417 178

© Sayyab Books, 2009

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,

stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise,
without written permission of the publisher.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record of this book is available from British Library

ISBN 978-1-906228-200

Cover designed by Saddam al-Jumaili, Basra, Iraq.

Typeset by Al-Waha Typesetters, Cairo, Egypt.

4
Acknowledgment

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the editor of this

book Prof. Alya' Al-Ruabi'i, Ph.D. in Linguistics and Translation,
University of Baghdad, for her insightful suggestions, directions, and
comments, which have surely constituted an indispensable support
for the completion of this work. I am also in debt to Prof. Rifaat
Ebied, University of Sydney for reviewing the book.
My profound appreciation is extended to Ali AL-Manna',
founding director of Sayyab Books/ translation studies, London, for
his valuable directions and encouragement.
I am grateful to those who are in charge of Universiti Sains
Malaysia, especially Dr. Aniswal Abd Ghani, the chairperson of the
Translation and Interpretation Department at the School of
Humanities, for providing me with the knowledge related to the field
of translation. I am also grateful to the library staff of the same
University for their general assistance to make such knowledge
accessible.
Finally, special thanks are due to Dr. Salah Al-Mohammedi and
Ali Baraja at Hadhramaut University of Science and Technology for
their effort and help in the data collection of the study.

5
6
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page
1 The Theoretical Framework of the Study 39
2 The General Core Categories Composing the Model 53
3 The Prominent Concepts and Elements of Model 64

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
1 Other Important Empirical Studies on Translation 16
Processes
2 Examples of Generating Themes 32
3 Examples of Sub-themes Generated from Themes 33
4 Sample of How Translation Equivalence Is 34
Generated from Themes and Sub-themes
5 Sub-themes Classified into Categories 50
6 Categories Classified into Core Categories 52
7 Similarities and Differences of Treatment and 61
Moderators

7
 LIST OF TRANSLITERATION SYMBOLS

Consonants Vowels and Diphthongs

◌ ’=‫ء‬ a= ◌ َ ‫ﻓﺗﺣﺔ‬
◌ b=‫ب‬ i= ◌ ِ ‫ﻛﺳرة‬
t=‫ت‬ u = ◌ُ ‫ﺿﻣﺔ‬
th = ‫ث‬ aa = ‫اﻷﻟف اﻟﻣﻣدودة آ‬
j=‫ج‬ ii = ‫ي‬ ‫اﻟﯾﺎء اﻟﻣﻣدودة‬
H=‫ح‬ uu = ‫اﻟواو اﻟﻣﻣدودة و‬
kh = ‫خ‬ a: = ‫ اَو‬as in arm a:m
d=‫د‬ o: = ‫ أو‬as in saw so:
th = ‫ذ‬ ai = ‫ آي‬as in five faiv
r=‫ر‬ au = ‫ آو‬as in now nau
z=‫ز‬ ei = ‫ أي‬as in play plei
s=‫س‬
sh = ‫ش‬
S=‫ص‬
D=‫ض‬
T=‫ط‬
Z=‫ظ‬
? = ‫ع‬
gh = ‫غ‬
f=‫ف‬
q=‫ق‬
k=‫ك‬
l=‫ل‬
m=‫م‬
n=‫ن‬
h = ‫ھـ‬
w=‫و‬
y=‫ي‬

Based on Hatim (1997: ΧІ), Al-Ani (1970: 20, 30), and Hornby
(1974: vi-vii)

8
 Preface

Think–Aloud Protocols: Translating Proverbs is the first

monograph published by Sayyab Books to meet the need for a
specialist-publishing house. The aim is to enhance translation studies
by providing the reader with high-quality books and monographs in
the field of translation in general.
The present title is one in a series of titles prepared by
Sayyab Translation Group (STG) founded by Sayyab Books in 2008.
Its author applies think-aloud protocols (TAPs) to the translation of
Hadhrami proverbs and concludes with a translating model, which
describes the cognitive processes that influence the translator's
decision-making. In fact, applying TAPs as a method of investigating
translation as process is by no means new. Ali Darwish (1997) in his
doctoral thesis "Translation as Decision Making Process under
Constraints" also utilizes TAPs as a method of examining the
cognitive strategies employed by translators in order to make
decisions while translating a text under the condition of uncertainty.
It is hoped that this monograph together with other
forthcoming titles dealing with translation-related issues will help to
fill a gap in this field and fulfil professional and academic interests.
I am grateful (as is the author) to Ali Al-Manna', founding
director of Sayyab Books/ translation studies, for arranging the initial
contacts and to Sayyab Books for taking this initiative.

Professor Alya' Al-Rubai'i

University of Baghdad

9
10
 CONTENTS

Introduction ……………………………………………. 13

Chapter One .……………………………………………..15

Think-Aloud Protocols (TAPs): Overview

Chapter Two ……………………………………………. 20

The Research Setting, Sample and Corpus

Chapter Three ……………………………………………48

A Descriptive Model of Translating Hadhrami Proverbs

Chapter Four ……………………………………………. 66

Conclusion

Notes……………………………………………………..70
References……………………………………………….71
Appendix …………………………………………...…..75
Index……………………………………………………..78

11
12
Introduction

This study aims at investigating how Hadhrami proverbs could be

translated. This is highlighted in view of describing the processes
concerned with the translation of these proverbs into English.

13
14
 Chapter One
Think-Aloud Protocols (TAPs)
1. An Overview
The issue of distinguishing between translation as product or as
process shows that dealing with text as product entails understanding
the process that ultimately leads to this product creation.“The
distinction cannot give the scholar leave to ignore the self-evident
fact that the one is the result of the other, and that the nature of the
product cannot be understood without a comprehension of the nature
of the process” (Holmes, 1978: 81). TAPs represent recent research
trends in the field of translation that stand out over the last three
decades. It is a new trend in the sense that it is process-oriented,
rather than the prescriptive product-oriented, aiming at providing
reliable models for data collection and analysis in translation studies.
“The old prescriptive discussions of translation have become a thing
of the past, as has the tendency to devise arbitrary rules for the
production of ‘correct’ translations” (Hatim, 2001: 10). It is quite
remarkable that research design using TAPs is increasingly attracting
the attention of investigators whose recent studies produce
interesting findings about mental activities during the process of
translating. It is the description given by the translator about his/her
thought or behaviour while performing his/her task. Researchers
want to get closer and observe the human mind at work through the
translator verbalising whatever comes to his mind. The translator can
give general account of how he goes about translating a certain text
and how he introspectively goes through the steps applied in carrying
out a particular strategy so that he can justify why the translation
output has taken its final shape that way.
Furthermore, Krings (2001: 75) distinguishes between two
TAP data collection methods of process-oriented studies: Think-
Aloud (TA, or verbalising at the same time), and Post Think-Aloud
(Post-TA, or verbalising some time later). Despite the concurrent
effectiveness of the former in disclosing translation difficulties, the
latter, which is also called Immediate Retrospection (IR) (Fraser,
1996), is looked at as a superior method that could reveal issues
relating to the cultural aspects of the text as a whole (Hatim, 2001).
In relevance with this, Flick (2002: 75) declares, “[t]o increase

15
16
17
18
19
 Chapter Two
Research and Data Requirements
1. The Research Setting, Sample and Corpus
The research is carried out at Hadhramaut University of Science
and Technology in the district of Hadhramaut in the Republic of
Yemen. This University was chosen because it has translation
courses and therefore translation students are available. This
makes it easy to do the study and to obtain objective peer advice.
This university is the only place in Hadhramaut where one can find
a greater probability for the sample to be homogenous in
understanding the cultural heritage of this area of Hadhramaut.
Purposeful non-random sampling is the chosen technique to
select sample elements where, for the students, only respondents who
met the inclusion criteria are selected. This is because the nature of
the topic under study is likely to be influenced by cultural and
educational factors and as such, there is a need to discriminate
respondents in order to attain a higher validity. The criteria to set this
are as follows:
• Respondents needed to be fourth year students. The
justification for selecting these students is that they already
have a relatively good command of English, i.e. they are
able to write and speak English without difficulty besides
their Hadhrami Arabic (mother tongue). They also have
integrated skills in translating texts from Arabic into English
and vice versa. They have attended translation courses so as
to gain the necessary translation skills, which could help
them access the written information in their field of study.
These criteria are necessary to examine both their written
and oral performances.

This is done in order to control consistency in the range of students

capacity to work operatively and solve translation problems. In
addition, being the last year in the academic life at Hadhramaut
University, fourth year brings issues related to translation into the
fore and this puts students in better situations to discuss and uncover

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
 Chapter Three
A Descriptive Model for Translating Hadhrami
Proverbs

The data analysis which was carried out throughout the translators’
transcribed data (textual units), and followed by constant
comparative process, makes the blur gradually vanish and the image
of the result get clearer. This analysis process continued back and
forth to cover all the translators’ data, making kinds of meaningful
regularities appear respectively in the form of the patterns: (1)
meaning units, (2) themes, (3) sub-themes, and (4) elements (Figure
2).
The pattern (3) of the sub-themes that contained the crucial
concepts was noticeable to have potentiality that can say something
more and take us beyond mere observation. They establish
translation patterns that are considered the basic concepts that could
offer cognitive description for the mental processes experienced by
the translators while translating Hadhrami proverbs. Thus,
continuous processing and analysing with constant comparative
method of these sub-themes in the direction of coding or classifying
them into categories (Figure 1) constitute the foundations pertaining
to the cognitive processes that have made a model emerge over a
time.

The constant comparative method undergoes continuous

refinement throughout close relationship of the process of data
collection and analysis to feed back into the categorizing process. In
this method, data is recorded, classified, and compared across themes,
sub-themes, and categories. Thus, relationship discovery begins with
the analysis. While patterns are constantly compared with one
another, new topological dimensions, as well as new relationships,
are explored. Therefore, the study data that was collected, analysed,
compared, and categorised is proposing the following descriptive
model.

48
1. Hadhrami Proverbial Translation Model

49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 Chapter Four
Conclusions

This study is the first research on the folklore of Hadhramaut

focusing explicitly on translating such local expressions as proverbs.
The central purpose of this study is to describe the translating
processes pertaining to these linguistically and culturally challenging
expressions. This is achieved by taking a closer look at the
translator’s mind at work in an effort to examine and assimilate the
cognitive processes to realise what kind of difficulties faced, what
makes such difficulties come to surface, and how such difficulties
are tackled. These are compatible with the recent process-oriented
translation researches of TAPs which shift translation research and
give room to focus on translation as process rather than product
(Gerloff, 1987; Li, 2004; Lörscher, 2005). Indeed, assimilating the
process is a helpful aid into better understanding with the aim of
coming up with proper solutions for these translation difficulties. By
and large, the findings are as follows:

1. The translators’ mental conscious processes and the way of

thinking take specific direction depending on the kind of
translation mismatch caused by the nature of the proverb.
2. Translators sway for a while among different strategies in
view of the unconscious moderators, which include
educational system, personal beliefs and attitudes, before
they take a decision to present their final output. The
observed translating processes leading to the use of
particular equivalences are characterised with regulations by
the school teaching rather than by free will. However, not
many are those translators who attributed the manner they go
about the process of translation to the educational system as
a normative authority for their conduct as translators.
3. The equivalences used for translating HPs into English are
literal translation, proverb-for-proverb translation, and
paraphrase. The paraphrase was the most applicable
technique. It occupied the first position (40.36%), the
possible explanation for this is that the translators preferred

66
 to translate freely and creatively exploiting the merit of this
type, which is being constantly available. Literal translation
occupied the second position (25.71%) due to the
psychological inclination of the student translators to be
faithful to the SL text as they often think that this strategy
will reveal the least errors. Proverb-for-proverb translation
came in the third position (22.74%). This score is considered
the least when compared to the other types of equivalence in
virtue of being not always available. The rest (11.19 %) goes
to the proverbs that were skipped as translators have shown
no response to them due to the insolubility of the translation
problem or the translator’s personal attitude.

The results have positive implications for both translation

theories as well as research. The obvious implication is that the work
presented here could represent one addition in the growing roster of
studies and it is hoped, to a certain degree, to have achieved the
following:
1. Satisfying Bell’s (1991: 26) aspiration to translators in
coming up with a model focusing on the translation process
rather than the translation product.
2. Supporting Lörscher in his many arguments about the
usefulness and utility of using TAPs in translation studies.
He, in favour of TAPs, states: “[b]y way of conclusion, it
can be assumed that thinking-aloud in combination with
retrospective probing represents a useful instrument to
formulate hypotheses on mental processes in general and
about translation processes in particular” Lörscher’s (2005:
598- 599).
3. Supporting Gerloff (1987: 141) in the usefulness of
adopting her approach of units of analysis as a strategic
method to evaluate and assess translation output. Gerloff’s
conclusions have shown that her respondents have strong
inclination to work with sentence level of analysis over the
other levels. This goes in consistency with the conclusions
of this study in the way that respondents have worked more
with sentence level (63.1%) represented by the total of
paraphrase (40.36%) and proverb-for-proverb translation

67
 (22.74%). The translator often considers the meaning of the
complete sentence of the proverb as one meaning unit. The
translator then rewrites the whole idea of the proverb in his
own style (paraphrase) or uses functional equivalence
(proverb-for-proverb translation).
4. Responding to Glaser and Strauss’s (1967) call to
qualitative researchers to take the challenge by generating
their own grounded models and theories.

This study could be an aid to translators in general as it comes

up with an idiographic model, which could be an additional
contribution to the translation research. This model has been
concluded by utilizing the modern process-oriented translation
research of TAPs bearing in mind that the studies using this
orientation on Arabic are still too limited (Atari, 2005: 4). The
fulfilment, if we have to elaborate, is that this study has elucidated
the underlying cognitive processes behind the production measures,
which have been classified into themes, sub-themes, categories and
core categories moving systematically towards building this model.
In principle, the study inductive/deductive qualitative
strategic approach was successful in building the model, yet it is
idiographic and context-bound, i.e. its applicability is limited to
only this kind of sample on these kinds of fixed expressions.
Therefore, we recommend that this model be validated through
further empirical investigation and replication with different fixed
expressions (such as idioms, collocations, metaphors, etc) and/or
with different samples.
Thus, what this model (HPTM) of the study does suggest is
that a wider section of other Hadhrami (local-specific) proverbial
expressions is possible to be translated i as long as translation
difficulties are looked into within of the process of translation. In
addition, we propose that this model could be generalized to
translating all Arabic (cultural-specific) and non-Arabic (cultural-
universal) proverbial expressions. However, such proposition needs
to be supported or refuted by further future research utilizing and
replicating this model.
It is hoped that this model (HPTM), if properly applied,
will be of ample benefit and use to provide lighthouse to translators.

68
The researcher is of the opinion that the findings of this study will
help to provide direction for a further study where certain important
parameters of the translation process might have passed undetected.
In such a case, it is hoped that this study, within the recent process-
oriented studies of TAP, will be helpful in identifying potential
areas of improvement and consideration.

69
70
Al-Akwa, I. 1984. ’al-amthaalu al-yamaaniyyatu. Beirut: ar-risaalah
Est.
Al-Amiri, H. 2001. ’alfain mathal min HaDramaut. Sana’a: alhai’atu
al?aamatu lilkitaabi.
Al-Ani, S. 1970. Arabic phonology. Janua Linguarum Series Practica,
61, The Hague/Paris: Mouton.
Atari, O. 2005. Saudi students’ translation strategies in an
undergraduate translator training program. Meta, 50 (1), p.p.180-
193.
Bahameed, A.S. 2007. The translatability of Hadhrami proverbial
expressions: Cultural and linguistic transfer from Arabic into
English. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, Universiti Sains:
Malaysia.
Bamatraf, M.A. 1982. ’at-turaathu wa Sinaa?atu ’ash-shi?iri. Aden:
Printing & publishing Est.
Bell, R. T. 1991. Translation and Translating: Theory and Practice.
London: Longman.
Færch, C and Kasper, G 1986. One learner – two languages:
Investigating types of interlanguage knowledge. In Juliane House
& Shoshana Blum-Kulka (eds.) Interlingual And Intercultural
Communication, Tübingen: Narr, pp. 211-227.
Flick, U. 2002. An introduction to qualitative research. London:
Sage Publications.
Fraser, J. 1996. The translator investigated: Learning from
translation process analysis. The Translator. 2(1), p.p. 65-79.
Gerloff, P. 1987. Identifying the unit of analysis in translation: Some
uses of think-aloud protocol data. In Færch, Claus & Kasper,
Gabriele (eds.), Introspection in Second Language Research.
Multilingual Matters, Clevedon, pp. 135-158.
Gerloff, P. 1988. From French to English: A look at the translation
process in students, bilinguals and professional translators.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: unpublished MA Thesis, Harvard
University.

71
Glaser, B.C. and Strauss, A. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded
Theory. New York: Aldine Publishing Company.
Hatim, B. 2001. Teaching and Researching Translation. Pearson
Education Limited, Edinburgh: Harlow, EssexCM20 2JE,
England.
Hatim, B. 1997. Communication across Cultures: Translation
Theory and Contrastive Text Linguistics. Exeter: Exeter
University Press.
Herold, B. 1990. Empirische untersuchung des
übersetzungsprozesses anhand der methode des lauten
denkens. Saarbrüchen: Universität des Saarlandes,
Fachrichtung Angewandte Sprachwissenschaft Sowie
Übersetzen und Dolmetschen. Unpublished Diploma Thesis.
Holmes, J.S. 1978. Describing Literary Translation: Models and
Methods. In James Holmes, Jose Lambert & Raymond van den
Broeck (eds.) Literature And Translation: New Perspectives in
Literary Studies; reprinted in Holmes 1994, pp. 81-91.
Hornby, A. S., Cowie, A. P. and Gimson, A. C. 1974. Oxford
Advanced Learner ’s Dictionary of Current English. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
House, J. 1988. Talking Aloud to Oneself or Thinking Aloud with
Others? On using different thinking aloud methods in
translation. Fremdsprachen Lehren Und Lernen 17: pp. 84-98.
Jääskelainen, R. 1990. Features of Successful Translation Processes.
A think-aloud Protocol study. Savonlinna: University of Joensuu
Licentiate thesis.
Jääskelainen, R. 1996. Hard work will bear beautiful fruit. A
Comparison of Two Think-aloud Protocol Studies. Meta, 41(1),
p.p. 60-74.
Kiraly, D. 1990. Towards a More Systematic Approach in
Translation Skill Instruction. Urbana-Champaign, Illinoin:
University of Illinois dissertation..
Kohn, K. 1988. Fachsprache und fachübersetzen. psycholinguistische
dimensionen der fachsprachenforschung. In Fachbezogener
Fremdsprachenunterricht. ed. C. Gnutzmann, Tübingen: Narr,
p.p. 39-65.

72
Königs, F.G. 1987. Was beim übersetzen passiert. theoretische
aspekte, empirische befunde und praktische konsequenzen. Die
Neueren Sprachen 86(2), p.p. 162-185.
Krings, H.P. 1986. Translation Problems and Translation
Strategies of Advanced German Learners of French (L2). In
Juliane House & Shoshana Blum-Kulka (eds.), Interlingual
And Intercultural Communication, Tübingen: Narr, pp. 263-
276.
Krings, H.P. 1987. The use of Introspective Data in Translation. In
Claus Frærch & Gabriele Kasper (eds.), Introspection in Second
Language Research. Multilingual Matters 30: Clevedon, pp. 159-
176.
Krings, H.P. 2001. Repairing Texts: Empirical Investigations of
Machine Translation Post-editing Processes. Edited by G.S.
Koby. Kent: The Kent State University Press.
KuBmaul, P. 1989. Towards an Empirical Investigation of the
Translation Process: Translation a passage from S. I.
Hayakawa, symbol, status, and personality. In Wege
Amerikanischer Kultur. Ways And Byways of American
Culture. Aufsatze zu Ehren von Gustav H. Blanke, ed. R. von
Bareleben, Frankfurt a.M: Lang, p.p. 369-380.
Li, D. 2004. Trustworthiness of Think-aloud Protocols in the study
of Translation Process. International Journal of Applied
Linguistics. Blackwell. 14, p.p. 301-313.
Lörscher, W. 1991. Translation Performance, Translation Process,
and Translation Strategies. A Psycholinguistic Investigation.
Tübingen Narr.
Lörscher, W. 2005. The Translation Process: Methods and Problems
of its Investigation. Meta, 50(2), p.p. 597-608.
Mondahl, M and Jenses, K.A. 1992. Information Processing in a
Translation Task. Multilingua 11(2), p.p. 95-215
Patton, M.Q. 1990. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods,
2nd edn. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Roter, D. and Frankel, R. 1992. Quantitative and Qualitative
Approaches to the Evaluation of the Medical Dialogue. Scc.
Sci. Med. 34(10), p.p.1097-1103.

73
Sandrock, U. 1982. Thinking-aloud Protocols (TAPs) – Ein
instrument zur dekomposition des komplexen prozesses
“ ubersetzen”. Unpublished Staatsarbeit. Kassel: University of
Kassel.
Séguinot, C. 1989b. The Translation Process: An Experimental
Study. In C. Séguinot (ed.), The Translation Process, Toronto:
H. G. Publications, p.p. 21-54.
Strauss, A and Corbin, J. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research:
Techniques And Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory.
CA: Sage Publications.
Tirkkonen-Condit, S. 1987. Think-aloud Protocol in the Study of the
Translation Process. Conference of Departments of English in
Finland (CDEF), Oulu: University of Oulu, p.p. 39-49.
Tirkkonen-Condit, S. 1989. Professional vs. Non-professional
Translation: A Think-aloud Protocol Study. In C. Séguinot (ed.),
The Translation Process, Toronto: H. G. Publications, p.p. 73-84.

74
 Appendix

CLASSIFYING THE RESPONDENTS’ TRANSLATION

INTO
AN APPROPRIATE TECHNIQUE

Questionnaire Literal Translation Proverb-for- Paraphrasing

Proverbs in proverb the idea of
Arabic translation the proverb
1. ‫ﺍﳌﺨﻠﹼﻔﺎﺕ ﳍﺎ ﺁﻓﺎﺕ‬ Rubbish has blights Cleanliness is next Dirtiness is
to godliness harmful
2. ‫ﺃﻭﺯﻥ ﺍﻟﻜﹶﻠﻤﻪ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻗﹶﻮﳍﺎ‬ Weigh the word Speech is silver, Think carefully
before saying it but silence is gold before you
speak
3. ‫ﺸﺎﻏﺐ‬‫ﻴﻒ ﻭ ﻣ‬‫ﺿ‬ Guest and naughty Beggars cannot be A guest shouldn't
choosers be disturbing
4. ‫ﲪﻦ‬‫ﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺮ‬‫ﺍﺿ‬‫ﺍﻟﺮ‬ Slowness is from Al- More haste, less Do not be in a
Rahman and the speed hurry
‫ﻴﻄﺎﻥ‬‫ﻠﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺸ‬‫ﺠ‬‫ﻭﺍﻟﻌ‬ haste is from the devil
5. ‫ﻚ ﻭ ﺃﺩﺧﻞ‬‫ﻛﹸﻞ ﻗﹸﺮﺻ‬ Eat your bread and ─ Be peaceful
enter your hole
‫ﻚ‬‫ﻠﺼ‬‫ﺧ‬
6. ‫ﻭﺝ ﺍﻷﻋﻮﺭ ﻭ ﻻ‬‫ﺍﻟﺰ‬ One-eyed husband is Half a loaf is better A little is better
better than than no bread than none
‫ﻞ‬‫ﻣ‬‫ﺮ‬‫ﺍﻟﺘ‬ widowhood
7. ‫ﻒ‬‫ﺪ ﻳﺄﺧﺬ ﺣﻴ‬‫ﻣﺎ ﺣ‬ None takes the bread ─ Do not beg the
of the beggar beggar
‫ﺍﻟﻄﹶﻼﹼﺏ‬
8. ‫ﻗﺎﻳﺲ ﻋﺸﺮ ﻭ ﻗﻄﻊ‬ Measure ten and cut Better be sure Do not be hasty
once than sorry
‫ﺓ‬‫ﻣﺮ‬
9. ‫ﻼﺵ ﺍﻻﹼ‬‫ﻣﺎ ﺷﻲ ﺑ‬ Nothing is free but the There is no rose Nothing is free
butting of sheep without a thorn
‫ﻧﻄﹼﺎﺡ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﺎﺵ‬
10. ‫ﻩ‬‫ﺎﻭ‬‫ ﻻ ﺟ‬‫ﻩ ﻭ‬‫ﻨﺎﻭ‬‫ﺍﻟﺴ‬ Pulling up water from East or west, Do not emigrate
wells is better than home is best
travelling to Java
11. ‫ﻪ‬‫ﺎﻩ ﻛﻠﹼﻪ ﻓﺎﺗ‬‫ﻐ‬‫ﻦ ﺑ‬‫ﻣ‬ He who wants Grasp all, lose all The greedy
everything, loses loses everything
‫ﻛﻠﹼﻪ‬ everything
12. ‫ﻪ‬‫ﺎﺫﺭ ﺑﻨﺖ ﻋﻤ‬‫ﻦ ﺣ‬‫ﻣ‬ He who feels shy of ─ Do not be so shy
his cousin, will not
‫ﻣﺎ ﺣﺒﻠﺖ ﻟﻪ‬ make her pregnant for
him

75
76
77
 INDEX

Aesthetic, 13 Corpus, 13, 20

Al-Akwa, I., 21 Creative, 47
Al-Amiri, H., 21 Criteria, 18, 20
Al-Ani, S., 7 Cultural, 15, 20-21, 49-50, 55, 68
Anonymity, 21, 28 Cultural problem, 38, 52, 54, 56
Appendix, 22, Data Analysis, 13, 37, 38, 48-49, 56, 58
Atari, O., 14, 16-17, 68
Audience, 47
Audio, 16-17, 40 Dictionary, 21, 42, 47
Bahameed, A.S., 13 Direct, 56-57, 61
Bamatraf, M.A., 22 Discourse, 24, 27
Bell, R. T., 67, 71 Discourse unit analysis, 24, 26
Bracketing, 24-27 Educational system, 38, 50-52, 58-59,
63, 68
Category, 23, 38, 50-51 Elements, 19-20, 30, 33, 34, 36-39, 48,
52, 54, 56-57, 64, 67,
Changeable, 51, 61 English culture, 21, 25-26, 35
Cognitive processes, 13, 17, 23, 28, 37, Equivalence, 5, 13, 22, 24, 34, 37, 39,
46, 48, 51, 56-57, 59-63, 66, 68 57, 60, 64-66, 69-70
Comparative Method, 33, 39-40, 48 Ethics, 28
Competence, 21 Explanation, 37, 43-44, 49, 51, 66
Confusion, 38, 50, 52, 55 Explanatory note, 47
Connotative, 46, 54 Extrinsic, 57, 61
Conscious, 51, 53, 56-57, 61, 66 Færch, C, 16
Consistency, 20, 67 Flick, U., 16
Context-bound, 68 Form Problem, 55
Core Categories, 52-54, 56-58, 60-62, 65 Framework, 27, 38-39, 51
Fraser, J., 15
French, 14, 17

Gerloff, P., 14, 16-18, 24, 27, 37, 66-67 Intrinsic, 60-61
German, 14, 18 Irony, 13
Glaser, B.C. and Strauss, A., 23, 40, 51, Jääskelainen, R., 14, 17
68
Gloss, 24-26 Justification, 20, 41-42
Grammatical composition, 46 Kiraly, D., 14
Guidance, 21 Kohn, K., 14
Hadhramaut, 13-14, 20-21, 36, 55, 66 Königs, F.G., 14
Séguinot, C., 14 Typologies, 24

78
79
80