CONTEMPORARY STUDIES

IN DESCRIPTIVE LINGUISTICS
Vol. 40

Edited by
PROFESSOR GRAEME DAVIS & KARL A. BERNHARDT

PETER LANG
Oxford • Bern • Berlin • Bruxelles • Frankfurt am Main • New York • Wien
 Ali Almanna

SEMANTICS FOR
TRANSLATION STUDENTS
ARABIC–ENGLISH–ARABIC

PETER LANG
Oxford • Bern • Berlin • Bruxelles • Frankfurt am Main • New York • Wien
Bibliographic information published by Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche
Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available on the Internet at
http://dnb.d-nb.de.

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Almanna, Ali, author.

Title: Semantics for translation students : Arabic-English-Arabic / Ali Almanna.
Description: Oxford ; New York : Peter Lang, 2016. | Includes bibliographical
references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2016014193 | ISBN 9781906165581 (alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Arabic language--Translating into English. | Arabic language--
Semantics. | Arabic language--Composition and exercises.
Classification: LCC PJ6403 .A36 2016 | DDC 428/.02927--dc23 LC record
available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016014193

ISSN 1660-9301
ISBN 978-1-90616558-1 (print) • ISBN 978-3-0353-0840-2 (ePDF)
ISBN 978-1-78707-122-3 (ePub) • ISBN 978-1-78707-123-0 (mobi)

© Peter Lang AG 2016

Published by Peter Lang Ltd, International Academic Publishers,

52 St Giles, Oxford, OX1 3LU, United Kingdom
oxford@peterlang.com, www.peterlang.com
Ali Almanna has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents
Act, 1988, to be identified as Author of this Work.
All rights reserved.
All parts of this publication are protected by copyright.
Any utilisation outside the strict limits of the copyright law, without the
permission of the publisher, is forbidden and liable to prosecution.
This applies in particular to reproductions, translations, microfilming, and
storage and processing in electronic retrieval systems.

This publication has been peer reviewed.

This publication has been peer reviewed.
About the author(s)/editor(s)

ALI ALMANNA has a PhD in Translation Studies from the University of

Durham and is Associate Professor of Linguistics and Translation at Sohar
University, Sultanate of Oman. He is a specialist in translation theory,
particularly the theoretical annotation of translation. His recent publications
include The Routledge Course in Translation Annotation.
About the book

This book is an introduction to semantics for students and researchers who are
new to the field, especially those interested in Arabic–English translation and
Arabic–English contrastive studies. The book first presents key concepts in
semantics, pragmatics, semiotics, syntax and morphology and gradually
introduces readers to the central questions of semantics. These issues are then
analysed and discussed in conjunction with the act of translating between Arabic
and English. Seeking a balance between theoretical developments and empirical
investigation, the book thus provides both a systematic overview of semantics
and an application in the field of English and Arabic contrastive semantics,
hence offering a resource for students and teachers of Arabic–English
translation.
‘This is an extremely useful, well organised, clearly written, pedagogically
oriented work aimed at students of Arabic/English translation. The chapters are
coherently organised and cover a wide range of central topics in semantics. This
book fills a real gap and will be of use to students of translation at
undergraduate, masters and doctoral levels.’
– James Dickins,
University of Leeds, UK

‘Written in a highly pedagogical language and filled with useful examples and
exercises, it aims to give future translators the unquestionably necessary training
in the field of linguistics/semantics and its application to translation.’
– Juan José Martínez Sierra, Universitat de València, Spain ‘It is a useful book
with clear definitions, lush examples and insightful summary questions. It will
be most welcome for those willing to ground their intuitions on translation on
more solid linguistic (and especially semantic) foundations.’
– Nicolas Froeliger,
Université Paris Diderot (Paris 7), France
This eBook can be cited

This edition of the eBook can be cited. To enable this we have marked the start
and end of a page. In cases where a word straddles a page break, the marker is
placed inside the word at exactly the same position as in the physical book. This
means that occasionally a word might be bifurcated by this marker.
Contents

Preface

Acknowledgements

Note on Transliteration

List of Abbreviations

CHAPTER 1
Definitions

CHAPTER2
Approaches to Word Meaning

CHAPTER3
Morphology

CHAPTER 4
Affixation

CHAPTER 5
Tense and Aspect

CHAPTER 6
Modality

CHAPTER 7
Lexical Semantics

CHAPTER 8
Semantic Roles

CHAPTER 9
Semantic Principles

CHAPTER 10
Levels of Meaning

CHAPTER 11
Pragmatics

CHAPTER 12
Annotating Semantic Issues

Bibliography

Index
| vii →

Preface

This book provides an engaging and accessible introduction to semantics for

students and researchers who are new to the field. It introduces the basics of
semantics in a simple fashion. It adopts a step-by-step approach, starting with the
basic concepts and gradually moving readers to the central questions in
semantics to discuss them in a direct link with the actual act of translating. It
strikes a balance between theoretical developments and empirical investigation.
In addition to gaining a systemic overview of semantics, readers can learn how
to argue for analysis, thus being able to annotate their own translation
academically. Specialists in language-related fields, such as linguistics,
semantics, pragmatics, semiotics, morphology, syntax, and translation will find
this book an essential resource and reference.
Among the significant concepts introduced in this book are denotation,
connotation, sense, reference, the open choice principle, the idiom principle,
semantic roles, semantic relations, semantic field, componential analysis,
meaning postulates, frames, scripts, paradigmatic axis, syntagmatic axis, speech
acts, implicature, the cooperative principle, and semiotics.
This academic textbook is an accessible coursebook for students of Arabic-
English translation, Arabic-English contrastive studies, and students of
linguistics and semantics. The book is primarily designed for those whose
mother tongue is either Arabic or English and who have some knowledge of
both linguistics and semantics (at a basic level) and translation studies (at a basic
level).
Although the topics and analyses used in this book are intrinsically of
different levels of complexity (in particular the complexity levels are different
within the analysis of examples in Chapters 4–11), the book is designed to be
useful for true beginners, including those with very little background in
linguistics in general and semantics in particular. The intended readership for
this book is BA students of applied linguistics, semantics, Arabic-English
contrastive studies, and Arabic-English translation studies. Further, MA and PhD
students in translation, applied linguistics, and contrastive ← vii | viii → studies
may also benefit from this book. In addition, students with majors in subjects
other than applied linguistics or English, such as translation, might be required to
take a semantics course. The book features authentic materials taken from
different text types, including literary texts, journalistic texts, religious texts,
legal texts, and so on.
There are a number of books on the market that explain semantics, such as the
following:

• Carter, R. (1998). Vocabulary: Applied Linguistic Perspectives. London/New

York: Routledge.
• Cowie, A. P. (2009). Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Griffiths, P. (2006). An Introduction to English Semantics and Pragmatics.
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
• Kearns, K. (2000/2011). Semantics. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
• Kreidler, C. W. (1998). Introducing English Semantics. London/New York:
Routledge.
• Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Palmer, F. R. (1976). Semantics: A New Outline. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
• Riemer, N. (2010). Introducing Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
• Saeed, J. I. (2009). Semantics (3rd edn). United Kingdom: Wiley Blackwell.

However, none of these books have approached the topic from a translation or
contrastive point of view. Further, none of them have taken the language pair
Arabic-English as its focus.

The key features of the book

• it provides readers (whether translation students or translation researchers)

with a resource for developing their own practical skills in semantic analysis.
← viii | ix →
• it links grammar, semantics, pragmatics, and semiotics to the actual work of
 translators (whether trainees or professionals).
• it provides readers with a list of recommended readings and resources for
each of the topics under discussion.
• each chapter closes with a wide-ranging selection of questions and exercises.
• each chapter has a wealth of features, such as an overview outlining the main
points and technical words used in the chapter as well as illustrative
examples.
• it provides readers with a long, annotated literary text, thus enabling them to
have a clear vision of how to apply the theoretical elements discussed
throughout the book in a cohesive way.
| xi →

Acknowledgements

My sincere appreciation goes to to Juan José Martínez-Sierra of the Universitat

de València (Spain), James Dickins of the University of Leeds (UK), Nicolas
Froeliger of the Université Paris Diderot (Paris 7, France), and Vivina Almeida
Carreira of Polytechnic Institute of Coimbra (Portugal), all of whom read the
whole manuscript and provided me with their valuable suggestions and
comments.
My special thanks also go to Murtadha Bakir, Fred Pragnell, Naser Al-Bzour,
Hashim Lazim, Wafa Abu Hatab, Muntaha Ali, and John Moreton, who offered
valuable insights into, and guidance on, the many and varied aspects of the
linguistic and analytical challenges of translating Arabic.
In addition, I would like to thank the BA and MA students of Arabic-English
translation over the years at the University of Nizwa (The Sultanate of Oman)
and the University of Basrah (Iraq), whose translation projects have served as
sources for the translation examples used in this book.
Finally, no words could ever express my deepest love and gratitude to my
family, who have supported me in this work.
| xiii →

Note on Transliteration

The following Arabic transliteration system has been consistently employed

throughout this book. However, in the case of (‫ )ـّــــ‬shaddah, a consonant is
doubled. The names of Arab authors whose works have been published in
English are spelled as they appear in the publication without applying this
transliteration system. In addition, any Arab names that appear in quotations
follow the transliteration system of the reference quoted and not that listed
below. Some names, such as Mahfouz and the like, remain as they commonly
appear in English and have not been transliterated in order to avoid confusion.

Arabic Transliteration
‫ء‬ ’
‫ب‬ b
‫ت‬ t
‫ث‬ th
‫ج‬ j
‫ح‬ h
‫خ‬ kh
‫د‬ d
‫ذ‬ dh
‫ر‬ r
‫ز‬ z
‫س‬ s
‫ش‬ sh
‫ص‬ s
‫ض‬ d
‫ط‬ t
‫ظ‬ z
‫ع‬ ‘
‫غ‬ gh
‫ف‬ f
‫ق‬ q ← xiii | xiv →
‫ك‬ k
‫ل‬ l
‫م‬ m
‫ن‬ n
‫ة‬/‫ﻫـــ‬ h
‫و‬ w
‫ي‬ y
‫ى‬/‫ا‬ a
Vowels

fathah a
kasrah i
dammah u
alif ā

yaa’ ī

waaw ū
| xv →

Abbreviations

Lit. Literal
SL Source language
ST Source text
SLC Source language culture
TL Target language
TT Target text
TLC Target language culture
|1→

CHAPTER 1

Definitions

Key terms

• Applied linguistics
• Discourse analysis
• Ethnography of communication
• Formal linguistics
• Language variation
• Linguist
• Linguistics
• Morphology
• Phonetics
• Phonology
• Pragmatics
• Psycholinguistics
• Semantics
• Sociolinguistics
• Syntax
• Verbal processing

This chapter provides the reader with a general overview on the discipline. It
identifies “semantics” and the relationship that it has with other branches. It
provides an introduction to linguistics along with its main branches and
approaches. ← 1 | 2 →
1.1 Linguistics and linguists

1.1.1 Linguistics

Linguistics is the study of language; it is concerned with “the nature of language

and linguistic communication” (Akmajian et al. 2010: 5). Knowledge of
linguistics, however, is different from knowledge of a language. A language
speaker can use language without being able to analyse it. Like a person who is
able to drive a car without understanding how the engine of the car works, a
language user can use language without any conscious knowledge of its internal
structure. Conversely, a linguist can know and understand the internal structure
of a language without actually being able to speak it.

1.1.2 Linguist

A linguist, then, is not an individual who speaks more than one language
(“bilingual” or “multilingual”); rather, a linguist is someone who studies
language as a human phenomenon. Linguists study the grammar of language, the
social and psychological aspects of language use, and the relationships among
languages, both historical and present-day. The field of linguistics, like any
complex field, includes several major divisions. In the rest of this chapter, an
attempt will be made to introduce these major divisions.

1.2 Formal linguistics

Formal linguistics focuses on studying the structures and processes of language,

paying particular attention to how it is organized and how it works. The goal of
formal linguists is to identify the common elements among ← 2 | 3 → the
available structures under consideration in an attempt to discover the most
efficient way to describe language in general. There are a wide range of schools
of thought in formal linguistics, the most important three of which will be
discussed here:
• the traditional approach focuses on what is correct and what is not, what is
preferred and what is not, and so on. It refers to “a set of rules that prescribes
or defines how we are supposed to speak [and write], typically according to
some authority” (Denham and Lobeck 2010: 9; emphasis in the original). For
instance, the traditional approach to grammar tells us that it is wrong to say I
tomorrow to London will travels and that it is preferable to say I will travel to
London tomorrow.
• structural linguistics is part of structuralism; it is an approach originating
from the work of Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure. In structural
linguistics, the physical features, such as phonology, morphology, and syntax
(described below) are given a front seat, while meaning or lexicon is given a
back seat (Crystal 1980). The ultimate objective of structural linguists is to
collect as many utterances as they can, and then classify them to different
linguistic categories (such as nouns, verbs, phrasal verbs, adjectives, adverbs,
etc.) according to their forms and positions in clauses and some other factors.
For example, an adjective is defined, according to structural linguistics, in
terms of its position in a clause and the suffixes attached to it, such as -ful, -
al, -ous, and so on.
• the generative or transformational approach to the study of grammar was
introduced by Noam Chomsky in 1957 in his seminal work Syntactic
Structures. In his work, Chomsky focused on the relationship between the
“deep structure” of sentences, that is, what we have in our mind, and the
“surface structure” of sentences, that is, what we utter or write on a piece of
paper. For instance, in a sentence uttered or written like this, The teacher was
given a gift by the dean (surface structure), the deep structure (what is in
mind) is The dean gave the teacher a gift – by resorting to the mechanism of
passive transformation, what is in mind (deep structure) is uttered or written
in this way (surface structure). Building on an assumption that all languages
share certain ← 3 | 4 → linguistic features (universals), Chomsky (1960s)
produced his theory of Universal Grammar. Since Chomsky’s original
proposals in 1957, a number of elaborations have been made and many
alternative theories have been suggested.

Formal linguistics includes five main areas of study. Actually, these areas are
considered the core areas of linguistics. All can be studied “formally” or
“functionally”.
1.2.1 Phonetics

Phonetics is the study of the sounds of language and their physical properties.
Phonetics describes how speech sounds are produced by the vocal apparatus (the
lungs, vocal cords, tongue, teeth, etc.) and provides a framework for their
classification. This is known as “articulatory phonetics”. However, there are
other branches in phonetics, namely “auditory phonetics”, which is concerned
with the perception of sounds, and the way in which these sounds are heard and
interpreted, and “acoustic phonetics”, which focuses on the sounds of speech in
terms of their frequency, duration, intensity, and so on.

1.2.2 Phonology

Phonology involves analysing how sounds function in a given language or

dialect. For example, p has two possible phones, i.e., sounds, in English
depending on its position in a word. If you place a sheet of paper near your
mouth and pronounce the words pin and spin, the paper will vibrate after the p in
the first word, but not in the second word. This puff of air occurs when p is in
the initial position of a word in English. Phonologists examine such phonetic
shifts to construct theories about linguistic sounds in one language that can be
used in comparing linguistic systems. The analysis of sounds in different
languages can be very useful for foreign language teachers. ← 4 | 5 →

Differences between phonetics and phonology

Unlike phonetics, which studies the sounds of language and their physical
properties, that is, describing how speech sounds are produced by the vocal
apparatus (the lungs, vocal cords, tongue, teeth, etc.), thus providing us with a
framework for their classification, phonology involves analysing how sounds
function in a given language or dialect.

1.2.3 Morphology

Morphology is the study of the structure of words. Morphologists study minimal

units of meaning, called “morphemes”, and investigate the possible
combinations of these units in a language to form words. For example, the word
unhappiness is composed of three morphemes: un + happy + ness. The root,
happy, is transformed from an adjective into a noun by the addition of the -ness
and made negative with un-. For more details on morphology, see Chapter 3.

1.2.4 Syntax

Syntax is the study of the structure of sentences. Syntacticians describe how

words combine into phrases and clauses and how these combine to form
sentences. For example, I bought an expensive car yesterday is embedded as a
relative clause in the sentence, The car that I bought yesterday is expensive.

1.2.5 Semantics

Semantics is the study of the meaning of linguistic units, such as morphemes,

words, expressions, phrases, and so on. It focuses on the relation between
“signifiers” (words, phrases, signs, symbols, and the like) and what they stand
for, that is, “signifieds”. In semantic analysis, the focus is on “what the words
conventionally mean, rather than on what a speaker might want the words to
mean on a particular occasion” (Yule 1985/1996: 114). ← 5 | 6 →

1.3 Sociolinguistics

Sociolinguistics is the study of the relationship between language and society.

Language is envisaged as a socio-cultural phenomenon shaped by certain social
factors in a given society. In addition to studying these social factors and their
effect on shaping language, sociolinguists also concern themselves with why the
language under consideration displays variation and varieties at a certain period
of time. To this end, they adopt a synchronic approach. The major divisions
within the field of sociolinguistics are (1) language variation and (2) language
and social interaction (pragmatics, discourse analysis, and ethnography of
communication).

1.3.1 Language variation

Language variation is examined through studying the relationship between the

use of linguistic forms and nonverbal factors, such as geographical areas, social
classes, ethnic groups, age, sex, education, occupation, function, or style. The
combination of these various factors results in an individual’s idiolect, that is,
their particular and idiosyncratic manner of speech. When a variety of language
is shared by a group of people in a certain society, it is known as a dialect. A
dialect, whether standard or nonstandard, covers the full range of elements used
to produce speech: pronunciation, grammatical constructions, and interactive
features (cf. Yule 1985/1996: 227). In this respect, dialect should be
distinguished from accent, which usually refers only to pronunciation.
Language speakers of any language speak one of the dialects within a speech
community. For example, the speech of an Egyptian is quite different in terms of
pronunciation, grammatical constructions, lexical choices along with their
denotative meaning and connotative meaning, and so on from that of an Iraqi,
even though the language spoken by both is Arabic. In this regard, Yule
(1985/1996: 227) rightly comments: “While differences in vocabulary are often
easily recognized, dialect variations in the meaning of grammatical constructions
are less frequently documented”. ← 6 | 7 →

1.3.2 Language and social interaction

There is a strong relationship between language and society. Studying the

function of language in the real world is one of the areas that sociolinguists give
full consideration to. Three subfields of sociolinguistics investigate this
relationship.

PRAGMATICS
Pragmatics looks at how context affects meaning. As such, pragmatics is the
study of what is not explicitly said and the role of context in interpreting the
speaker/writer’s intended meaning. For example, It is hot in here can have a
variety of meanings. It could be a request to open the window, it could be an
invitation to go out, or it could mean that the speaker is not happy and wants to
leave the place.

DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
Discourse analysis covers a wide range of different approaches. It examines how
smaller linguistic forms relate in larger linguistic units, such as conversational
exchanges or written texts. To put this differently, discourse analysis examines
issues related to the textual relations appearing on the surface of the text (i.e.,
cohesion); the relation between text and its context (i.e., coherence); the relation
between linguistic features and those features of situation, such as field of
discourse, tenor of discourse, and mode of discourse (i.e., register); the relation
between the text producer and text receiver and their roles (i.e., speech event);
and the relation between text interpretation and text participants’ background
knowledge (i.e., schema).

ETHNOGRAPHY OF COMMUNICATION
Closely related to discourse analysis is ethnography of communication (also
known as “ethnography of speaking”). It utilizes the tools of anthropology to
examine verbal interaction in its social setting, giving full consideration to social
and cultural practices in a given society on the one hand, and ← 7 | 8 →
assumptions and beliefs of the members of the society on the other. A good
individual example of ethnographic research is the study of doctor-patient
communication. In such a study, microanalysis is involved, focusing on not only
what is said, but also on verbal and nonverbal aspects, such as pauses between
turns, interruptions, signs of hesitation, response patterns, intonation, eye
contact, and the like.

1.4 Psycholinguistics

Psycholinguistics is the study of the relationship between language and cognitive

or mental systems. Psycholinguists concern themselves with first and second
language acquisition and how people store and retrieve linguistic information,
referred to as verbal processing.

1.4.1 Language acquisition

The study of how humans acquire language begins with the study of child
language acquisition. Principally, two hypotheses have been put forth. The first
hypothesis, which is known as the “imitation hypothesis”, proposes that children
learn language by means of hearing people around them, thus starting imitating
them (Rowe and Levine 2006/2009: 234). As for the second hypothesis, which is
known as the “innateness hypothesis”, it proposes that “children have the innate
capacity to differentiate phonemes, extract words from the stream of language,
and process grammar” (p. 233). Proponents of this hypothesis, see for example
Eric Lenneberg (1967), draw a comparison between language acquisition and
other innate biologically based mental systems in nature and, thus, conclude that
the ability to acquire language is a biologically innate capacity. There is also the
distinction between the cognitive school that takes language acquisition to be
part of a general cognitive development, and the more specified approach of
taking language to be the product of an independent mental system that is
innately endowed. ← 8 | 9 →

1.4.2 Verbal processing

Verbal processing refers to the way in which people use certain linguistic forms
to communicate their own ideas and express their own feelings, and how the
brain creates and understands these linguistic forms. Most recent theories in this
area hold that this process is mainly carried out by the brain. The process of
hearing, understanding, and saying any linguistic form, say a word, normally
follows a certain pattern.

1.5 Applied linguistics

Applied linguistics is an interdisciplinary field of linguistics. Its ultimate

objective is to identify and examine language-related problems and offer suitable
solutions to them (cf. Berns and Matsuda 2006; Cook 2003; Hall et al. 2011).
The findings of any theoretical study can be applied to the solutions of the
practical problems related to it. The same holds true for linguistics. Applied
linguists examine, for instance, theories of language acquisition with a view to
developing first and second language teaching methodologies. Similarly, they
may investigate theories of sociolinguistics in order to develop special teaching
strategies for speakers of nonstandard English, and so on. Applied linguistics
covers a great number of branches, such as language acquisition, language
pedagogy, language planning, stylistics, pragmatics, forensic linguistics,
discourse analysis, conversation analysis, lexicography, contrastive linguistics,
translation, and so on.

Further reading

Aitchison, J. (1999). Linguistics (5th edn). London: Teach Yourself Series.

Baker, E. A., and Hengeveld, K. (eds; 2012). Linguistics. Oxford: Wiley-
Blackwell Publishing Ltd. ← 9 | 10 →
Berns, M., and Matsuda, P. K. (2006). Applied Linguistics: Overview and
History. In K. Brown (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics
(2nd edn), pp. 394–405. Oxford: Elsevier.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton.
——. (1968). Language and Mind. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Cook, G. (2003). Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Crystal, D. (1980). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Cambridge: Basil
Blackwell.
Elgin, S. H. (1979). What Is Linguistics? (2nd edn). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Fromkin, V., and Rodman, R. (1978). An Introduction to Language (2nd edn).
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Hall, C. J., Smith, P. H., and Wicaksono, R. (2011). Mapping Applied
Linguistics. A Guide for Students and Practitioners. London/New York:
Routledge.
Lenneberg, E. (1967). The Biological Foundations of Language. New York:
John Wiley and Sons.
Rowe, B. M., and Levine, D. P. (2006/2009). A Concise Introduction to
Linguistics. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
Slobin, D. I. (1971). Psycholinguistics. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
Trudgill, P. (1983). Sociolinguistics: An Introduction to Language and Society.
Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Yule. G. (1985/1996). The Study of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Questions

1. How would you define “linguistics”, “phonetics”, “semantics”,

“morphology”, “syntax”, and “pragmatics”?
2. What is the difference between a “linguist” and a “bilingual person” or
“multilingual person”?
3. What is the difference between “phonology” and “phonetics”?
4. What is “formal linguistics”? And what are its main areas?
5. What is “sociolinguistics”? And what are its main areas?
6. Briefly explain the terms “applied linguistics”, “psycholinguistics”, and
“sociolinguistics”.
7. What are the main differences among the three main schools of thought in
formal linguistics?
8. In language acquisition, there are two hypotheses. What are they? Explain.
| 11 →

CHAPTER 2

Approaches to Word Meaning

Key terms

• Cognitive approaches
• Componential analysis
• Diagnostic features
• Frame semantics
• General approaches
• Hyponymy
• Incompatibility
• Lexicon
• Lexeme
• Meaning postulates
• Primitives
• Prototype
• Script
• Semantic features
• Semantic field
• Supplementary features

The previous chapter looked into the main branches of linguistics, such as
formal linguistics, sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and applied linguistics. It
provided the reader with a general overview of the whole discipline, and
identified the place of semantics in the whole discipline. This chapter addresses
the main approaches to describing the relationships between words and concepts.
It introduces three main approaches, namely:
1. general approaches, such as semantic fields (also known as “word fields”).
 ← 11 | 12 →
2. formal approaches, such as componential analysis and the use of meaning
postulates.
3. cognitive approaches, such as frame semantics.

2.1 Semantic fields

A semantic field is defined as a set of lexical items teamed up semantically as

they share a common semantic property, thus forming a particular field or
domain. The notion of semantic fields (also known as “word fields” or “semantic
domains”) goes back to the linguist Jost Trier (1931). He argues that the
meaning of any lexical item is defined by relating it to, and contrasting its
meaning with, other lexical items semantically related in a given semantic field,
thus identifying the relationship among them on the one hand, and highlighting
the differences among them. The basic tenets of Trier’s theory can be
summarized as follows:
1. the meaning of a lexical item is dependent on the meaning of other lexical
items which are semantically related to it.
2. different semantic fields can form larger fields, thus covering all human
experiences.
3. any change in the meaning of any lexical item in a given semantic field
affects the meanings of the other lexical items in the field.
It is worth noticing that the lexical items in a given semantic field are not
necessarily synonymous, but rather they hold a variety of relations, such as
synonymy, hyponymy, hyperonymy, co-hyponymy, and so forth. As an
illustration, cooking terms, such as to cook, to bake, to boil, to simmer, to fry, to
deep-fry, and to broil quoted from Lehrer (1974: 63) may be discussed:
to cook: a general cooking term used to refer to the preparation of meals.
to bake: a cooking term used to refer to the preparation of bread, pasta,
cookies, etc.
to boil: a cooking term used to refer to cooking with water. ← 12 | 13 →
to simmer: a cooking term used to refer to cooking with water, but the water
used should be below the boiling point.
 to fry: a cooking term used to refer to the use of fat or oil in the process of
cooking.
to deep-fry: a cooking term used to refer to the use of a large amount of fat or
oil in the process of cooking.
to broil: a cooking term used to refer to cooking by direct exposure to fire.
Semantic fields are based on paradigmatic relations, that is, the vertical relations,
where lexical items are related and contrasted in a particular domain. For
example, the word book has a relationship with lexical items like novel, novella,
dictionary, and so on as they all can be found in and bought from a bookshop.
Therefore, in a sentence like this:
Yesterday, I went to the nearby bookshop to buy a book.
the lexical item book can be replaced with lexical items, such as novel, novella,
dictionary, and the like as they all can syntactically fill in the slot occupied by
the word book in the above sentence. Thus, it would be possible to propose that
syntagmatic relations, that is, the horizontal relations need to be incorporated in
addition to paradigmatic relations when the meaning of a lexical item is
considered.
However, part of the difficulty in relating the idea of semantic fields to the
actual act of translating any text may arise from the fact that there are a great
number of lexical items in any language that cannot be filed under any semantic
domain. Consider, for example, lexical items, such as only, just, nevertheless,
and the like (Baker 1992: 19). In this respect, Baker holds that the notion of
“semantic fields works well enough for words and expressions which have fairly
well-defined propositional meanings, but not for all, or even most of the words
and expressions in a language” (ibid.). Despite that, figuring out why the writer
of the original text opts for such a lexical item in place of other available lexical
items may be very useful to the actual work of the translators. To elaborate, the
following sentence where the lexical item to barbecue is used may be discussed:
I do not mind barbecuing today, but the problem is that I do not like it when
smoke gets in my eyes. ← 13 | 14 →
As can be seen, the writer/speaker uses the lexical item to barbecue in place of
other lexical items, such as to roast or to grill. Thus, the translator, in addition to
figuring out the differences among these semantically related words, needs to
pay undivided attention to the significance of the lexical item used in the original
text while activating the mechanism of lexical search for an equivalent in the
target language. Here, while the verb to grill is used to refer to cooking food
under a grill, which heats the food from above and the verb to roast is used to
refer to roasting on an open fire on a spit or in an oven, the verb to barbecue is
used to refer to cooking food on a metal frame on an open fire outdoors. Being
fully aware of these differences, the translator may well opt for the addition of
‫( ﻓﻲ اﻟﻬﻮاء اﻟﻄﻠﻖ‬in the open air), as in:
‫ ﻳﺪﺧﻞ ﻓﻲ‬. ‫ﺐ اﻟﺪﺧﺎن ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ‬
ّ ‫ وﻟﻜﻦ اﻟﻤﺸﻜﻠﺔ أﻧﻨﻲ ﻻ أﺣ‬،‫ﻻ ﻣﺎﻧﻊ ﻟﺪيّ أن ﻧﺸﻮي ﻓﻲ اﻟﻬﻮاء اﻟﻄﻠﻖ اﻟﻴﻮم‬
‫ﻲ‬
ّ ‫ﻋﻴﻨ‬

2.2 Formal approaches

2.2.1 Componential analysis

Componential analysis (also known as “feature analysis” or “lexical

decomposition”) is an approach used by linguists to define the meaning of a
lexical item by relating and contrasting it with other lexical items in a certain
semantic field. Due to the differences between the interfacing languages and
cultures, mismatch of reference frequently occurs. Newmark (1988: 114) makes
a distinction between componential analysis in linguistics and that in translation:
Componential analysis (CA) in translation is not the same as componential
analysis in linguistics; in linguistics it means analysing or splitting up the
various senses of a word into sense-components which may or may not be
universals; in translation, the basic process is to compare a [source language]
SL word with a [target language] TL word which has a similar meaning, but
is not an obvious one-to-one equivalent, by demonstrating first their common
and then their differing sense components. ← 14 | 15 →
It is worth noticing that it is impractical to analyse all the lexical items used in
the original text. Componential analysis is carried out only on a word of some
significance in the SL text which cannot adequately be translated one-to-one
(Newmark 1988: 115). Componential analysis can be used as a means to bridge
lexical gaps linguistically and culturally between the interfacing languages and
cultures.
In his oft-cited book Componential Analysis of Meaning, Nida (1975)
classifies the components of any lexeme into two main types, viz. supplementary
components and diagnostic or distinctive components.
a. supplementary components refer to the additional features that a lexeme
shares with other semantically related lexemes. These components “may be
very important for an extensive definition of a meaning but which are not
diagnostic in specifying basic differences” (Nida 1975: 112).
b. diagnostic components refer to those components that serve to distinguish the
meaning of a certain lexeme from other lexemes in a particular domain or
field, that is, they specify that part of meaning that distinguishes the lexeme
in question from other semantically related lexemes in a certain semantic
field. In this regard, Nida writes:

If all the universe were blue, there would be no blueness, since there would
be nothing to contrast with blue. The same is true for the meanings of words.
They have meaning only in terms of systematic contrasts with other words
which share certain features with them but contrast with them in respect to
other features (p. 32).

To make this point clear, five lexical items, namely child, boy, girl, man, and
woman may be considered. These lexical items belong to the semantic field of
“human race”. In the semantic domain of child, boy, girl, man, and woman
[HUMAN] is a supplementary component, that is, an additional feature that the
lexical items child, boy, girl, man, and woman share. Therefore, to distinguish
them from one another, their diagnostic components could be resorted to, such as
[MALE] and [ADULT], as shown below:
Lexeme HUMAN MALE ADULT
child + +/– –
boy + + –
girl + – – ← 15 | 16 →
man + + +
woman + – +
As can be observed, to distinguish them from one another, their supplementary
components cannot be relied on, that is, [HUMAN] as all of them share the
semantic feature [+HUMAN]. Alternatively, it is possible to fall back on their
diagnostic components, that is, [MALE] and [ADULT]. So,
child would be [+HUMAN], [–ADULT], but neither [MALE] nor [FEMALE].
boy would be [+HUMAN], [–ADULT], and [+MALE].
girl would be [+HUMAN], [–ADULT], and [–MALE].
man would be [+HUMAN], [+ADULT], and [+MALE].
 woman would be [+HUMAN], [+ADULT], and [–MALE].
Primitives like [MALE], [HUMAN], [ADULT] or [MARRIED] are believed to be both
binary and universal. They are universal as they exist across cultures and should
be reflected by all languages. The number of these contrasting features depends
on the number of the concepts we try to describe. If we add another concept, say,
bachelor, then we need another primitive, that is, [MARRIED].

INCOMPATIBILITY AND HYPONYMY

Such an approach provides an economical means of representing sense relations
like incompatibility and hyponymy. To begin with, incompatibility holds
between lexical items in a set if they share a number of components but differ
from each other in one or more contrasting feature(s). For instance, man and
woman are incompatible as they differ from each other in one feature, that is,
[MALE].
Further, any lexical item can be defined as a hyponym of another if its
features, i.e., primitives, contain all the positive features of the other. As such,
the lexical item bachelor is a hyponym of the lexical item man because it
contains all the positive features of man [+HUMAN], [+MALE], and [+ADULT], plus
an additional feature, that is, [–MARRIED]. This means that any bachelor is a man,
but not all men are bachelors. ← 16 | 17 →
In the actual act of translating any text from language A to language B, the
translators are sometimes required to analyse some lexical items and contrast
them with other semantically related lexical items in an attempt to be fully aware
of the distinctive features of the lexical item at hand. It also helps the translators
draw a comparison between the lexical item used in the original text and the one
to be used in the target text, thus putting a finger on the similarities and
differences between them. In this connection, Van Steenbergen (2002: 29) holds
that componential analysis as a tool “can play a crucial role in cross-cultural
communication, describing and analysing the features that have a bearing on our
understanding of reality”. It can be used not only for linguistic and psychological
inputs, but for anthropological input as well, hence its relevance “beyond its
traditional structuralist linguistic constraints” (ibid.). To elaborate, the following
example may be given full consideration:
ُ ‫ﻫ‬.‫ ﻟﺬا رﺑ ّﻤﺎأذ‬،‫ﻦ ﻟﺪيّ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻜﻔﻲ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻮﻗﺖ ﻟﻔﻌﻞ ذﻟﻚ‬
‫ﺐ اﻟﻴﻮم‬ ْ ‫ﺔ وﻟﻜﻦ ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜ‬
ً ‫ت اﻟﺒﺎرﺣﺔ أن أﺷﺘﺮي رواﻳ‬
ُ ‫ﻗﺮر‬
‫ﻷﺷﺘﺮﻳﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻜﺘﺒﺔ اﻟﻘﺮﻳﺒﺔ‬
Here, the lexical item that needs extra attention is ‫ ﻣﻜﺘﺒﺔ‬. The word ‫ ﻣﻜﺘﺒﺔ‬in Arabic
refers to three referents, namely bookshop/bookstore, library, and book case.
This entails that the denotative meaning of ‫ ﻣﻜﺘﺒﺔ‬is wider and less specific than
the three words in English. Relying on the context where the nonfinite verb ‫أﺷﺘﺮي‬
(to buy) is used, the translator can easily go for the lexical item bookshop or
bookstore. This is due to the diagnostic component [+SALING BOOKS] that
distinguishes the lexical item bookshop/bookstore from library and bookcase
[–SALING BOOKS]. As such, the above sentence can lend itself to:
I decided to buy a novel last night, but there wasn’t enough time to do so.
Therefore, I may go today to buy it from the nearby bookshop.
However, in the following example, given to a number of translation students to
translate it into English, the lexical item ‫ زﻣﻴﻞ‬lends itself to colleague and
classmate. Consider the following four translations selected: ST:

.18 | 17 ← ‫→ﻢ ﻳﺰرﻧﻲ أﻣﺲ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺒﻴﺖ ﻻ زﻣﻼﺋﻲ وﻻ أﻗﺎرﺑﻲ‬

‫ﻟ‬

TT 1:
Neither my colleagues nor my relatives visited me yesterday at home.
TT 2:
Neither my classmates nor my relatives visited me yesterday at my house.
TT 3:
I was not visited yesterday by my colleagues and relatives.
TT 4:
My classmates and relatives did not visit me yesterday at home.
To make this point clear, the following authentic example from Husni and
Newman (2008: 44–45; bilingual edn) can be considered:
‫ وﻟﻦ ﻳﺘﺰوج‬،‫ » ﺳﻴﻌﻮد إﻟﻴﻚ زوﺟﻚ‬:‫ﻗﺎل اﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺳﻌﻴﺪ وﻫﻮ ﻳﺮﻣﻲ ﻓﻲ وﻋﺎء اﻟﺠﻤﺮ ﻧﺘﻔﺎ ً ﻣﻦ اﻟﺒﺨﻮر‬
،‫ » ارﺗﻴﺎح ﻃﻮﻳﻠﺔ‬. ‫ ﻓﻨ ّﺪت ﻋﻨﻬﺎ آﻫﺔ‬،‫ وﻛﺎن ﺻﻮﺗﻪ وﻗﻮرا ً ﻫﺎدﺋﺎ ً ﻣﻨﺢ ﻋﺰﻳﺰة اﻟﻄﻤﺄﻧﻴﻨﺔ‬.« ‫ﻣﺮة ﺛﺎﻧﻴﺔ‬
ً ‫ﻦ ﻋﻤﻠﻲ ﻳﺘﻄﻠﺐ ﻣﺎﻻ ً ﻛﺜﻴﺮا‬ّ ‫»ﻟﻜ‬ ‫ و‬:‫اﺑﺘﻬﺞ ﻟﻬﺎ وﺟﻪ اﻟﺸﻴﺦ وﻗﺎل‬

He threw bits of incense into the dish filled with live coal, and said: “Your
husband will return to you, and he will not take another wife”. His voice was
sedate and soft, and soothed Aziza, who heaved a deep sigh of satisfaction.
The Sheikh’s face lit up. “However, my work doesn’t come cheap”, he said.

Here, the lexical item ‫ ﺻﻮت‬refers to, at least, four referents, namely ‫ﺻﻮت اﻹﻧﺴﺎن‬
(voice), ‫(ﺻ ﻮ ت ﻏ ﻴ ﺮ ا ﻹ ﻧ ﺴ ﺎ ن‬sound), ‫( ﺻﻮت اﻟﺘﻠﻔﺎز‬volume), and ‫(ﺻﻮت ا ِﻧﺘﺨﺎﺑﻲ‬vote). The
diagnostic feature that distinguishes voice from other semantically related words,
such as sound, volume and vote is that [OF HUMAN BEING]. Being fully aware of
the supplementary and diagnostic features of the lexical items at hand, the
translators have rendered the lexical item ‫ ﺻﻮت‬into voice. Again, here the
denotative meaning of the lexical item ‫ ﺻﻮت‬is wider and less specific than the
lexical item voice in English, thus resulting in translating by a hyponym.
Translating by a hyponym (also referred to as “particularizing translation”)
“implies that the [target text] TT expression has a narrower and more specific
denotative meaning than the [source text] ST expression” (Dickins et al. 2002:
56).
To elaborate, the following example quoted from Haifā’ Zangana’s story
(2009: 57) ‫(ﻣﺜﻮى‬Dwelling) may be paid extra attention: ← 18 | 19 →

‫ ﻳﺨﺘﺮق آذان اﻟﻤﺎرة‬،‫ أﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻦ ﺻﻮت اﻟﻤﺎرة واﻟﺴﻴﺎرات‬،ً ‫ﻣﻦ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟﺮﺷﻔﺎت اﻟﺒﻄﻴﺌﺔ ﻳﻨﻄﻠﻖ ﺻﻮﺗﻬﺎ ﺣﺎدا‬
.‫ ﺿﺮوري ﻓﻘﻂ‬. ‫ ﺗﻠﻔﻆ ﻣﺎ ﻫﻮ‬.‫ ﺗﻠﺤﻨﻪ ﺑﻄﺮﻳﻘﺘﻬﺎ اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ‬.‫ ﻳﺴﺮي ﻓﻲ أﺟﺴﺎدﻫﻢ‬،‫وأدﻣﻐﺘﻬﻢ‬
‫ﻓﻠﻮس ﻟﻠﻤﺤﺘﺎﺟﻴﻦ‬

Here, the lexical item ‫ ﺻﻮت‬refers to two referents, viz. ‫( ﺻﻮت اﻟﻤﺎرة‬the voice of the
passers-by) and ‫(ﺻﻮت اﻟﺴﻴﺎرات‬the sound of the cars). Again, the diagnostic feature
that distinguishes these two lexical items is that the former is [+OF HUMAN BEING]
and the latter is [-OF HUMAN BEING]. Due to the differences between the
interfacing languages, two lexical items may well be used, namely voice and
sound to live up to the expectations of the target-language reader, as in:
Between slow sips, she releases a sharp squeal, louder than the voices of the
passers-by and sounds of the passing cars, piercing the ears and minds of the
passers-by and travelling through their bodies. She emits it in her own
peculiar way and says only what is necessary: “Money for the needy”.

2.2.2 Meaning postulates

Closely related to componential analysis is “meaning postulates”, a term

borrowed from logic. According to this approach, most lexical relations, such as
hyponymy, antonymy, synonymy, and the like can be analysed by using “some
basic connectives from propositional logic”, such as “if … then”, “and”, “not”,
“or”, or “if and only if” (Saeed 2009: 323). Unlike componential analysis and
other formal approaches to meaning that decompose the meaning of the lexical
item into its basic components in order to specify its overall meaning and
contrast it with some semantically related words in the same semantic domain,
the meaning postulates approach is not decompositional. Rather, it attempts to
“describe the relations which a word has with other members of the same
vocabulary” (Riemer 2010: 210; emphasis in the original).
To figure out the hyponymy relationship between, for instance, pickup and
vehicle, this connective “if …, then …” can be used. Logically speaking, if
something is a pickup, then it is a vehicle. Similarly, hyponymy relationships
between lexical items, such as apple and fruit, chair and furniture, ← 19 | 20 →
horse and animal, and bachelor and man can be analysed by using the same
formula “if …, then …”, as in:
If something is an apple, then it is fruit.
If something is a chair, then it is furniture.
If something is a horse, then it is an animal.
If somebody is a bachelor, then he is a man.
In a similar vein, part-part relationships between lexical items, such as eye and
nose, apple and banana, and sofa and chair, can be analysed, as in:
If an eye is part of a face and a nose is part of a face, then they are co-
hyponyms of a face.
If an apple is fruit and a banana is fruit, then they are co-hyponyms of fruit.
If a chair is furniture and a sofa is furniture, then they are co-hyponyms of
furniture.
One way of capturing the relation of nongradable antonyms (also known as
“binary antonyms”) between, for instance, lexical items, such as dead and alive,
single and married, close and open, and awake and asleep is to use the following
formula:
If something is dead, then it is not alive.
If somebody is single, then s/he is not married.
If something is closed, then it is not open.
If somebody is awake, then s/he is not asleep.
The relation of relational antonymy (also known “converses”) between lexical
items, such as teacher and student, doctor and patient, husband and wife, and
employer and employee can be detected by using this formula:
If X is the teacher of Y, then Y is the student of X.
If X is the doctor of Y, then Y is the patient of X.
If X is the husband of Y, then Y is the wife of X.
If X is the employer of Y, then Y is the employee of X.
To detect the relation of synonymy between lexical items, such as father and
dad, large and huge, and sofa and couch, this formula may be used:
If somebody is the father of somebody else, then he is his dad.
If something is large, then it is huge.
If something is a sofa, then it is a couch. ← 20 | 21 →
The discussion of the previous examples clearly shows the importance of this
approach in establishing the network of sense relations that a lexical item has
with other lexical items. It is worth noting that the meaning postulates approach
does not confine itself to the formalization of the standard lexical relations that a
word has with others (ibid.). Rather, it can be utilized to capture any relation that
a lexical item has with others. For example, to form the network of sense
relations that the lexical item ill has with other lexical items, the following
formula may be suggested:
If somebody is ill, then s/he is alive and kicking.
This formula tells us that s/he is still alive and kicking in addition to feeling not
well. However, we cannot suggest that s/he has been admitted to hospital and
discharged from it or s/he is on sick leave. Similarly, we cannot predict his/her
age, gender or marital status as they are not part of the meaning of the lexical
item ill.
Further, to establish the network of sense relations that the lexical item ‫( ﻗﺮَر‬to
decide) has with other lexical items, the following sentence may be given full
consideration:
.‫ت أن أﻗﺮأ رواﻳﺔ‬
ُ ‫ ﻗﺮر‬،ِ ‫ ﻗﺒﻞ أن أﺧﻠﺪ َ إﻟﻰ اﻟﻨﻮم‬،‫اﻟﺒﺎرﺣﺔ‬
Here, in an attempt to capture the meaning of the lexical item ‫ ﻗﺮَر‬, we may opt
for this formula:
If somebody can decide, then s/he is a human being and still alive and
kicking.
However, to capture the overall meaning of the above sentence, we may propose
that as long as s/he decided to read a novel, this means that s/he has the ability to
read, that is, s/he is not illiterate. On top of this, s/he is able to recognize a novel
from other sub-genres, such as a short story, novella, or poetry. Further, s/he is
not so tired that s/he cannot do anything, but falling asleep. Also, we may
conclude that s/he has a bookcase or, at least, a novel. To reflect all these
elements, the translator may render the above sentence into:
Last night, before falling asleep, I decided to read a novel. ← 21 | 22 →
To reinforce this point, the following example discussed in the previous section
(quoted from Husni and Newman 2008: 44–45; bilingual edn) may be re-
considered:
 ‫ وﻟﻦ ﻳﺘﺰوج‬،‫ » ﺳﻴﻌﻮد إﻟﻴﻚ زوﺟﻚ‬:‫ﻗﺎل اﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺳﻌﻴﺪ وﻫﻮ ﻳﺮﻣﻲ ﻓﻲ وﻋﺎء اﻟﺠﻤﺮ ﻧﺘﻔﺎ ً ﻣﻦ اﻟﺒﺨﻮر‬
،‫» ارﺗﻴﺎح ﻃﻮﻳﻠﺔ‬. ‫ ﻓﻨ ّﺪت ﻋﻨﻬﺎ آﻫﺔ‬،‫ وﻛﺎن ﺻﻮﺗﻪ وﻗﻮرا ً ﻫﺎدﺋﺎ ً ﻣﻨﺢ ﻋﺰﻳﺰة اﻟﻄﻤﺄﻧﻴﻨﺔ‬.« ‫ﻣﺮة ﺛﺎﻧﻴﺔ‬
ً ‫ﻦ ﻋﻤﻠﻲ ﻳﺘﻄﻠﺐ ﻣﺎﻻ ً ﻛﺜﻴﺮا‬
ّ ‫»ﻟﻜ‬
‫ و‬:‫اﺑﺘﻬﺞ ﻟﻬﺎ وﺟﻪ اﻟﺸﻴﺦ وﻗﺎل‬

He threw bits of incense into the dish filled with live coal, and said: “Your
husband will return to you, and he will not take another wife”. His voice was
sedate and soft, and soothed Aziza, who heaved a deep sigh of satisfaction.
The Sheikh’s face lit up. “However, my work doesn’t come cheap”, he said.

Here, by adopting the meaning postulates approach, we can conclude that ‫ﻋﺰﻳﺰة‬
(Aziza) is not single, but has a husband. So, logically speaking, this means that
she is both an adult and human being. Further, she has problems of some sort
with her husband. She does not want to lose him. This means she still loves him.
Her husband is a Muslim as he has the right to marry another woman. On the
other hand, ‫( اﻟﺸﻴﺦ‬the Sheikh) has nothing to do with Islamic worshipping
practices and providing religious guidance, and the place is not a mosque as we
do not expect that somebody throws bits of incense into the dish filled with live
coal in a mosque. Further, he is not doing this for free, but will charge her some
money, that is, he is not pious as the denotative meaning of the word ‫( ﺷﻴﺦ‬the
Sheikh) may suggest.

2.3 Frame semantics

Frame semantics is a theory developed by Charles J. Fillmore in his case

grammar. According to this theory, the meanings of words are analysed by
emphasizing the continuities, rather than the discontinuities, between the lexical
items and one’s socio-cultural experience. In this connection, Fillmore (1982:
111) comments: “Frame semantics offers a particular way of looking at word
meanings, as well as a way of characterizing principles for creating new words
and phrases, for adding new meanings to words, and for ← 22 | 23 →
assembling the meanings of elements in a text into the total meaning of the text”.
So, it is a bottom-up process, starting from the linguistic materials of the text
with a view to forming a mental image. It links linguistic semantics to socio-
cultural experiences and encyclopaedic knowledge. According to this approach,
people can capture the meaning of any lexical item by consulting their
encyclopaedic knowledge stored in their minds by virtue of their accumulated
experiences in life and previous reading, hearing, and so forth. For instance, it is
hard to capture the meaning of the term face book without knowing anything
about social media, which involves knowing how to use a smart phone,
computer, laptop, etc., how to invite people, how to post and share, and so forth.
To put this differently, the meaning of a lexical item is understood when the
concept encoded by the lexical item is motivated by the language user’s socio-
cultural experiences, beliefs, assumptions, practices, accumulated value system,
and so forth. Fillmore (1982: 111) holds that “words represent categorizations of
experience, and each of these categories is underlain by a motivating situation
occurring against a background of knowledge and experience”.
To understand the meaning of the lexical item to buy, for instance, it is
necessary for the language user to rely on his/her background frame experience
and encyclopaedic knowledge. Hearing or reading the lexical item to buy
invokes in the mind of the hearer/reader different background frame experiences,
such as:
• how to buy it (going to a shop or a shopping centre, or buying online).
• how much to pay (whether the price is fixed or negotiable will be determined
by many external factors).
• how to pay (knowing that a buyer has to pay money for anything to get the
item can be linked to other experiences, such as the method of payment, e.g.,
in cash or by a visa card, and so on).
• when to receive it (the time of receiving the item varies as buying a house is
different from buying a car or a belt).
• when to enjoy it (the concept of enjoying, possessing, selling, using, giving
away, etc. encoded by the word ownership needs to be linked to other socio-
cultural experiences to capture the meaning of the lexical item owner
associated with the word to buy). ← 23 | 24 →
Further, in each scenario, the lexical item to buy might be associated with
different scenes and frames along with different preconditions and (un)expected
results. For a traditional person at a certain age in a given society, to buy a book
requires a physical seller, price, and bookshop. However, for somebody else who
is able to order it online, there will be no physical seller and bookshop.

2.3.1 Frames

In order to understand frame semantics, we need to understand the idea of

“frame” first. A frame is a conceptual structure that provides background of
beliefs, assumptions, practices against which the meaning of a lexical item can
be captured. These frames organize stereotype knowledge about an entity, event,
situation, and the like. Below I will consider dog-frame. It has two attributes
namely:
1. IS-A attribute, which triggers a superordinate frame, that is, a mammal-
frame and an animal-frame, as in:
A dog is a mammal
2. HAS attribute, as in:

A dog has four legs and one tail.

Further, these legs and the tail are instances of more general legs and tails in the
real world. As such, if somebody who is speaking the truth tells us about a dog,
we will know for sure that the entity in question is a mammal, that it is an animal
and that it is a living creature. Also, we will know that the entity has one head,
two eyes, four legs and one tail, and can eat, breathe and move around, but
cannot speak, fly, etc. We know this thanks to our knowledge accumulated from
our socio-cultural experiences. In this regard, Saeed rightly comments that
“words are in a network of semantic links with other words and it is reasonable
to assume that conceptual structures are similarly linked” (2009: 38). ← 24 | 25
→
The attribute can also have a default value, such as a particular colour (white,
black, etc.), size (small, big, etc.) or action (barking, growling, whining, wagging
its tail, etc.). It is worth noting that “our system of cognitive classification is
structured in terms of prototypes, in that some instances of a concept are more
typical (closer to the prototype) than others” (Akmajian et al. 2010: 231;
emphasis in the original). These default values are taken for granted unless
proved otherwise. So, each lexeme is assumed to invoke in the mind of the
reader or hearer a particular frame which has a network of many related frames.
These frames associated with the lexical item in question are relevant for
translation since the lexical item along with its frames may vary from one
language and culture to another. For instance, the lexical item ‫ زﻣﻴﻞ‬in Arabic
refers to both a person who you work with in a job and a person who is in the
same class as you in school, college, university, etc. Therefore, to translate a
sentence like this:
Tonight, one of my colleagues is coming to visit me.
the translators need to reflect the different frames associated with the lexical
item colleague; therefore, they may well opt for a term or expression that
activates the work-frame, as opposed to class-frame, as in:
.‫ ﺳﻴﺰورﻧﻲ أﺣﺪ زﻣﻼﺋﻲ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻌﻤﻞ‬،‫اﻟﻠﻴﻠﺔ‬
However, in a sentence like this:

Yesterday, we congratulated our colleague on his promotion.

the work-frame will be activated by virtue of the lexical item promotion that
excludes class-frame, as in:
.‫ﻫﻨﺄﻧﺎ زﻣﻴﻠﻨﺎ ﻳﻮم أﻣﺲ ﺑﻤﻨﺎﺳﺒﺔ ﺗﺮﻗﻴﺘﻪ‬
To reinforce the point, the lexical item ‫ ﻓﺮاﺷﺔ‬in the following text quoted from
Mahmūd Al-Braikān’s poem ‫( ا ﺣ ﺘ ﻔ ﺎ ء ﺑ ﺎ ﻷ ﺷ ﻴ ﺎ ء ا ﻟ ﺰ ا ﺋ ﻠ ﺔ‬Homage to the ephemeral
things) translated by Shihāb Ahmad Al-Nāsir (2006: 18–19; bilingual edn) may
be considered: ← 25 | 26 →
ST:

ٍ ‫أرﺑﻊ أﯾﺪ‬
ً ‫ﺗﻤﺘﺪ إﻟﻰ دفء اﻟﻨﺎر ﻣﻌﺎ‬
‫وﻋﯿﻮن أرﺑﻊ‬
‫ﺗﺘﺄﻣﻞ ﻃﻔﻼ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻬﺪه‬
‫ﻣﺎﺋﺪة‬
‫ﻣﻦ زاد اﻟﻔﻘﺮاء‬
‫وﺣﺪﯾﺚ ﮬﺎدئ‬
‫ ﻓﯿﻠﻢ اﻟﺴﻬﺮة‬،‫اﻟﻠﯿﻞ‬
‫أﻧﺴﺎم اﻟﻔﺠﺮ ﺗﺮف رﻓﯿﻒ ﺟﻨﺎح ﻓﺮاﺷﺔ‬

TT:

Four hands
Stretch out together to the warmth of fire,
And four eyes
Pore over a child in his cradle.
A meal
From the poor’s provisions,
And a quiet talk,
The night, and the late night film;
The dawn’s breezes flutter
A flutter of a moth’s wing.
As can be seen, the translator has translated the lexical item ‫ ﻓﺮاﺷﺔ‬into the
lexical item moth in place of butterfly. The main difference between moths and
butterflies is that moths are primarily nocturnal, i.e., flying at night while
butterflies are diurnal, i.e., flying in the daytime. Having taken into account the
different frames associated with the lexical item ‫ ﻓﺮاﺷﺔ‬in such a context … ،‫اﻟﻠﻴﻞ‬
‫( ﻓﻴﻠﻢ اﻟﺴﻬﺮة‬the night, and the late night film), the translator has opted for the
lexical item moth instead of butterfly, thus activating the night-frame, as opposed
to day-frame.
This means that the translator “must be aware of framing differences and
understand how linguistic and textual processes attach to frame-based
knowledge” (Neubert and Shreve 1992: 65). Thus, the translators’ role is to use
the linguistic elements that activate the relevant frames for the interpretation of
the target text, thereby enabling the target readers to draw the reasonable
contextual inferences from their frame-based knowledge. ← 26 | 27 →

2.3.2 Scripts

An extended form of frame is referred to as “script”, which represents activities,

such as giving a lecture, delivering a political speech, buying a house, opening a
bank account, visiting a dentist, eating at a restaurant, and so on. This situational
frame, that is, “script”, was developed first by Schank and Abelson’s (1977).
Building on contextual dependency theory that deals with the representation of
meaning in sentences, Schank and Abelson (1977) in their book Scripts, Plans,
Goals and Understanding introduced the concept of “script” with a view to
handling story-level understanding. To elaborate, the script that describes the
activity of visiting a dentist, for example, may be discussed here. To begin with,
it is an event frame specifying a number of requirements related to such an event
frame, such as the purpose (the reason behind visiting a dentist), properties (a
dental chair, a little sink with a cup, a dental mirror, a dental explorer, a high-
pitched drill, a periodontal probe, etc.), and the participants’ roles (a dentist, a
nurse, receptionist, etc.).
Further, there will be some preconditions, such as a common dental problem
or any other reasons. While people with a lot of problems with their teeth do, of
course, need to visit the dentist often, many other people visit a dentist because
they need regular check-ups. However, some other people go there for different
reasons, such as to straighten, lighten, reshape or repair their teeth. So, there
should be a reason. In some countries, another precondition may be required,
that is, the patient has money in order to pay for his/her NHS dental treatment.
Scripts have “a prescriptive value, since they provide information about the
goals and behaviour patterns (including linguistic behaviour) which are
acceptable in conventional situations” (López 2002: 320–321). For instance, in
the situation of visiting a dentist, the patient may well expect the receptionist and
dentist to address him/her in a formal and respectful way (unless, of course, they
have already known each other for a long time). Therefore, in such a situation,
the patient expects to hear
Greetings, such as
Good afternoon
Good evening ← 27 | 28 →

Questions, such as
Can I help you?
How can I help you?

Polite requests, such as

Can I have your name?
Can I have your date of birth?
Can I see …?
Have a seat please.

A dentist who says, for instance, Hi man, what’s up? would certainly annoy the
patient.
Further, each script consists of a number of scenes, such as entering the clinic
(entering scene), talking with the receptionist (talking scene) and waiting your
turn (waiting scene which involves many different scenes). After your name is
called in the waiting room, you will go into an exam room and sit down in a
dental chair (examining scene). Having had your teeth cleaned, flossed and
checked for cavities, you will leave the room (leaving scene). As stated above, in
some countries you may be required to pay (paying scene). At times, there will
be additional scenes, such as arranging an appointment, visiting a pharmacy, re-
entering the clinic, and so forth. As can be seen, there is an action in each scene,
such as to enter, to talk, to wait, to examine, to pay, hence the specificity of each
scene. It is worth noticing that the event frames vary from one scenario to
another, from one society to another, and so on. As such, when translating from
language or culture A into language or culture B, the translators, in an attempt to
form a mental image and, then, reflect it in the target language and culture, need
to give full consideration to all these scripts (situational frames) along with their
perspective value, scenes and actions along with their conditions and
preconditions. Further, they should be fully aware of framing differences
between the interfacing languages and cultures, thus opting for the use of certain
terms and expressions that activate the relevant frames for the interpretation of
the target text in order to enable the target readers to draw the reasonable
contextual inferences based on their frame-based knowledge. ← 28 | 29 →

2.3.3 Prototype

Closely related to frames and scripts is the concept “prototype” proposed by

Rosch and her colleagues (for more details, see Saeed 2009: 37). According to
this model, concepts are teamed up into many groups, and each group consists of
a number of members. While some of these members occupy a central position,
thus they are typical members, others are peripheral members. For example, the
lexical item horse in the category ANIMAL is a more central member than the
lexical item camel. Similarly, the lexical item orange is a more central member
than the lexical item kiwi in the category FRUIT.
Within frame semantics, the use of prototypes as a model is illustrated by
Fillmore (1977) by the analysis of the concept widow. The lexical item widow is
specified due to a background scene where a woman got married some time ago,
and then her husband died, thus affecting her entire life. Similarly, the meaning
of the lexical item divorced is specified due to a background scene where a
person is no longer married to a former husband or wife. The question that may
jump into mind here is: would you call a woman a divorced woman who had
been divorced from her husband and later got married to somebody else? In such
a case, we are not pretty sure if we can call such a woman a divorced woman any
more or not since certain properties of the background frame for this concept are
missing (Fillmore 1977).
Finally, the following individual example of a change in doxic beliefs and
practices drawn from BBC may be considered to close the discussion of this
section:
Ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is in custody following his dramatic
capture by US forces in Iraq. (BBC, 14 December 2003).

The chief lawyer for deposed Iraqi President Saddam Hussein says he has
 been denied access to his client for the first time in more than a year. (BBC, 5
February 2006).

Witnesses said there had been a wave of air strikes and that former President
Saddam Hussein’s palace had been hit. (BBC, 30 June 2014).

Here, semantically speaking, the adjective ousted, i.e., ‫ ﻣﻌﺰول‬is different from
deposed, i.e., ‫ ﻣﺨﻠﻮع‬, toppled, i.e., ‫ ﻣﻄﺎح ﺑﻪ‬or former, i.e., ‫ ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‬as each ← 29 | 30
→ has its own background frame. Further, the adjective former, i.e., ‫ ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‬used
more recently by BBC is different from deposed, toppled, and ousted in the
sense that former has a wider and less specific denotative meaning than those
offered by the other adjectives, such as deposed, toppled, and ousted. This,
according to frame semantics, explains the observed asymmetries in many
lexical relations (for more details, see Fillmore 1977, 1982; Keith 2001). The
basic idea is that language users cannot understand the meaning of a single word
without access to all the essential knowledge that relates to that word. For
example, they would not be able to understand the differences among words
like: former, toppled, deposed, and ousted without knowing anything about the
situation of taking over power, which also involves, among other things, the
political system, the way of taking over and the ex-president himself, and so on.

Further reading

Fillmore, C. (1977). “Scenes-and-frames Semantics”. In A. Zampolli (ed.),

Linguistic Structures Processing. Amsterdam: North Holland, pp. 55–82.
——. (1982). “Frame Semantics”. In Linguistics Society of Korea (ed.),
Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing, pp. 111–137.
Lehrer, A. (1974). Semantic Fields and Lexical Structure. Amsterdam: North
Holland.
López, A. M. R. (2002). “Applying Frame Semantics to Translation: A Practical
Example”, Meta: Translators’ Journal, Vol. 47 (3), pp. 312–350.
Neubert, A., and Shreve, G. M. (1992). Translation as Text. Kent, OH: The Kent
State University Press.
Nida, E. A. (1975). Componential Analysis of Meaning. The Hague: Mouton.
Saeed, J. I. (2009). Semantics (3rd edn). United Kingdom: Wiley Blackwell.
Schank, R. C. and Abelson R. P. (1977). Scripts, Plans, Goals and
Understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Steenbergen, G. van (2002). “Componential analysis of meaning and cognitive
linguistics”, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages, Vol. 28 (1), pp. 19–
38.
Trier, J. (1931). Der deutsche Wortschatz im Sinnbezirk des Verstandes. Die
Geschichte eines sprachlichen Feldes. Heidelberg: Winter. ← 30 | 31 →

Questions

1. What is the difference between “componential analysis” and “meaning

postulates approach”?
2. How would you define “frame semantics”?
3. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of componential analysis.
4. How would you know the difference between two lexical items which are
semantically related? Discuss.
5. In his book Componential Analysis of Meaning, Nida (1975) classifies the
components of any word into two main types. What are they? Discuss with
illustrative examples.
6. What is “translating by a hyponym”? Discuss with illustrative examples.

Exercises

Exercise 1: Try to suggest possible meaning postulates that capture the

relationships between the following lexical items:
1. cold and hot
2. table and sofa
3. cup and glass
4. bus and coach
5. lend and borrow
6. adviser and advisee
7. right and wrong
8. leg and body
9. hamburger and burger
10. kiwi and fruit ← 31 | 32 →
Exercise 2: What are the main scenes and actions in the following activities?

1. opening a bank account

2. giving a lecture
3. eating at a restaurant

Exercise 3: In frame semantics, frames organize stereotype knowledge about an

entity, event, situation, and the like. Building on this, what are the main frames
that may be associated with the following lexical words? Try to use IS-A
attribute and HAS attribute to identity them.

1. a car
2. a teacher
3. a book
4. a banana
5. an armchair
6. a piglet

Exercise 4: Critically discuss the following analyses of bovine terms:

bull: [+BOVINE] [+MALE] [+ADULT]

cow: [+BOVINE] [–MALE] [+ADULT]
calf: [+BOVINE] [–ADULT]

Exercise 5: How would you capture the difference in meaning between the
following lexical items?

1. library and bookshop

2. voice and sound
3. solicitor and barrister
4. garden and park
5. house and home
6. evening and night
7. to like and to love
8. to assassinate and to kill

Exercise 6: The following example quoted from Samīra Al-Māni‘ (1997: 7) and
translated by Paul Starkey (2008: 5). Critically discuss the translation of the
semantic repetition 33 | 32 ← .‫→ ﺻﻴﺎح وﺿﻮﺿﺎء‬

،‫ﺳﻤﻊ‬
ُ . ‫ أﺛﻨﺎء ﻣﺎ ﺗﻜﻮن اﻟﺴﻤﺎء ﻣﻠﺘﺼﻘﺔ ﺑﺎﻷرض ﻣﻦ ﺷﺪ ّة اﻟﻌﺘﻤﺔ‬،‫ﻓﻲ ﻟﻴﻠﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻟﻴﺎﻟﻲ ﺷﺘﺎء ﺑﻐﺪاد‬
‫ﺟﺎ ﻣﻦ إﺣﺪى ﻏﺮف داﺧﻠﻲ ﻃﺎﻟﺒﺎت ﻛﻠﻴﺔ اﻵداب‬
ً ‫ﺻﻴﺎح وﺿﻮﺿﺎء ﺧﺎر‬

One Baghdad winter’s night – a night so dark that the sky seemed to merge
into the earth – a great commotion could be heard coming from a room in the
Faculty of Languages girls’ boarding house.
| 35 →

CHAPTER 3

Morphology

Key terms

• Analytic causativity Causativity Free morphemes Grammatical morphemes

• Inflectional morphemes Lexical causativity Morpheme Morphological
• causativity Morphology Syntax Transitivity
The previous chapter looked into three main approaches to describing the
relationships between words and concepts, namely semantic field, formal
approaches (such as componential analysis and meaning postulates approach),
and frame semantics. This chapter gives full consideration to morphology,
causativity, and transitivity in a direct link with the actual act of translating a
text.

3.1 Grammar Grammar has two main dimensions:

morphology and syntax. Morphology focuses on the
structure of lexical items, the units that make up
lexical items, and the way in which the form of
lexical items varies, thus indicating ← 35 | 36 →
specific contrasts in the grammatical system of
language, such as past/present/future,
singular/dual/plural, passive/active, etc. (Almanna
2016: 83). Syntax, on the other hand, deals with the
 grammatical structure of groups of words (clauses vs
sentences), and the linear sequence of classes of
words (noun, verb, adverb, adjective, etc.). The
syntactic structure imposes restrictions on the way
messages can be organized in the text.

Syntacticians describe how words combine into phrases and clauses, and how
these combine to form sentences. For example, I bought a book two days ago is
embedded as a relative clause in the sentence The book that I bought two days
ago is quite valuable and interesting. Choices in language can be expressed
grammatically or lexically. In this respect, Almanna (2016: 82) comments:
“Choices made from closed systems (singular/dual/plural; past/present/future;
active voice/passive voice, etc.) are grammatical; those made from open-ended
sets are lexical”. Grammatical categories are not identical in all languages.
Languages differ widely in the way they map various aspects of world
experiences (for more details, see Baker 1992: 84). In this chapter, special
attention will be paid to morphology, causativity, and transitivity in a direct link
with translation.

3.2 Morphology Morphology is the study of word

formation. It is concerned with “the structure and
classification of words and the units that make up
words” (Rowe and Levine 2006/2009: 87).
Morphologists study minimal units of meaning,
called “morphemes”, and investigate the possible
combinations of these units in a language to form
words. For example, the word imperfections is
composed of four morphemes:
 im + perfect + ion + s
The root perfect is transformed from an adjective into a noun by the addition of -
ion, made negative with -im, and pluralized by -s. Morphemes are classified by
morphologists into: ← 36 | 37 →

• “grammatical morphemes” (specifying the relationship between one lexical

morpheme and another) vs “lexical morphemes” (having meaning in and of
themselves).
• “free morphemes”, such as quick, hand, read, govern, etc. (can stand alone as
words) vs “bound morphemes”, such as –ly, –ful, –able, pre–, –ment, in–, etc.
(cannot stand alone as words).
• “inflectional morphemes” (indicating certain grammatical functions of
words, such as the plural marker –s, past tense marker –ed, possessive
marker –’s, progressive marker –ing, comparative marker –er, superlative
marker –est, etc.) vs “derivational morphemes” (can change the grammatical
category, or part of speech, of a word, such as adding –ful to beauty, thus
changing the word from a noun to an adjective, beautiful) (for more details
on morphology, see Parker and Riley 1994/2010: 79–93; Rowe and Levine
2006/2009: 91–92).

Unlike English morphology, which is predominantly analytic, Arabic

morphology is synthetic (cf. Farghal and Almanna 2015). This means that the
two languages have two contrasting morphemes, thus sometimes causing
problems to translators. For instance, English words, such as readers, writers,
and players can be easily analysed into three morphemes, namely:
• a root (read/write/play) a doer morpheme (-er) a plural morpheme (-s)
In Arabic, however, the corresponding words ‫ ﻗُّﺮاء‬, ‫ﻛ ُﺘ ّﺎب‬, and ‫ﻻِﻋﺒﻴﻦ‬/‫ﻻِﻋﺒﻮن‬, do not
lend themselves to such a linear analysis, but rather they undergo vowel changes
as well as plural morphemes ‫ ﻳﻦ‬/‫ون‬within the abstract triconsonantal roots ‫ ﻗﺮأ‬, ‫ﻛﺘﺐ‬,
and ‫ﻟﻌﺐ‬. To put this differently, prelexicalized forms that have to do with
reading, writing, and playing become:
• ‫( ﻗﺎرِئ‬reader) and ‫( ﻗُّﺮاء‬readers) ‫( ﻛﺎﺗ ِﺐ‬writer) and ‫( ﻛ ُﺘ ّﺎب‬writers) ‫( ﻻِﻋﺐ‬player)
and ‫ﻻِﻋﺒﻴﻦ‬/‫( ﻻِﻋﺒﻮن‬players)
Another difference between Arabic morphology and English morphology is that
in English derivation, “the root functions as input for prefixes and ← 37 | 38 →
suffixes which may change word class” (Farghal and Almanna 2015: 54). For
example, from the verb to study, a number of words, such as: restudy, studying,
studied, studies, student, students, and so on can be created. In Arabic, however,
“the root functions as input for semantically related verbs which in turn function
as input for other derivation processes” (ibid.). Similarly, from the verb ‫س‬ َ ‫( د ََر‬to
study), the following words ‫س‬ َ ‫( دّر‬he taught), ‫( د َْرس‬lesson), ‫( دارِس‬student), ‫دارِﺳﻮن‬
(students), ‫( ﻣﺪرﺳﺔ‬school), ‫( ُﻣﺪرس‬teacher), and ‫( ﺗﺪاَرس‬to discuss) can be
generated.
With respect to translation, translators need to pay extra attention to these
semantically related Arabic words to avoid confusion that they may cause as
they sometimes lend themselves to morphologically unrelated words. To make
this point clear, the following semantically related Arabic verbs along with their
corresponding words in English may be considered:
…‫ ا ِﺳﺘﻘﺘﻞ‬،‫ ﻗﺎﺗﻞ‬،‫• ﻗﺘﻞ‬
.‫ﻗﺘﻞ اﻟﻌﺪو ﻋﺸﺮة ﺟﻨﻮد ﻣﻦ ﻗﻮاﺗﻨﺎ‬

The enemy killed ten soldiers from our troops.

.‫ﻗﺎﺗﻠﺖ ﻗﻮاﺗﻨﺎ اﻟﻌﺪو ﺑﺒﺴﺎﻟﺔ‬

Our troops fought the enemy bravely.

.‫ا ِﺳﺘﻘﺘﻞ ﻣﻦ أﺟﻞ أن ﻳﺘﺰوّﺟﻬﺎ إﻻ إﻧﻪ ﻃﻠ ّﻘﻬﺎ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺷﻬﺮﻳﻦ‬

He has made every effort in order to marry her, but divorced her after two
months.

…‫ ا ِﺳﺘﺠﻮّب‬،‫ ﺗﺠﺎوب‬،‫ ﺟﺎوب‬،‫أ•ﺟﺎب‬

.‫ ﺟﺎوب ﺟﻤﻴﻊ اﻷﺳﺌﻠﺔ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ‬/‫أﺟﺎب‬

He answered all questions correctly.

.َ ‫ا ِﺳﺘﺠﻮّب اﻟﻘﺎﺿﻲ اﻟﺸﺎﻫﺪ‬

The judge cross-examined the witness.

.‫ ﺗﺠﺎوب ﻣﻊ ﻃﻠﺒﻲ‬،‫ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﺳﺄﻟﺘﻪ ﻛﻲ ﻳﺴﺎﻋﺪﻧﻲ‬

When I asked him to help me, he had a positive reaction with my request. ←
38 | 39 →
 …‫ ﺗﻤﺎرض‬،‫ﻣﺮض‬ •
.‫ﻣﺮض اﻟﺒﺎرﺣﺔ ﻓﻨﻘﻠﻨﺎه إﻟﻰ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺸﻔﻰ‬

He felt sick last night, so we took him to hospital.

.‫ﺗﻤﺎرض ﻛﻲ ﻻ ﻳﺨﺮج ﻣﻌﻬﺎ‬

He pretended to be ill in order not to go out with her.

…‫ ﺗﺒﺎﻛﻰ‬،‫ﺑﻜﻰ‬ •
.‫ﻣﺎ إن ذﻫﺒﺖ أﻣﻪ إﻟﻰ ﻋﻤﻠﻬﺎ ﺣﺘﻰ أﺧﺬ اﻟﻄﻔﻞ ﻳﺒﻜﻲ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ‬

No sooner had his mother left for her job than the child started crying over
her.

.‫أﺧﺬ اﻟﻄﻔﻞ ﻳﺘﺒﺎﻛﻰ ﻛﻲ ﻳﻜﺴﺐ ﻋﻄﻒ واﻟﺪﻳﻪ‬

The child started to feign crying in order to gain his parents’ sympathy.

As can be observed, the verbs ‫ﻗﺎﺗﻞ‬, ‫ﻗﺘﻞ‬, and ‫ ا;ِﺳﺘﻘﺘﻞ‬the verbs ‫ﺗﺠﺎوب‬, ‫ﺎوب‬,‫ ﺟ‬and ‫ا ِ;ﺳﺘﺠﻮّب‬
the verbs ‫ﻣﺮض‬, and ‫ ; ﺗﻤﺎرض‬and the verbs ‫ ﺑﻜﻰ‬, and ‫ ﺗﺒﺎﻛﻰ‬lend themselves to
different renditions in English.
To further illuminate the importance of giving full consideration to
morphological asymmetries between the interfacing languages, the following
translation produced by a translation student can be examined: ST:

Standing in what is left of his burnt-out home this week, Jehad showed me a
photo on his mobile phone. It was of a cheeky, chunky, round-faced little boy
in denim dungarees, chuckling in a pushchair, dark-eyed with a fringe of fine
brown hair pushed across his brow.

TT:

‫ أراﻧﻲ ﺻﻮرة ﻓﻲ ﻫﺎﺗﻔﻪ‬،‫ﻘﻰ ﻣﻦ ﺑﻴﺘﻪ اﻟﻤﺤﺮوق ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬا اﻷﺳﺒﻮع‬ ّ ‫ﻔﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺎ ﺗﺒ‬

ً ‫وﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﻛﺎن ﺟﻬﺎد واﻗ‬
‫ ﻣﻤﺘﻠﺊ اﻟﺨﺪﻳﻦ وﻛﺎن ﻳﺮﺗﺪي رداًء ﻗﻄﻨﻴ ًﺎ وﻛﺎن‬،‫ ﻣﻜﺘﻨﺰ‬،‫ﺖ ﻟﻮﻟﺪ ﺻﻐﻴﺮ ذي وﺟﻪ ﻣﺴﺘﺪﻳﺮ‬.‫اﻟﻤﺤﻤﻮﻛلﺎﻧ‬
‫ﻟﻰ ﺣﺎﺟﺒﻴﻪ‬.‫ وﻋﻴﻨﺎه ﻗﺎﺗﻤﺘﺎن ذات أﻫﺪاب ﺑﻨﻴﺔ رﻗﻴﻘﺔ ﺗﺼﻞ إ‬،‫ﺿﺎﺣﻜ ًﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺮﺑﺔ أﻃﻔﺎل‬

Apparently, the student translator has confused the two semantically related
 English words cheek and cheeky when rendering the word cheeky in the source
text. Checking up the meaning of the adjective cheeky in a number of
monolingual dictionaries, it may be concluded that it has nothing to do with
cheek. Rather, it simply means slightly rude or showing no respect, but often in a
funny way. ← 39 | 40 →

3.3.1
3.3 Causativity and transitivity Causativity Causativity
(from the verb to cause) indicates that the doer of the
action or activity causes somebody or something else
to do or to become something else. In general, there
are three main types of causatives, viz. analytic
causatives, lexical causatives, and morphological
causatives. To begin with analytic causatives, they
are syntactic constructions with certain verbs.
Examples of analytic causatives in English include
verbs, such as to make, to have, and to get, as in:

The boss made her type the letter.

The boss had her type the letter.
The boss got her to type the letter.
However, examples of analytic causatives in Arabic include the use of the verb
‫(ﺟﻌﻞ‬to make), as in:
.‫ﻚ اﻷﺣﻤﻖ‬
َ ُ‫ﺲ ﻫﻮ ﺗﺼّﺮﻓ‬
ٍ ‫م أﻣ‬
َ ‫إن ﻣﺎ ﺟﻌﻠﻨﻲ أﻏﻀﺐ ﻳﻮ‬

What made me angry yesterday was your silly behaviour.

It is worth noticing that in Arabic we can reflect the same causativity, thus
producing the same mental image without using the verb ‫(ﺟﻌﻞ‬to make), as in:
.‫ﻚ اﻷﺣﻤﻖ‬
َ ُ‫ﺲ ﻫﻮ ﺗﺼّﺮﻓ‬
ٍ ‫م أﻣ‬
َ ‫إن ﻣﺎ أﻏﻀﺒﻨﻲ ﻳﻮ‬
Lexical causatives, on the other hand, are lexical items that have implicit
causativity. Examples of lexical causatives in English include verbs, such as to
kill, that is, to cause to die, to send, that is, to make somebody go, and to feed,
that is, to make somebody eat (for more details, see Goddard 1998/2011: 304).
With respect to morphological causatives, they are created by the process of
affixation. Morphological causatives in English are created by adding suffixes,
such as –en, –ify, and the like. Consider the following examples: ← 40 | 41 →

thicken, widen, blacken, awaken, loosen, sharpen, soften, strengthen, weaken,

worsen clarify, amplify, beautify, falsify, magnify, satisfy, simplify, terrify, etc.

Morphological causatives in Arabic are created easily. For instance, some verbs,
َ ‫ﺿﺤ‬, ‫ﺟﻠ َﺲ‬, ‫م‬
such as,َ ‫ﻚ‬ َ َ ‫ﻋﻄ‬
َ ‫ ﻧﺎ‬, ‫ ﺑﻜﻰ‬, ‫ﺲ‬ ,‫ﻞ‬َ َ ‫ﻋﻄ‬
, ‫ ﺳﺎﻓَﺮ‬, ‫ﻞ‬ َ ‫َر‬, ‫ﻟﺒ ِﺲ‬, etc. can be changed into
َ ‫ﺣ‬
transitive verbs, and then, causatives as they have implicit transitivity
incorporated into the verb stem.

(to make somebody laugh) ‫ﻚ‬ ّ ‫ﺿ‬/‫أﺿﺤﻚ‬vs (to laugh) ‫ﻚ‬

َ ‫ﺤ‬ َ ‫ﺿﺤ‬ •
(to make somebody cry) ‫ ﺑﻜ ّﻰ‬/‫أﺑﻜﻰ‬vs (to cry) ‫ﻰ‬
َ ‫ﺑﻜ‬ •
(to put somebody to bed; to send somebody to bed) ‫ ﻧﻮّم‬vs (to sleep) ‫ﻧﺎم‬ •
َ ّ ‫ﻋﻄ‬vs (to sneeze) ‫ﺲ‬
(to make somebody sneeze) ‫ﺲ‬ َ ‫• ﻋﻄ‬
(to break) ‫ﻋﻄ ّﻞ‬vs (to break; to be broken) ‫ ﺗﻌﻄ ّﻞ‬/‫• ﻋﻄﻞ‬
(to make somebody understand) ‫ ﻓﻬّﻢ‬/‫ أﻓﻬﻢ‬vs (to understand) ‫ ﺗﻔﻬّﻢ‬/‫ﻓﻬﻢ‬ •
(to return; to bring back; to give back) َ‫ رّﺟﻊ‬/‫ أرﺟﻊ‬vs (to return; to come •
back) َ‫رﺟﻊ‬
(to bring out; to take out; to send out; to sack out) ‫ ﺧّﺮَج‬/‫ أﺧﺮج‬vs (to go out) •
‫ﺧﺮج‬

(to graduate) ‫ ﺧّﺮَج‬vs (to graduate) ‫ﺗﺨّﺮَج‬ •

(to expel somebody from the country) ‫ ﺳّﻔَﺮ‬vs (to travel) ‫ﺳﺎﻓَﺮ‬ •
(to make somebody angry) ‫ﺐ‬ ‫( أ‬to be angry) ‫ﺐ‬
َ ‫ﻏﻀ‬vs َ ‫• ﻏﻀ‬

(to make somebody sad) ‫ﺣّﺰن‬/‫أﺣﺰَن‬vs (to be sad) ‫• ﺣﺰَن‬

(to make somebody feel ill) ‫ض‬ َ ‫أﻣﺮ‬vs (to feel sick; to be ill) ‫ض‬
َ ‫ﻣّﺮ‬/‫ض‬ َ ‫• ﻣﺮ‬
(to awake; to wake up; to awaken) ‫ ﺻّﺤﺎ‬vs (to awake; to wake up) ‫ﺻﺤﺎ‬ •
(to feed) ‫أﻃﻌﻢ‬/‫أﻛ ّﻞ‬vs (to eat) ‫ﻞ‬
َ ‫• أﻛ‬

(to give somebody a drink; to make somebody drink) ‫ب‬

َ ‫ ﺷّﺮ‬vs (to drink) •
‫ب‬
َ ‫ﺷﺮ‬
 (to teach) ‫ ﻋﻠ َّﻢ‬vs (to learn) ‫ ← • ﺗﻌﻠ ّﻢ‬41 | 42 →
(to teach) ‫س‬
َ ‫دّر‬vs (to study) ‫س‬
َ ‫• در‬
(to remind) ‫ ذﻛ َّﺮ‬vs (to remember) ‫ذﻛَﺮ‬ •
(to make somebody forget) ‫ﺴﻰ‬
ّ ‫ﻧ‬/‫أﻧﺴﻰ‬vs (to forget) ‫ﻧﺴﻰ‬ •
(to surprise) ‫ﺶ‬ َ ‫دﻫ‬vs (to be surprised) ‫• ا ِﻧﺪﻫﺶ‬
َ ‫دﻫ‬/‫ﺶأ‬
(to surprise) ‫ﺑﺎﻏﺖ‬/‫ ﻓﺎﺟﺄ‬vs (to be surprised) ‫ﺗﻔﺎﺟﺄ‬ •
(to encourage; to brave) َ‫ ﺷّﺠﻊ‬vs (to be brave; to be encouraged ) ‫ﺗﺸّﺠﻊ‬ •
(to hurt) ‫أذ ّى‬vs (to be hurt) ‫ﺗﺄذى‬ •

As can be observed, there are some English verbs that can be used both
transitively and intransitively, e.g., to break in Tom broke the window and The
window broke. With such verbs, the object of the transitive verb is identical with
the subject of the intransitive one. In the actual act of translating, translators
need to consider these linguistic asymmetries. To elaborate, the following
example may be considered:
‫ﺤﻜﺔ‬ِ ‫ﻤﻀ‬ ُ ‫اﻟ‬. ‫ﺼﺔ ﺷﻌﺮِ زﻣﻴﻠﺘ ِﻬﺎ‬
ّ ‫ ﻣﺎ أﺿﺤﻜﻬﺎ ﻗ‬.‫ﺼﻒ‬ ّ ‫ﺖ ﻛﺜﻴﺮا ً ﻣﻊ زﻣﻴﻼﺗ ِﻬﺎ أﻣﺲ ﻓﻲ داﺧﻞ اﻟ‬ ْ ‫ﺿﺤﻜ‬
Here, the verb ‫ﻚ‬ َ ‫ﺿﺤ‬ َ is an intransitive verb, that is, it does not have a direct object,
thus lending itself to the verb to laugh in the past. However, in the second
sentence the verb ‫ﻚ‬ َ ‫ أﺿ‬is transitive, that is, it needs an object. To reflect the
َ ‫ﺤ‬
transitivity, the translator may well opt for the verb to make followed by the first
form of the verb to laugh, as in:
She laughed a lot with her classmates in class yesterday. What made her
laugh was her classmate’s funny haircut.
Following is another example:
‫ﻞ؟ ﻫﻞ ﺗﺄذى؟‬ َ ‫اﻟﺬي أﺑﻜﻰ اﻟﻄﻔ‬-‫ﻣﺎ‬
،،‫ﻟﻰ ﻋﻤﻠ ِﻬﺎ‬.-‫ﻪ إ‬ُ ‫ﻣ‬ُ ‫ﺖأ‬ ْ ‫ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ذﻫﺒ‬،‫ﻜﻦ‬.‫ﻪِﻟ‬
‫ﻣو‬ِ ‫ﻒأ‬
َ ‫ﺐ ﻋﻄ‬ ُ ‫ ﻟﻜﻨﻪ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺒﺪاﻳﺔ أﺧﺬ َ ﻳﺘﺒﺎﻛﻰ ﻛﻲ ﻳﻜ‬،َ ‫ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺘﺄذ‬،‫ﻻ‬
َ ‫ﺴ‬
ً ‫ﻣّﺮا‬ ُ ‫أﺧﺬ َ اﻟﻄﻔ‬
ُ ً‫ﻞ ﻳﺒﻜﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺑ ُﻜﺎء‬
Here, the verb ‫ ﺗﺄذى‬is different from ‫ أ ﺻ ﺎ ب ﺷ ﺨ ﺼ ﺎ ً ﺑ ﺄ ذ ى‬:‫ذ ّى‬.‫ أ‬While the former is
intransitive, thus lending itself to the adjective hurt preceded by was to reflect
the tense, the latter is transitive, thus lending itself to the verb to hurt.
Translating the intransitive verb ‫ ﺗﺄذ ّى‬to an adjective preceded by verb to be ← 42
| 43 → in the past leads to “class shift” to use Catford’s (1965) terminology, that
is, changing the part of speech through the nexus of translation. Further, in the
above example, three verbs ‫ﺑﻜﻰ‬,‫ ﺗﺒﺎﻛﻰ أ‬, and ‫ ﺑﻜﻰ‬, which are semantically related,
that is, they are derived from the same root (‫) ﺑ ـ ك ى‬, are used. Therefore, extra
attention needs to be paid to their meanings, voices, etc. To begin with, the verb
‫(أﺑﻜﻰ‬also ‫ ) ﺑﻜ ّﻰ‬is a transitive verb, thus lending itself to to make somebody cry in
the past. As for the verbs ‫ﻰ‬ َ ‫( ﺑﻜ‬to cry) and ‫ﻰ‬َ ‫( ﺗﺒﺎﻛ‬to feign crying), they are
intransitive verbs. Taking into account the meanings of these verbs, the
translator may well suggest a rendering like this:
What made the child cry? Was he hurt?
No, he wasn’t. But, in the beginning he started to feign crying to gain his
mom’s sympathy. However, as soon as she went out to her job, he started to
cry over her bitterly.
Following is an example extracted from Fū’ād Al-Takarlī’s (2009: 181) story
‫(اﻟﺘﺒﺎس‬Confusion):
‫ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ أو‬، ‫ دواء ﻟﻢ ﻳﺠﺮﺑﻪ‬،‫أﺗﺬﻛ ّﺮ ﺟﻴﺪا أﻧﻲ أﺧﺒﺮﺗﻚ أﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺮة ﺑﺄن زوﺟﻲ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺄﺧﺬ ذﻟﻚ اﻟﻤﺴﺎء‬
‫أﻧﻪ ﻧﺴﻲ أن‬، ‫ ﺑﺎﻟﻀﺒﻂ ﺑﻌﻴﺪ اﻟﻌﺸﺎء‬،‫ ﻧﻌﻢ‬،‫ ﺑﻌﻴﺪ اﻟﻌﺸﺎء‬،‫ﻟﻘﺪ ﺗﺬﻛ ّﺮ‬ .‫ﺷﻴﺌﺎ ً ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﻌﺮوف ﻟﺪﻳﻨﺎ‬
‫ أﻧﻚ ﺗﻌﺮﻓﻪ‬،‫ﻻﺷﻚ‬ . ‫ﻳﺘﻨﺎول ﺣﺒﺔ اﻟﺼﺒﺎح ﻣﻦ دواء اﻟﻀﻐﻂ … ذﻟﻚ »اﻟﺘﻴﻨﻮرﻣﻴﻦ «اﻟﻤﻌﺘﺎد اﻟﺬي‬
In this example, seven verbs are used, viz. two intransitive verbs ‫( ﺗﺬﻛ ّﺮ‬to
remember) used twice and ‫( ﻧﺴﻰ‬to forget), and five transitive verbs, namely ‫أﺧﺒﺮ‬
(to tell), ‫( أﺧﺬ‬to take), ‫(ﺟّﺮب‬to try out), ‫( ﺗﻨﺎول‬to take), and ‫(ﻋﺮف‬to know). Paying
special attention to these verbs along with their tenses, aspects, and voices, a
professional translator may suggest a rendering like this:
I do remember very well telling you more than once that my husband that
evening did not take any medicine that he had not taken before or anything
else unknown to us. He remembered just after dinner, yes, exactly shortly
after dinner, that he had forgotten to take his morning tablet for hypertension,
the usual Tenormin which you no doubt know.

3.3.2 Transitivity The concept of transitivity is related by the traditional

grammarians to the types of verbs that need objects. However, transitivity
is defined by Halliday (1976: 199) as “the set of options relating to
cognitive content, ← 43 | 44 → the linguistic representation of
extralinguistic experience, whether of the phenomena of the external
world or of feelings, thoughts and perceptions”. According to Halliday,
transitivity refers to the way in which the meanings of smaller units, such
as words and expressions, are encoded in larger units, such as clauses or
sentences. Approached from such a perspective, “a number of processes
can be identified as to whether they represent an action, behaviour,
saying, state of mind, state of being or state of existing, inter alia, process
of doing, process of behaving, process of sensing, process of being and
 process of existing respectively” (Almanna 2016: 151). In studying the
type of the process of transitivity, three main components, viz. the process,
the participants, and the circumstances, should be given full
consideration. To illustrate this, these two examples extracted from
Muhsin Al-Ramlī’s story (2009: 31) ‫ﻲ‬ ّ ‫(ﺚ ﻋﻦ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺣ‬Search
‫اﻟﺒﺤ‬ for a Live Heart)
may be given full consideration:

(‫ﻣﻦ أﺣﺪﻫﺎ‬. ‫ ﻳﺨﺮج ﻫﻮ‬.‫ وﻋﻠﻰ ﺟﺎﻧﺒﻲ اﻟﻤﻤﺮ أﺑﻮاب ﻣﺮﻗﻤﺔ‬،‫ داﺧﻞ أﺣﺪ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺸﻔﻴﺎت‬،‫ﻣﻤﻓﺮﻲ(ﺿﻴﻖ‬
‫ ﻳﺜﻘﻞ ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻪ اﻷﻟﻢ واﻟﺤﺰن اﻟﺤﺎد‬،‫ﻣﺎﺳﺤﺎ ً ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ‬
Here, the original writer decides to encode and present his ideas by employing a
material process, as in:
• actor: ‫( ﻫﻮ‬he) the process of doing ‫( ﻳﺨﺮج‬to go out) goal: no goal
• circumstances: an adverb of place: ‫ ( ﻣﻦ أﺣﺪﻫﺎ‬from one of them). Here, ‫أﺣﺪﻫﺎ‬
(one of them) refers back to one of the numbered doors on both sides of the
narrow corridor in one of the hospitals.
• an adverb of manner ‫( ﻣﺎﺳﺤﺎ ً ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ‬rubbing his eyes).
• a clause of manner ‫( ﻳ ﺜ ﻘ ﻞ ﺣ ﺮ ﻛ ﺘ ﻪ ا ﻷ ﻟ ﻢ و ا ﻟ ﺤ ﺰ ن ا ﻟ ﺤ ﺎ د‬his movement weighed
down by deep pain and grief ).
To reflect the same mental image, the translator needs to pay undivided attention
to the processes of transitivity used in the original text along with their main
components. With this in mind, a professional translator may well suggest a
rendering like this: ← 44 | 45 →

In a narrow hospital corridor, there is a succession of numbered doors on

both sides. He comes out of one of them rubbing his eyes, his movement
weighed down by deep pain and grief.

Following is another example:

… ‫ ﻓﻬﻢ ﻳﺪرﻛﻮن ﺑﺄن‬،‫وﺣﺘﻰ اﻟﺠﻴﺮان ﻳﻮدون ﻟﻮ ﻳﻨﻘﻠﻮا ﻟﻨﺎ ﺧﺒﺮ ﻋﻮدﺗﻪ ﺑﺴﺮﻋﺔ ﻟﻴﻮﻗﻔﻮا ﺣﺰﻧﻨﺎ‬
‫ﻟﺤﻈﺔ ﺣﺰن إﺿﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﻗﺪ ﺗﻘﻀﻲ ﻋﻠﻴﻨﺎ‬
Here, the original writer, in an attempt to express his feelings and ideas, resorts
to certain processes, participants and circumstances. As can be noticed, five
processes are used, namely:
• a process of wishing ‫(اﻟﺠﻴﺮان ﻳﻮدون‬neighbours want).
• a material process …‫( ﻳ ﻨ ﻘ ﻠ ﻮ ا ﻟ ﻨ ﺎ ﺧ ﺒ ﺮ‬to bring us news of …) indicating an
implicit verbal process, that is, ‫( ﻳﻘﻮﻟﻮا‬they say) plus a goal ‫( ﺧﺒﺮ‬news), and an
adverb of manner ‫( ﺑﺴﺮﻋﺔ‬quickly).
• a material process ‫( ﻳﻮﻗﻔﻮا ﺣﺰﻧﻨﺎ‬they stop our sorrow) used metaphorically to
 mean to put an end to our sorrow.
• a process of sensing ‫( ﻓﻬﻢ ﻳﺪرﻛﻮن‬they realize) where ‫( ﻫﻢ‬they) is the sensor of
the process, ‫( ﻳﺪرك‬to realize) is the process of sensing, and the clause … ‫ﺑﺄن‬
(that …) is the phenomenon of the process.
• a material process ‫( ﻟﺤﻈﺔ ﺣﺰن ﻗﺪ ﺗﻘﻀﻲ ﻋﻠﻴﻨﺎ‬a moment of sorrow may destroy us)
used metaphorically to mean any other moment of sorrow might be too much
for us.
Giving full consideration to the types of processes used in the original text along
with their participants and circumstances, a well-trained translator may well
suggest a translation like this:
Neighbours, too, want to bring us news of his return as quickly as they can to
put an end to our sorrow as they realize that any other moment of sorrow may
well destroy us (Or: might be too much for us).
To finish off this section, the following example extracted from Mahmūd
‘Abdulwahhāb’s story ‫( اﻟﺸﺒﺎك واﻟﺴﺎﺣﺔ‬The Window and the Courtyard) translated
by Sadkhan and Pragnell (2012: 19; bilingual edn) may be analysed: ← 45 | 46
→
ST:

‫أﻏﻠﻘﺖ اﻟﻤﺮأة ﺿﻠﻔﺔ اﻟﺸﺒﺎك اﻟﻴﺴﺮى ﺛﻢ ﺗﺤّﺮﻛﺖ داﺧﻞ اﻟﻐﺮﻓﺔ وﺟﻠﺴﺖ ﺧﻠﻒ ﻣﻨﻀﺪة ﺻﻐﻴﺮة ﻣﻜﺴﻮّة‬
‫ رأس ﻓﺘﺎة زﻧﺠﻴﺔ‬. ‫ﺑﺸﺮﺷﻒ أﺻﻔﺮ وﺿﻊ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺻﻨﺪوق ﺧﺸﺒﻲ ﺻﻐﻴﺮ ﻣﺤﻔﻮر ﻋﻠﻰ ﻏﻄﺎﺋﻪ‬

TT:

The woman shut the left side of the window, and then moved inside the room
and sat down at a small table covered by a yellow sheet. On it there was a
small wooden box, its cover carved with the head of a Negro woman.

Here, the original writer, in an attempt to express the mental image that he has of
the world around him, decides to opt for certain processes and participants, and
determined in advance which participant will act and which one will be acted on.
As can be noticed, six processes are used, as in:
• a material process ‫(ﻠﻘﺖ اﻟﻤﺮأة ﺿﻠﻔﺔ اﻟﺸﺒﺎك اﻟﻴﺴﺮى‬the
‫أﻏ‬ woman shut the left side of
the window): ‫( اﻟﻤﺮأة‬the woman) is the actor of the process, ‫(أﻏﻠﻖ‬to shut) is the
process of doing, and ‫(ﺿﻠﻔﺔ اﻟﺸﺒﺎك اﻟﻴﺴﺮى‬the left side of the window) is the goal
of the process.
• a material process without a goal ‫( ﺗ ﺤ ّﺮ ﻛ ﺖ د ا ﺧ ﻞ ا ﻟ ﻐ ﺮ ﻓ ﺔ‬she moved inside the
 room): the implicit pronoun ‫( ﻫﻲ‬she) is the actor of the process, ‫( ﺗﺤّﺮك‬to
move) is the process of doing, and ‫(داﺧﻞ اﻟﻐﺮﻓﺔ‬inside the room) is an adverb of
place.
• a material process without a goal ‫(ﻠﺴﺖ ﺧﻠﻒ ﻣﻨﻀﺪة‬she ‫ﺟ‬ sat down at a table): the
implicit pronoun ‫(ﻫﻲ‬she) is the actor of the process, ‫( ﺟﻠﺲ‬to sit down) is the
process of doing, and ‫(ﺧﻠﻒ ﻣﻨﻀﺪة‬at a table) is an adverb of place.
• an implicit material process ‫( ﻣ ﻨ ﻀ ﺪ ة ﺻ ﻐ ﻴ ﺮ ة ﻣ ﻜ ﺴ ﻮّة ﺑ ﺸ ﺮ ﺷ ﻒ أ ﺻ ﻔ ﺮ‬a small table
covered by a yellow table-cloth): the actor is unknown, ‫( ﻛﺴﻰ‬to cover) is the
process of doing, and ‫( ﻣﻨﻀﺪة ﺻﻐﻴﺮة‬a small table) is the goal of the process.
• a material process ‫( وﺿﻊ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺻﻨﺪوق ﺧﺸﺒﻲ ﺻﻐﻴﺮ‬a small wooden box was put on
it): the actor is unknown, ‫( وﺿﻊ‬to put) is the process of doing, and ‫( ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ‬on it –
it refers back to the table) is an adverb of place. This material process
functions as an existential process: an existent ‫( ﺻ ﻨ ﺪ و ق ﺧ ﺸ ﺒ ﻲ ﺻ ﻐ ﻴ ﺮ‬a small
wooden box), an implicit process of existing ‫( ﻳﻮﺟﺪ‬there was), and an adverb
of place ‫( ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ‬on it). ← 46 | 47 →
• an implicit material process ‫( ﻣﺤﻔﻮر ﻋﻠﻰ ﻏﻄﺎﺋﻬﺎ رأس ﻓﺘﺎة زﻧﺠﻴﺔ‬its cover was carved
with the head of a Negro woman): the actor is unknown, ‫( ﺣﻔﺮ‬to carve) is the
process of doing, and ‫( رأس ﻓﺘﺎة زﻧﺠﻴﺔ‬the head of a Negro woman) is the goal
of the process.
Being fully aware of the types of processes along with their participants and
circumstances, the translators have succeeded in offering an equivalent text that
effectively reflects the types of processes along with their participants and
circumstances, thus producing an accurate mental image.

Further reading Almanna, A. (2016). The Routledge

Course in Translation Annotation: Arabic-English-
Arabic. London/New York: Routledge.

Farghal, M., and Almanna, A. (2015). Contextualizing Translation Theories:

Aspects of Arabic-English Interlingual Communication. Newcastle upon
Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Goddard, C. (1998/2011). Semantic Analysis: A Practical Introduction. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1976). “Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English. Part 2”,
International Journal of Language and Philosophy, Vol. 3 (1), pp. 199–
244.
Rowe, B. M., and Levine, D. P. (2006/2009). A Concise Introduction to
Linguistics. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
Thakur, D. (1999). Linguistics Simplified: Semantics. New Delhi: Bharati
Bhawan.

Questions It is argued that English and Arabic represent

two contrasting morphologies. While English
morphology is predominantly analytic, Arabic
morphology is largely synthetic. Explain with illustrative
examples.

2. Morphemes are classified by morphologists into many types. What are they?
← 47 | 48 →
3. How would you define “morphology” and “syntax”?
4. What are the main types of causatives? Discuss with illustrative examples.
5. What is transitivity according to the traditional grammarians?

Exercises Exercise 1: Try to identify the functions

achieved by the morphemes (-able, im-, in-, and -less) in
these words (achievable, impolite, independent, and
wireless), and then suggest equivalents to them in Arabic.

Exercise 2: Analyse the meanings of the morphemes in these words: invention,

indispensable, politeness, interviewee, and unemployment.
Exercise 3: Identify the type of causativity in the following sentences:
1. I made him wash my car yesterday.
2. They had him sing in the party.
3. The police killed the thief while leaving the house.
4. His father sent him to the nearest pharmacy.
5. Before going to bed, she sent her naughty boy to bed.
Exercise 4: Identify the types of processes along with their participants and
circumstances in the following text extracted from Mahmūd ‘Abdulwahhāb’s
(2012: 19) story ‫(اﻟﺸﺒﺎك واﻟﺴﺎﺣﺔ‬The Window and the Courtyard). Then, translate it
into English.

.‫أﻃﻠﺖ اﻣﺮأة ﻓﻲ اﻷرﺑﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺸﺒﺎك ﺗﺮاﻗﺐ اﻟﻄﺮﻳﻛﺎﻖ‬

‫ن اﻟﻤﻄﺮ ﻳﻨﻬﻤﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ أﻋﺎﻟﻲ اﻟﺒﻴﻮت وأﻋﻤﺪة‬
‫ﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻠﺤﻈﺔ اﻟﺘﻲ‬.‫ ﻳﻘﻔﺰان داﺧﻞ ﺑﺎص اﻟ‬،‫ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺸﺎرع‬،‫ ﺷﺨﺼﺎن‬.‫اﻟﺘﻠﻔﺰﻳﻮن ورؤوس اﻷﺷﺠﺎر‬
‫ﺗﺤﺮك ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‬
| 49 →

CHAPTER 4

Affixation
Key terms

• Affixation
• Chameleon prefixes
• Homonymous affixes
• Inflectional morphemes
• Polysemous affixes
• Prefixation
• Suffixation

The previous chapter considered the similarities and differences in morphology,

causativity, and transitivity between Arabic and English. This chapter examines
affixation, such as infixes, prefixes, and suffixes, in a direct link with the actual
act of translating a text.

4.1 Affixation

Affixation refers to the addition of prefixes, suffixes or infixes (an infix means a
letter or a group of letters added within the word stem in some languages, such
as Arabic). To begin with English affixation, a prefix is a letter or a group of
letters attached to the beginning of a word and changes its original meaning. A
suffix, however, is a letter or a group of letters attached to the end of a word and
changes the way a word fits into a sentence grammatically. For its turn, Arabic
has prefixes, infixes and suffixes; however, they are derivational and
inflectional, that is, they are limited in number. For ← 49 | 50 → example, the
prefix ‫ ﻣـ‬is attached in Arabic to a number of verbs to indicate the place where
an action or event is done, such as:

Word stem (verb) Place

• ‫ﺐ‬َ َ ‫(ﻛ َﺘ‬to write) — ‫(ﻣﻜﺘﺐ‬office)
• ‫(ﻋَﻤَﻞ‬to work) — ‫(ﻣﻌﻤﻞ‬factory)
• —
• —
َ ‫ﻧَﺰع‬ (to take off) ‫ﻣﻨﺰع‬ (changing room)
• ‫ﺢ‬ َ ‫ ذﺑ‬or ‫ﺦ‬ َ ‫( ﺳﻠ‬to slaughter) — ‫ ﻣﺬﺑﺢ‬/‫( ﻣﺴﻠﺦ‬slaughterhouse)
• ‫( ﺳﻌﻰ‬to move or attempt) — ‫(ﻣﺴﻌﻰ‬attempt or effort)
• ‫(رﻣﻰ‬to throw) — ‫(ﻣﺮﻣﻰ‬goal, range or distance)
• َ‫( وﺿﻊ‬to put) — ‫( ﻣﻮﺿﻊ‬position)
• َ‫( وﻗﻊ‬to fall) — ‫( ﻣﻮﻗﻊ‬site or location)
• ‫ل‬ َ ‫( ﻧﺰ‬to go down) — ‫(ﻣﻨﺰل‬house)
• ‫ﻂ‬َ ‫( ﻫﺒ‬to land) — ‫( ﻣﻬﺒﻂ‬landing ground or landing field)
• َ ‫( ﺻﻌﺪ‬to go up) — ‫( ﻣﺼﻌﺪ‬lift)
• ‫ﻞ‬ َ ‫(دﺧ‬to enter) — ‫(ﻣﺪﺧﻞ‬entrance)
• ‫ج‬ َ ‫( ﺧﺮ‬to go out) — ‫( ﻣﺨﺮج‬exit)
• َ ‫(ﺟﻠ‬to sit)
‫ﺲ‬ — ‫( ﻣﺠﻠﺲ‬sitting room or council)

However, the prefix ‫ ﻣـ‬is also added to word stems, such as ‫( رش‬to spry or
sprinkle), َ ‫( ﺑ ََﺮد‬to file), and ‫ﻚ‬
ّ ‫( ﻓ‬to unscrew) to change them into nouns of
instruments, as in ‫( ﻣﺮش‬sprayer or sprinkler), ‫( ﻣﺒﺮد‬file), and ‫( ﻣﻔﻚ‬screw driver)
respectively. The same prefix ‫ ﻣـ‬can be added along with the infix ‫ ـــﺎ‬to word
stems, such as ‫( ﻓﺘﺢ‬to open), and ‫ث‬ َ ‫(ﺣﺮ‬to cultivate) to change them to nouns of
instruments, as in ‫( ﻣﻔﺘﺎح‬key), and ‫(ﻣﺤﺮاث‬plough) respectively.
The suffix ‫ﻲ‬,‫ ـ‬however, is added to a number of nouns to indicate nationalities,
as in:

Noun Nationality
• ‫(ﻋﺮاق‬Iraq) — ‫(ﻋﺮاﻗﻲ‬Iraqi)
• ‫( ﻣﺼﺮ‬Egypt) — ‫(ﻣﺼﺮي‬Egyptian)
• ‫(ﻋ ُﻤﺎن‬Oman) — ‫(ﻋ ُﻤﺎﻧﻲ‬Omani)
• ‫( ﺗﻮﻧﺲ‬Tunisia) — ‫( ﺗﻮﻧﺴﻲ‬Tunisian)
• ‫(ﻛﻮﻳﺖ‬Kuwait) — ‫( ﻛﻮﻳﺘﻲ‬Kuwaiti)
• ‫( ﻗﻄﺮ‬Qatar) — ‫( ﻗﻄﺮي‬Qatari) ← 50 | 51 →

The same suffix ‫ــﻲ‬can be added to nouns, such as ‫( رﻣﻞ‬sand), ‫( ﺛﻠﺞ‬snow), ‫ﺷﻤﺲ‬
(sun), ‫( ﻗﻤﺮ‬moon), ‫( أرض‬earth), ‫( ﻫﻮاء‬air), ‫( ﺻﺤﺮاء‬desert), ‫( ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻢ‬education), and
the like to change them into adjectives, as in ‫( رﻣﻠﻲ‬sandy), ‫( ﺛﻠﺠﻲ‬snowy), ‫ﺷﻤﺴﻲ‬
(solar), ‫( ﻗﻤﺮي‬lunar), ‫(أرﺿﻲ‬land or soil), ‫(ﻫﻮاﺋﻲ‬airy), ‫( ﺻﺤﺮاوي‬desert-like), and ‫ﻲ‬
ّ ‫ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻤ‬
(educational) respectively.
Translating suffixes and prefixes from Arabic into English does not cause a
serious problem to translators as they are limited in number. However,
translating suffixes and prefixes from English into Arabic requires extra effort.
This is because a wide-range of English prefixes and suffixes are borrowed from
Latin and Greek, thus it is not an easy task to figure out their exact meanings.
Further, some of them have several related and/or unrelated meanings (see
below). As such, in the following sections full consideration will be given to
English affixations and their translations into Arabic.

4.2 Changes associated with affixation

While the addition of the prefix dis- to the verb like to form dislike is an example
of prefixation, the addition of the suffix –er to the verb teach to form the noun
teacher is an example of suffixation. With affixation (in particular suffixation),
there must be a change at all or most of these levels:

• the morphological level

• the syntactic level
• the semantic level
• the phonological level

To make this point clear, the adjective large may be considered. The addition of
the prefix en-, for instance, to it will change it

• at the level of morphology (two morphemes en + large in place of just one

morpheme, i.e., large). ← 51 | 52 →
• at the level of syntax (it will function as a verb instead of an adjective).
• at the level of semantics (it will be changed into the meaning of causing
something larger or becoming larger).
• at the level of phonology (there will be no change).

However, the addition of the suffix –ise (also –ize) to the noun critic will change
it at the four levels, including the phonological level.

4.3 Suffixes and prefixes in English

In this section, an attempt will be made to provide the reader with the meanings
of the suffixes and prefixes commonly used in English. Following are examples
of English prefixes:

Prefix Meaning
ante- before, as in antenatal, anteroom, antedate, and the like.
anti- against or opposing, as in antibiotics, antidepressant, antidote,
antisocial, and the like.
co- with, as in co-author, co-translator, co-worker, co-pilot, co-
operation, and the like.
de- off, down or away from, as in defame, defrost, destabilize, devalue,
and the like.
dis- not or opposite of, as in disagree, disappear, disapprove, disembark,
dislike, and the like.
ex- former, out of or away from, as in ex-boyfriend, ex-girlfriend, ex-
husband, ex-mayor, ex-president, ex-wife, export, exhale, exclusive,
and the like.
extra- beyond or more than, as in extracurricular, extraordinary, and the
like.
fore- before, as in forehead, foresee, foreword, foremost, and the like. ←
52 | 53 →
hyper- over or above, as in hyperactive, hypertension, hypermarket, and the
like.
micro- small, as in microscope, microbiology, microfilm, microwave, and the
like.
mid- middle, as in midfielder, midway, and the like.
mis- wrong or bad, as in misinterpret, misread, misspell, misunderstand,
and the like.
mono- one or singular, as in monotone, monolithic, and the like.
re- again, as in, rediscover, redo, replay, reread, rewrite, and the like.
semi- half, as in semicircle, semi-final, and the like.
sub- under, as in sub-category, sub-divide, submarine, subtitle, and the
like.
super- above or over, as in superimpose, superman, supermarket,
supernatural, superstar, and the like.
trans- across or beyond, as in transport, transnational, transatlantic, and
the like.
tri- three, as in triangle, tricycle, and the like.
un- not, as in undone, unfair, unfriendly, unhappy, unknown, and the like.
uni- one, as in unicorn, unicycle, uniform, unilateral, universal, and the
like.

Suffixes can be classified into four main groups, namely noun suffixes, verb
suffixes, adjective suffixes and adverb suffixes:
Noun suffixes

Suffix Meaning
-acy state or quality, as in accuracy, determinacy, democracy, and the like.
-al the action or process of, as in criminal, denial, trial, and the like. ←
53 | 54 →
-ance/-ence state or quality of, as in absence, acceptance, annoyance,
dependence, equivalence, maintenance, negligence, tolerance, and
the like.
-dom condition of, state of being or realm, as in boredom, freedom,
kingdom, stardom, wisdom, and the like.
-er/-or doer of an action, as in creator, collaborator, doctor, editor,
interpreter, inventor, investor, reader, reviser, teacher, translator,
and the like.
-ism state, quality, doctrine or belief, as in capitalism, heroism, idealism,
socialism, terrorism, tourism, and the like.
-ist person or doer of an action, as in artist, communist, geologist,
linguist, scientist, theorist, and the like.
-ment action, result or condition, as in argument, enchantment, government,
movement, shipment, and the like.
-ness state of being or quality, as in coldness, happiness, heaviness,
highness, kindness, illness, sadness, shyness, sickness, tiredness,
weakness, and the like.
-ship state or condition of, skill of or position held, as in authorship,
citizenship, friendship, hardship, internship, scholarship, and the
like.
-sion/-tion state of being or quality, action or process, as in attention,
celebration, caution, completion, navigation, position, promotion,
decision, and the like.

Verb suffixes

Suffix Meaning
-ate to make or become, as in activate, collaborate, evaporate, facilitate,
mediate, medicate, and the like.
-en to make, as in awaken, fasten, loosen, sharpen, soften, strengthen,
weaken, worsen, and the like.
-ify/-fy to make or cause, as in amplify, beautify, falsify, justify, magnify,
satisfy, simplify, terrify, and the like.
-ise/-ize to cause, treat or become, as in authorize, criticize, conceptualize,
contextualize, culturalize, publicize, and the like. ← 54 | 55 →

Adjective suffixes

Suffix Meaning
-able/ible capable of being, as in audible, drinkable, doable, edible, excitable,
incredible, notable, preventable, portable, readable, and the like.
-al relating to, having the form or character of, as in bacterial, colonial,
herbal, international, national, natural, theatrical, and the like.
-ful full of, as in forceful, helpful, skilful, thankful, and the like.
-ic/-ical relating to, characterized by or having the form, as in analytic,
analytical, comic, comical, economic, economical, historical,
organic, psychological, nonsensical, musical, and the like.
-ious/-ous having the qualities of, full of or characterized by, as in ambitious,
cautious, dangerous, gracious, jealous, religious, ridiculous, and the
like.
-ish relating to or having the quality of, as in childish, sheepish,
squeamish, and the like.
-ive having the nature of, inclined to or have the quality of, as in
attractive, attentive, expensive, informative, inquisitive, repulsive,
and the like.
-less without, as in fearless, homeless, hopeless, meaningless, wireless,
and the like.
-y made up of, characterized by or having, as in airy, angry, brainy,
fruity, hungry, icy, jumpy, sandy, teary, and the like.

Adverb suffixes

Suffix Meaning
-ly in the manner of, as in angrily, crazily, happily, quickly, slowly,
softly, and the like.
-ward/wards specifying direction, as in backwards, eastward, homeward, inward,
 towards, and the like.
-wise in relation to, in the manner of or direction of, as in clockwise,
lengthwise, likewise, otherwise, timewise, and the like. ← 55 | 56 →

4.4 Polysemous prefixes and suffixes

Polysemy (see Chapter 7 for more details) refers to the words that have at least
two different but related meanings. Just as there are polysemous words, there are
polysemous prefixes or suffixes, that is, there are prefixes and suffixes that have
at least two different but related meanings. Consider the following polysemous
prefixes and suffixes adapted from Thakur (1999: 52–53):

Affix Meaning
bi- a. twice in one period, as in biannual, bimonthly, and so forth.
b. having two, as in bicycle, bilingual, bilateral, bidirectional, and
so forth.
-ful a. having much of or being full of, as in beautiful, cheerful,
forceful, harmful, meaningful, painful, peaceful, successful,
useful, sorrowful, and so forth.
b. amount that fills, as in fistful, spoonful, handful, mouthful, and so
forth.
-ery a. art of, as in cookery, pottery, and so forth.
b. place of an action, as in bakery, fishery, and so forth.
-ette a. diminutive, as in cigarette, diskette, kitchenette, and so forth.
b. imitation, as in leatherette, and so forth.
-ish a. of or like, as in boyish, childish, girlish, mannish, and so forth.
b. almost, as in greenish, reddish, yellowish, twentyish, thirtyish,
and so forth.
-less a. having not or without, as in, childless, friendless, homeless,
humorless, wireless, and so forth.
b. not causing or giving, as in harmless, painless, and so forth.
un- a. not, as in uncertain, unsure, uncomfortable, unhappy, unable,
unfair, and so forth.
b. do the reverse of, as in undress, uncover, undo, unzip, unscrew,
unbutton, and so forth. ← 56 | 57 →
4.5 Homonymous prefixes and suffixes

Just as there are homonymous words, that is, words that have at least two
different unrelated meanings, there are homonymous prefixes and suffixes.
Consider the following examples adapted from Thakur (1999: 53):

Affix Meaning
a- a. not or without, as in agnostic, amoral, apolitical, asexual,
asymmetrical, atheist, atypical, and so on.
b. in the state of, as in ablaze, afloat, asleep, and so on.
dis- a. not, as in disbelieve, dislike, distrust, displeasure, and so on.
b. to know something or to make it known, as in disclose, discover,
and so on.
c. to change, as in discolour, and so on.
-er a. the doer of an action, as in builder, designer, player, reviser,
singer, teacher, and so on.
b. the comparative degree, as in bigger, nicer, older, shorter,
smaller, richer, and so on.
-ly a. every, as in hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, annually, yearly, and
so on.
b. having the quality of, as in, manly, neighbourly, friendly,
scholarly, and so on.

4.6 Chameleon prefixes

Chameleon prefixes appear at the beginning of a word and cannot be removed

from it, that is, it is an intrinsic part of the word. Unlike the other types of
prefixes, these chameleon prefixes change their spelling and physical forms
slightly to suit the word attached to it. Following are some examples of
chameleon prefixes: ← 57 | 58 →

Chameleon prefixes Meaning

a- not or without, as in apathy, anaemic, and the like.
com- with or jointly, as in company, comrade, community, and the like.
contra- against, as in contraceptive, contradict, and the like.
de- down or away, as in descend, and the like.
ex- out of or outside, as in exit, exhort, and the like.
homo- same, as in homogeneous, and the like.
para- beside, as in paradox, and the like.
sub- under, as in substitute, and the like.
trans- through or across, as in transmit, transcend, and the like.
tri- three, as in triceps, triathlon, and the like.

4.7 Translating English suffixes and prefixes

As can be observed, there are several methods to translate English prefixes and
suffixes along with their word stems into Arabic:

• it can be translated into one word, as in renew ‫ ﻳ ُﺠﺪ ّد‬, supermarket ‫ ﺑﻘﺎﻟﺔ‬,
builder ‫ ﺑﻨ ّﺎء‬, singer ‫ﻣﻐﻨ ّﻲ‬, reviser ‫ ﻣﺮاﺟﻊ‬, translator ‫ﻣﺘﺮﺟﻢ‬, unbutton ‫ اﻷزرار ﻳﻔﺘﺢ‬,
disappear ‫ﻳﺨﺘﻔﻲ‬, homeless ‫ﻣﺸّﺮد‬, discover ‫ﻳﻜﺘﺸﻒ‬, cigarette ‫ ﺳﻴﻜﺎرة‬, successful
‫ ﻧﺎﺟﺢ‬, useful ‫ﻣﻔﻴﺪ‬, beautiful ‫ﺟﻤﻴﻞ‬, disbeliever ‫ ﻛﺎﻓِﺮ‬, bakery ‫ ﻣﺨﺒﺰ‬, etc.
• it can be translated into a genitive construction, as in: defamation ‫ﺗﺸﻮﻳُﻪ‬
ِ‫ اﻟﺴﻤﻌﺔ‬, bilingual ِ‫ﻲ اﻟﻠﻐﺔ‬ ُ ‫ ﺛﻨﺎﺋ‬, deforestation ‫ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺗﻘﻠﻴ ﻞ اﻟ ﻐﺎ ﺑﺎت‬, depopulation ‫ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺴﻜﺎن‬ ُ ‫ ﻓﺮ‬, etc.
ّ ‫ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞ اﻟ‬, overproduction ‫ط اﻻ ِﻧﺘﺎِج‬
• it can be translated into a prepositional phrase, as in: underground ‫ﺗﺤﺖ اﻷر ض‬,
and the like.
• it can be translated into a compound word, as in decentralization ‫اﻟﻼﻣﺮﻛﺰﻳﺔ‬,
apolitical ‫ﻲ‬ ّ ‫ ﻻ ﺳﻴﺎﺳ‬, and the like. ← 58 | 59 →
• it be translated into a noun phrase, as in infrastructure ‫ ﺑ ُﻨ ﻴ ﺔ ﺗ ﺤ ﺘ ﻴ ّﺔ‬,
superstructure ‫ ﺑ ُﻨﻴﺔ ﻓﻮﻗﻴ ّﺔ‬, bicycle ‫دراﺟﺔ ﻫﻮاﺋﻴ ّﺔ‬, antibiotics ّ‫ﻣﻀﺎد ٌ ﺣﻴﻮي‬, kitchenette
‫ﺦ ﺻﻐﻴﺮ‬ٌ ‫ ﻣﻄﺒ‬, etc.

To elaborate, the lexical item destabilize in following example may be given

adequate consideration:

Yesterday, the Iraqi government accused the neighbouring countries,

particularly Turkey of destabilizing the country.

Here, the addition of the suffix –ize to the adjective stable changes it into a verb,
that is, causing something stable or becoming stable. However, the addition of
the prefix de- to the verb stabilize changes its meaning into the opposite despite
the fact that it does not change its word class. Being aware of the meanings and
functions of the prefix de- and suffix –ize, the translator may well opt for a
genitive construction ‫زﻋﺰﻋُﺔ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم‬, as in:

.‫ وﺑﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺎ ﺑﺰﻋﺰﻋﺔ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم‬،‫ﺖ اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣُﺔ اﻟﻌﺮاﻗﻴُﺔ دوَل اﻟﺠﻮار ﻳﻮم أﻣﺲ‬
ْ ‫ا ِﺗ ّﻬﻤ‬

Following are two examples translated by Safīa Al-Sa‘dī in her final translation
project entitled Life in Japan (2015: 2):
ST:

One of the first things you notice in Japan – trash cans are impossible to find
at public places!

TT:

‫ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ‬. ‫ﻓﺄوّل اﻷﺷﻴﺎء اﻟﺘﻲ ﺳﺘﻼﺣﻈﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻴﺎﺑﺎن ﻫﻮ اﺳﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ أن ﺗﺠﺪ ﺻﻨﺎدﻳﻖ اﻟﻘﻤﺎﻣﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻷﻣﺎﻛﻦ‬

In the above example, the lexical item impossible has been translated into one
word, that is, ‫اﺳﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ‬. Being fully aware of the meaning and function of the prefix
im- added to the adjective possible, the translator has opted for the noun ‫اﺳﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ‬
(impossibility). Here, there is an example of “class shift” to use Catford’s (1965)
term. Class shift occurs when a source language item, such as the adjective
impossible is translated into a target language item ← 59 | 60 → which belongs
to a different grammatical class, such as the noun ‫( اﺳﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ‬for more details on
shift see Almanna 2016: 61–64).
ST:

When living in Japan, you will learn a lot about handling trash. As the
islands are tiny and densely populated, it was crucial for the Japanese to
focus on recycling and minimizing their impact on the nature around.

TT:

‫وﻷن‬.‫ ﻓﺈن اﻟﺘﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻊ اﻟﻨﻔﺎﻳﺎت ﻫﻮ أﺣﺪ اﻷﻣﻮر اﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﺘﻌﻠ ّﻤﻬﺎ‬،‫ﻓﻲ اﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﺗﻌﻴﺶ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻴﺎﺑﺎن‬
‫ اﻟﺘﺪوﻳﺮ وﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ‬. ‫ ﻓﻘﺪ ﻛﺎن ﺣﺮﻳ ّﺎ ً ﺑﺎﻟﻴﺎﺑﺎﻧﻴﻴﻦ أن ﻳﺮﻛ ّﺰوا ﻋﻠﻰ إﻋﺎدة‬،‫ﺴﻜﺎن‬
ّ ‫اﻟﺠﺰر ﺻﻐﻴﺮة وآﻫﻠﺔ ﺑﺎﻟ‬
 ‫اﻟﻨﻔﺎﻳﺎت ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻄﺒﻴﻌﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﻴﻄﺔ ﺑﻬﻢ‬

Here, the suffix –ese added to Japan and prefix re- added to the verb cycle will
be given full consideration. To begin with the suffix -ese, it is added to the
names of the countries to refer to the people of that country. The prefix re- added
to the verb cycle, however, does not change its word class, but adds a specific
meaning to the verb cycle, that is, again. Paying undivided attention to their
meanings and functions, the translator has opted for ‫اﻟﻴﺎﺑﺎﻧﻴﻴﻦ‬in a genitive case to
refer to the people of Japan and a genitive construction ‫ إﻋﺎدة اﻟﺘﺪوﻳﺮ‬to stand for the
verb recycle. As can be observed, there is a combination of both class shift, that
is, changing parts of speech, and unit shift, that is, translating a word into a
phrase. It is worth noting that such a shift cannot be avoided due to the
differences between the interfacing languages.
Further reading

Almanna, A. (2016). The Routledge Course in Translation Annotation: Arabic-

English-Arabic. London/New York: Routledge.
Farghal, M., and Almanna, A. (2015). Contextualizing Translation Theories:
Aspects of Arabic-English Interlingual Communication. Newcastle upon
Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press. ← 60 | 61 →
Rowe, B. M., and Levine, D. P. (2006/2009). A Concise Introduction to
Linguistics. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
Thakur, D. (1999). Linguistics Simplified: Semantics. New Delhi: Bharati
Bhawan.
Questions

1. In English, it is claimed that the suffix –able is attached only to transitive

verbs, as in readable, breakable, washable, debateable, useable, doable,
drivable, etc. However, there are some intransitive verbs, such as run that
takes the –able, as in runnable. Are there other intransitive verbs that can
take the suffix –able?
2. What do “infixes” mean? Discuss with illustrative examples.
3. What do “chameleon prefixes” mean? Discuss with illustrative examples.
4. With affixation (in particular suffixation), there must be a change at
different levels. Discuss with illustrative examples.
5. To translate English prefixes and suffixes into Arabic, there are several
methods. What are they?
Exercises

Exercise 1: Read the following pairs of words, paying extra attention to the
affixes attached to them and decide whether they are examples of polysemy,
homonymy or neither:

1. sleepless – childless
2. spoonful – successful
3. unhappy – uncover
4. ablaze – asymmetric
5. yellowish – girlish
6. bilingual – bimonthly
7. friendly – quickly
8. discover – disembark ← 61 | 62 →
9. misunderstand – misbehave
10. irregular – irrelevant

Exercise 2: Read the following pairs of words, paying extra attention to the
prefixes attached to them and decide whether they are examples of chameleon
prefixes or not:

1. paradox
2. exist
3. asocial
4. apathy
5. company
6. substitute
7. atypical
8. coordinator
9. defame
10. bicycle

Exercise 3: Read the following pairs of words, paying extra attention to the
affixes attached to them and decide whether they are examples of class-
maintaining affixes or class-changing affixes:

1. amoral
2. unhappy
3. mishear
4. foreman
5. co-author
6. mileage
7. usherette
8. telegram
9. pre-war
10. supermarket
11. quickly
12. undo
13. criticize
14. hyperactive
15. friendship
16. spoonful
17. boredom
18. booklet
19. waitress
20. childish

Exercise 4: Identify the meanings and functions of the following prefixes and
suffixes in the following words:

1. (mal-) in maltreatment and malware

2. (in-) in incomplete and incoherent
3. (ex-) in ex-wife and ex-president
4. (-ment) in government and management ← 62 | 63 →
5. (anti-) in antisocial and antibiotic
6. (de-) in defrost and defame
7. (dis-) in distrust and discover
8. (-able) in readable and drinkable
9. (-ness) in kindness and tiredness
10. (multi-) in multipurpose and multilingual
Exercise 5: The following text is extracted from Hans Küng’s Book Islam: Past,
Present and Future. Comment on the following translation produced by one of
the translation students, paying particular attention to the translation of the
prefixes and suffixes (cited in Al-Shuraīqī 2016: 23):
ST:

The Islamic economy had hardly any comparable stimuli from religion.
Changes of mentality were at best superficial. Immobility, intellectual
laziness and economic incompetence were widespread.

TT:
.‫وﺑﺎﻟﻜﺎد ﻟﻌﺐ اﻟﺪﻳﻦ دورا ً ﻣﻤﺎﺛﻼ ً ﻓﻲ اﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎد اﻹﺳﻼﻣ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﻜﺎﻧﺖ اﻟﺘﻐﻴﺮات اﻟﻔﻜﺮﻳﺔ ﻓﻲ أﻓﻀﻞ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮا‬. ‫ﻞ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻛﺎن اﻟﺘﺨﻠ ّﻒ اﻟﻔﻜﺮي واﻟﻌﺠﺰ اﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎدي اﻹﺳﻼﻣﻲ‬.‫ﺸﺔﻜ‬ ‫اﻟﻈﺎوﻫﺑﺮﻳ‬
| 65 →

CHAPTER 5

Tense and Aspect

Key terms

• Aspect
• Atelicity
• Perfect aspect
• Perfect progressive aspect
• Progressive aspect
• Simple aspect
• Telicity
• Tense

The previous chapter looked into infixes, prefixes, and suffixes in Arabic and
English. This chapter gives full consideration to tense and aspect in a direct link
with the actual work of the translators.

5.1 Tenses versus aspects

Both “tense” and “aspect” refer to time. So, what is the difference between
them? Although both of them “convey temporal information about a described
event or state of affairs”, tense refers to when an event or situation happens, thus
locating the described event or state of affairs on the timeline: past, present, or
future (Kearns 2000/2011: 176). However, aspect refers to how a described
event or situation happens. In English, for instance, there are four types of
aspect, viz. “simple aspect”, “perfect aspect”, “progressive aspect”, and “perfect
progressive aspect” (cf. Celce-Murcia and ← 65 | 66 → Larsen-Freeman 1999;
Griffiths 2006; Kearns 2000/2011; Kreidler 1998). To illustrate, the following
sentences may be discussed:

I eat an apple in the morning.

I am working in this company.
I have waited for you.
 I have been teaching at this university for two years.

Example Tense Aspect

I eat … simple present tense simple aspect
I am working … present continuous tense progressive aspect
I have waited for … present perfective tense perfect aspect
I have been teaching … present continuous perfect perfect and progressive
tense aspect

As can be observed, all these examples are in the present tense as they describe
different situations in the present, yet each conveys different information, or
points of view, as to how the action pertains to the present. As such, they differ
in aspect. In what follows, these types of aspect will be examined in detail.

5.1.1 Simple aspect

In simple aspect (also known as “zero aspect”), the emphasis is placed on the
regularity and frequency of the described action or situation as a matter of
routine, unchanging situations, or general truth. Semantically speaking, in a
sentence like this:

I drink a cup of coffee in the morning.

there is an implicit adverb of frequency and/or habituality, such as always,

usually, often, every day, and so on. These implicit adverbs trigger a habitual
interpretation of simple present tense clauses. In the following example:

My little daughter brushes her teeth by herself. ← 66 | 67 →

the act of brushing in the above sentence is characterized by dynamism and

telicity (the word “telicity” is derived from the Greek work “telos”, which means
the characteristic of having a natural finishing point). Further, it is durative as it
occupies time; therefore, it can be considered as an accomplishment rather than
an achievement or activity. The difference between an accomplishment and
achievement is that the former is durative while the latter is nondurative. “Given
that an achievement is an event boundary rather than a ‘full’ event, it is
nondurative” (Kearns 2000/2011: 158). In the following example (adapted from
ibid.), reach the city expresses the onset of being in the city:

We reached the city in the morning.

In other words, the emphasis (aspect) in the above example is placed on the
completion of the act of reaching the city (nondurative) not on the act of being in
the city (durative). To reflect both the tense and aspect, the translator may well
suggest a rendering like this:

.‫وﺻﻠﻨﺎ إ)ﻟﻰ( اﻟﻤﺪﻳﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺼﺒﺎح‬

On the other hand, the difference between an accomplishment and activity or

process is that the former is telic (i.e., it has the property of having a natural
finishing point) while the latter is atelic (i.e., having no natural finishing point),
as in the following example in which the process of walking does not lead to a
natural finishing point, but rather the walker has to decide to stop walking for
any reason:

I walk in the park in the morning.

However, this does not exclude habitual interpretations. When one of the
adverbs of frequency and/or habituality is explicitly used, this will force habitual
interpretations, thus excluding other available interpretations, such as a single-
event interpretation (Griffiths 2006: 102). To reinforce this point, following is
another example:

My brother is taller than me.

Here, as can be seen, the tense is a simple present tense. The verb used is static.
Further, it is not characterized by the property of having a natural ← 67 | 68 →
finishing point (i.e., it is atelic). Such characteristics do not trigger habitual
interpretations, but rather, give rise to stative interpretations. Try to insert one of
the adverbs of frequency or habituality to see the result. Being taller than
somebody else does not have a forward movement or a finishing point. As such,
the emphasis (i.e., aspect) is placed on unchanging situations – he is taller than
me yesterday, today, and tomorrow.
Following is another example:
 She visits her family twice a year.

In the above example, the tense is present. The emphasis (aspect) is on the
regularity and frequency of the action as a matter of routine indicated by the
phrase twice a year. To reflect both the tense and aspect, the translator may use a
verb in the present, as in:

.‫ﺴﻨﺔ‬
ّ ‫ﺗﺰور ﻋﺎﺋﻠﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﺮﺗﻴﻦ ﻓﻲ اﻟ‬

Here is another example:

In the UK, it rains heavily in some cities in winter.

Here, the tense is present. The emphasis (aspect) is on the regularity and
frequency of the action. To reflect both the tense and aspect, the phrase ‫ﻋﺎدة ﻣﺎ‬
(usually) can be added, as in:

.‫ ﺗﻬﻄﻞ اﻷﻣﻄﺎر ﺑﻐﺰارة ﻓﻲ ﺑﻌﺾ اﻟﻤﺪن ﻓﻲ ﻓﺼﻞ اﻟﺸﺘﺎء‬،‫ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﻤﻠﻜﺔ اﻟﻤﺘ ّﺤﺪة‬
Or

.‫ ﻋﺎدة ﻣﺎ ﺗﻬﻄﻞ اﻷﻣﻄﺎر ﺑﻐﺰارة ﻓﻲ ﺑﻌﺾ اﻟﻤﺪن ﻓﻲ ﻓﺼﻞ اﻟﺸﺘﺎء‬،‫ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﻤﻠﻜﺔ اﻟﻤﺘ ّﺤﺪة‬

When the phrase ‫( ﻋﺎدة ﻣﺎ‬usually) is added, there will be a “level shift” to use
Catford’s (1965) terminology. Level shifts occur, for instance, when an item in
the source text is at one linguistic level (e.g., grammar) and translated into an
item at a different level (e.g., lexis). In this regard, Almanna (2016: 61) states
that “to emphasize the frequency of the action in Arabic, the only solution is to
resort to lexical items/expressions, such as ‫ ﻋﺎدة ﻣﺎ‬usually, ‫ ﻏﺎﻟﺒﺎ ﻣﺎ‬often, and so on
or leave it to the context to see to it”.
In the following example, the emphasis is on general truths:

The earth is round. ← 68 | 69 →

So, the aspect is simple. To reflect both the tense and aspect in Arabic, a nominal
sentence may be resorted to, as in:

.‫إّن اﻟﻜﺮة اﻷرﺿﻴﺔ ﻣﺴﺘﺪﻳﺮة‬

To express habituality in the past, used to may be used, as in the following

sentence:

I used to play football very well.

This indicates that the speaker used to play football very well in the past, but
now s/he does not.

5.1.2 Progressive aspect

In progressive aspect, the emphasis is put on the continuity of the described

action or event. The emphasis is shifted from the beginning and end of the action
or event towards the middle phase, thus presenting the action or event as an
ongoing activity, as in the following example:

I am writing a novel.

Here, the tense is present continuous marked by verb to be followed by the base
form of the verb plus the suffix –ing. However, this is not enough for translation
purposes. We need to know where the emphasis is placed and whether the
described event or situation is a state, activity, accomplishment, or achievement.
To begin with, the emphasis is put on the continuity of the action. Further, such
an act of writing is durative (occupying time), dynamic (not static), and atelic
(having no natural finishing point but the writer has to decide to stop writing for
a particular reason). Further, writing a novel in the above example does not
entail that the writer has completed all stages of writing a novel – the emphasis
is on the middle phase of writing. As such, it may be concluded that there is an
implicit time marker, such as right now, currently, and the like. To reflect both
the tense and aspect, the translator may use lexical items and expressions, such
as ← 69 | 70 → ‫( ﻻ أزال‬still), ‫( ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬه اﻷﺛﻨﺎء‬at this moment), ً ‫( ﺣﺎﻟﻴﺎ‬currently), and so
on. Or, s/he may opt for the use of the present active participle ً ‫ُﻣﻨﻬِﻤﻜﺎ‬, ً ‫ ُﻣﻨﻐِﻤﺴﺎ‬, as
in:

.‫ﺐ رواﻳًﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬه اﻷﻳﺎم‬ ُ ‫ﻻ أزا‬

ُ ‫ل أﻛﺘ‬
.‫ﻻ أزاُل ُﻣﻨﻐِﻤﺴﺎ ً ﻓﻲ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﺔ رواﻳﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬه اﻷﻳﺎم‬

In a sentence like this:

She is singing right now.

the tense is a present continuous tense, expressed by is singing and forced by

means of the adverbial right now. Such an act of singing entails that the singer
has sung as it lacks sub-interval property. Compare it now with the following
sentence in the past continuous tense:

She was singing from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m.

Here, the emphasis is on the continuity of the act of singing in a specific period
of time in the past. This entails that she sang on the one hand, and the event
described by a telic predicate happened at a particular interval of time, that is,
from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m.
In Arabic, to emphasize the continuity of the described action, event or
situation in a specific period in the past, language users normally use the verb ‫ﻛﺎن‬
followed by a verb in the present, as in:
 .‫ﺖ أ ُراِﺟﻊُ دروﺳﻲ أﻣﺲ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻫﺬا اﻟﻮﻗﺖ‬
ُ ‫ﻛ ُﻨ‬

Here, the act of revising ‫ أراﺟﻊ‬is in the past, indicated by the verb ‫ﺖ‬ ُ ‫ﻛ ُﻨ‬. The
emphasis is placed on the continuity of the described action in a specific period
in the past, thus lending itself to a past continuous tense:

I was revising my lessons yesterday at this time.

To conclude, progressive aspect is characterized by the following characteristics:

• the event is expressed by a dynamic verb (such as walk, talk, eat, drink, play,
and the like) not a static one (such as realize, know, believe, and so on). ← 70
| 71 →
• it usually has sub-interval properties, and the focus is on inside the duration
of the described event, that is, on one or more sub-intervals not on the whole
event run time.
• the emphasis is shifted from the beginning and end of the described action or
event towards the middle phase, thus presenting the action or event as an
ongoing activity.
• it can be telic (leading up to, but not including, a finishing point) or atelic
(does not lead up to a finishing point), depending on the verb and its
predicate.

5.1.3 Perfect aspect versus perfect progressive aspect

In perfect aspect, the emphasis is shifted towards the duration of the described
event or situation that began in the past and is seen relevant to the present time.
In a sentence like this:

Tom has written a collection of short stories.

the emphasis is on the duration of the event that began in the past and is seen
relevant to the present time, thus entailing that Tom has spent a period of time to
accomplish his job. Further, the present perfect form has written portrays the
state of Tom in the aftermath of writing his short stories. As such, the perfect
aspect in the above example triggers a “recently” interpretation, that is, the time
of writing the short stories is a frame just before the time of speech. To translate
it into Arabic, the translator may use an optional particle ‫ ﻟﻘﺪ‬followed by a verb
in the past, or may bring out the implicit adverb of time, i.e., recently, as in:

.ً ‫ﺐ ﺗﻮم ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﻗﺼﺺ ﻗﺼﻴﺮة ﻣﺆﺧﺮا‬

َ ‫) ﻟﻘﺪ( ﻛﺘ‬

Again, adding the adverb of time ‫( ﻣﺆﺧﺮا‬recently) or the particle ‫ ﻟﻘﺪ‬will result in
a level shift. According to Catford (1965) a level shift occurs when the source
language item at one linguistic level (e.g., lexis) has a target language equivalent
at a different level (e.g., grammar) or the other way round.
To reinforce this, these two sentences may be compared: ← 71 | 72 →

I have waited for you for an hour.

I have been waiting for you for an hour.

In the first example, the emphasis is placed on the duration of the event (i.e., one
hour). It entails that the speaker has waited for an hour and has just left. To put
this differently, the time of waiting is a frame just before both the time of leaving
the place and time of speaking. To reflect both the tense and aspect in Arabic, a
verb in the past along with the time marker ‫( ﻟﻤﺪة‬for the period of) may be used,
as in:

.‫ﻚ ﻟﻤﺪة ﺳﺎﻋﺔ‬

َ ‫ا ِﻧﺘﻈﺮﺗ‬

In the second example, the emphasis, however, is shifted from the beginning and
end of the described event towards a sub-interval that occupies a longer period
than that occupied by progressive aspect, thus it is called perfect progressive
aspect, that is, a combination of two aspects: progressive aspect and perfect
aspect. To reflect both the tense and aspect in Arabic, the translator may well opt
for an optional expression ‫( ﻻ أزال‬still) followed by a verb in the present along
with the time marker ‫( ﻣﻨﺬ‬for/since), as in:

.ٍ‫ك ﻣﻨﺬ ُ ﺳﺎﻋﺔ‬

َ ‫ل( أﻧﺘﻈﺮ‬
ُ ‫)ﻻ أزا‬

Or, s/he may start his/her sentence with ٍ‫( ﻣﻨﺬ ﺳﺎﻋﺔ‬for an hour) followed by a
nominal sentence ‫ك‬
َ ‫أﻧﺎ أﻧﺘﻈﺮ‬preceded by an additive connector ‫( و‬and), as in:

.‫ك‬
َ ‫ﻣﻨﺬ ُ ﺳﺎﻋﺔٍ وأﻧﺎ أﻧﺘﻈﺮ‬
5.2 Translating tenses and aspects

One of the challenging problems in translating from English into Arabic and vice
versa is translating tenses and aspects. This is because of the differences
between the two languages. Unlike Arabic, English has certain morphological
resources to express aspect, such as simple, progressive, perfect, ← 72 | 73 → or
perfect progressive. Therefore, to express simple aspect, for example, in English,
the language user has to express it grammatically as in:

My friend goes to school with his dad.

However, to translate the same aspect into Arabic, which has no grammatical
category for aspects, translators can express it lexically by using lexical items
when they are relevant (cf. Baker 1992). Languages differ widely in the way
they map various aspects of world experiences. In this connection, Baker (1992:
84) rightly comments:

Languages which have morphological resources for expressing a certain

category, such as number, tense, or gender, have to express these categories
regularly; those which do not have morphological resources for expressing
the same categories do not have to express them except when they are felt to
be relevant.

In the above example, there is an implicit adverb of frequency or habituality,

such as usually, often, every day, and the like, that gives rise to a habitual
interpretation of simple present tense clauses. As such, in an attempt to lay
emphasis on the regularity and frequency of the action as a matter of routine
(aspect) on the one hand, and to make the text read smoothly and cogently on the
other, the translator may well resort to adding phrases, such as ‫( ﻋﺎدة ﻣﺎ‬usually) or
‫( ﻛﻞ ﻳﻮم‬every day) (cf. Almanna 2014, 2016), as in:

.‫ﻋﺎدة ﻣﺎ ﻳﺬﻫﺐ ﺻﺪﻳﻘﻲ إﻟﻰ اﻟﻤﺪرﺳﺔ ﻣﻊ أﺑﻴﻪ‬

Or

.‫ﻞ ﻳﻮم‬
ّ ‫ﻳﺬﻫﺐ ﺻﺪﻳﻘﻲ ﻣﻊ أﺑﻴﻪ إﻟﻰ اﻟﻤﺪرﺳﺔ ﻛ‬

Languages differ widely in the way they record various aspects of world
experiences. To illustrate this, the following example, in particular the first
sentence in the text, along with two translations produced by two translation
trainees may be given full consideration:
ST:

They will face trial in October 2013, reports say. The three men were
extradited from the UK last week along with another pair, Babar Ahmad and
Talha Ahsan, following a long legal battle. ← 73 | 74 →

TT 1:

‫ ﺗﺮﺣﻴﻞ‬. ‫ وﺗﺰاﻣﻦ ﺗﺮﺣﻴﻞ اﻟﺜﻼﺛﺔ ﻣﻊ‬.‫ﺣﺴﺒﻤﺎ ذﻛﺮت اﻟﺘﻘﺎرﻳﺮ‬2003 ‫ﺳﻴﻤﺜﻼن ﻟﻠﻤﺤﺎﻛﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻛﺘﻮﺑﺮ‬
‫اﺛﻨﻴﻦ آﺧﺮﻳﻦ وﻫﻤﺎ ﺑﺎﺑﺎر أﺣﻤﺪ وﻃﻪ إﺣﺴﺎن ﺑﻌﺪ ﻣﻌﺮﻛﺔ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴﺔ ﻃﻮﻳﻠﺔ‬

TT 2:

‫ﻗﺪ ا ُﺳﺘﻠﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﻬﻤﻮن اﻟﺜﻼﺛﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺔ‬.‫اﻛﺘﻮﺑﺮو‬/‫أﺷﺎرت اﻟﺘﻘﺎرﻳﺮ أن ﻣﺤﻜﻤﺘﻬﻤﺎ ﺳﺘﻌﻘﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﻦ اﻷول‬
‫ﺣﺴﺎن ﻻﺳﺘﻜﻤﺎل‬.‫اﻟﻤﻤﻠﻜﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة ﻓﻲ اﻷﺳﺒﻮع اﻟﻤﺎﺿﻲ ﺑﺮﻓﻘﺔ اﺛﻨﻴﻦ آﺧﺮﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﺎ ﺑﺎﺑﺎر أﺣﻤﺪ وﻃﻪ إ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺎﻛﻤﺘﻬﻤﺎ اﻟﻄﻮﻳﻠﺔ‬

Here, in the first sentence in the original text, the writer uses a simple present
tense expressed by say. Although a simple present tense is used, the emphasis is
on the completion of the action, rather than on its continuity or frequency.
Having given full consideration to verb aspect, the translation trainees have
intrinsically managed the text when translating the simple present tense
expressed by say into a past tense, viz. ‫ذﻛﺮت‬and ‫ﺷﺎرت‬.‫ أ‬This is an example of
“intra-system shift”, to use Catford’s (1965) term. Intra-system shifts occur
when translators opt for a noncorresponding term in the target language system
although there is a formal corresponding one.
To further illuminate how (not) taking into account verb aspect may well
affect the translation, thus creating a different mental image, the following
example extracted from Lubna Mahmūd Yāsīn’s story (n.d.) ‫( ﺑ ﺼ ﻤ ﺔ ﻣ ﻮ ا ﻃ ﻦ‬A
Citizen’s Fingerprint) translated for the purposes of this study can be discussed:
ST:

‫وﻃﺎﺑﻘﻪ ﻣﻊ ﻧﻔﺲ‬ » … … ‫…ﺳﺤﺐ رﺳﻢ ﺑﺼﻤﺘﻪ اﻟﺬي ﻛﺎن ﻗﺪ ﺟﻒ‬ ‫ﺛﻢ اﻟﺘﻔﺖ إﻟﻰ ﺻﺎﺣﺒﻨﺎ و‬
‫ » اﻧﻪ ﻫﻮ … اﻟﻤﺘﻤﺮد … ﺧﺬوه‬:‫ﻤﻜﺒ ّﺮة … وﻋﺎد ﻳﻘﻮل‬
ُ ‫اﻟﺒﺼﻤﺔ اﻟ‬

TT:

Then, the officer turned to our friend and pulled up the depiction of his
fingerprint which was dry in order to compare it to the magnified fingerprint.
Once again, he stated, “It’s him, it’s the insubordinate, take him”.

The translator, to a certain degree, has succeeded in offering an equivalent text

that effectively reflects the variables of register, the language ← 74 | 75 →
function, lexical choices, the emphasis used in the original text in the form of the
particle ‫ّن‬,‫ إ‬and so on. However, there is a minor deviation in the relationship
between the second sentence and the third sentence. In the original extract, there
is no time lapse between the two material processes ‫( ﺳﺤﺐ رﺳﻢ ﺑﺼﻤﺘﻪ … وﻃﺎﺑﻘﻪ‬he
pulled up the depiction of his fingerprint … and compared it), whereas in the
target text, the psychological speed of events has been slowed down when the
translator has opted for in order to compare it. Such a comparison, according to
the target text, can be after a minute, one hour, one day, and so on, or it might be
completely ignored later. Similarly, the change in aspect from a past perfect
tense in the source text, expressed by ‫ﺬ ي ﻛ ﺎ ن ﻗ ﺪ ﺟ ﻒ‬,‫ ا ﻟ‬to a simple past tense,
expressed by was dry in the target text, does produce a change in time reference,
thus affecting the pragmatic communicative effect, in that the emphasis in the
source text is on the sequence of events, whereas the emphasis in the target text
is put on the completion of the event.
To further illustrate the importance of reflecting the verb aspect, the
following example quoted from Husni and Newman (2008: 44–45; bilingual
edn) may be examined:
ST:

‫ وﻟﻦ ﻳﺘﺰوج‬،‫ » ﺳﻴﻌﻮد إﻟﻴﻚ زوﺟﻚ‬:‫ﻗﺎل اﻟﺸﻴﺦ ﺳﻌﻴﺪ وﻫﻮ ﻳﺮﻣﻲ ﻓﻲ وﻋﺎء اﻟﺠﻤﺮ ﻧﺘﻔﺎ ً ﻣﻦ اﻟﺒﺨﻮر‬
،‫» ارﺗﻴﺎح ﻃﻮﻳﻠﺔ‬. ‫ ﻓﻨ ّﺪت ﻋﻨﻬﺎ آﻫﺔ‬،‫ وﻛﺎن ﺻﻮﺗﻪ وﻗﻮرا ً ﻫﺎدﺋﺎ ً ﻣﻨﺢ ﻋﺰﻳﺰة اﻟﻄﻤﺄﻧﻴﻨﺔ‬.« ‫ﻣﺮة ﺛﺎﻧﻴﺔ‬
ً ‫ﻦ ﻋﻤﻠﻲ ﻳﺘﻄﻠﺐ ﻣﺎﻻ ً ﻛﺜﻴﺮا‬
ّ ‫»ﻟﻜ‬
‫ و‬:‫اﺑﺘﻬﺞ ﻟﻬﺎ وﺟﻪ اﻟﺸﻴﺦ وﻗﺎل‬

TT:
 He threw bits of incense into the dish filled with live coal, and said: “Your
husband will return to you, and he will not take another wife”. His voice was
sedate and soft, and soothed Aziza, who heaved a deep sigh of satisfaction.
The Sheikh’s face lit up. “However, my work doesn’t come cheap”, he said.

As can be noticed, in the original text there is no time gap between the process
of saying ‫( ﻗﺎل‬he said) and the process of doing ‫( ﻳﺮﻣﻲ‬he is throwing). In the
original text, while the emphasis in ‫( ﻗﺎل‬he said) is placed on the completion of
the act of saying, the emphasis in ‫( وﻫﻮ ﻳﺮﻣﻲ‬and he is throwing) is put on the
continuity of the act of throwing in a specific period in the past as there is an
implicit ‫( ﻛﺎن‬was). However, the translators, ← 75 | 76 → for no obvious reason,
have resorted to using the connector and, thus changing the emphasis in the
process of doing ‫ وﻫﻮ ﻳﺮﻣﻲ‬on the one hand, and creating a time gap on the other.
Had they given full consideration to the sequences of the described acts, that is,
the act of saying and the act of throwing, they could have suggested something
like this: While throwing bits of incense into the dish filled with live coal, he said
….
To make this point clear, the following example extracted from a short story
titled ‫( اﻟﺨﻴﻮل‬The Horses) by ‘Abdul-Rahmān Al-Rubai‘ī (cited in Dickins et al.
2002: 86–87) may be considered:
ST:

:‫ﺳﺄﻟﺘ ْﻪ‬
َ ‫–ﺣﺠﺰ‬
‫ت؟‬ ‫أ‬
:‫ﺳُﻪ وﻗﺎل‬َ ‫وﻫّﺰ رأ‬
.‫–ﻋﻠﻰ وﺷﻚ‬
‫ﻤﺎم؟‬ّ ‫ﺖ ﻏﺮﻓﺔ ﺑﺤ‬َ ‫– أﻃﻠﺒ‬
.‫– ﻧﻌﻢ‬
.‫ﻓﻐﺮﻓﺘﻲ ﺑﻼ ﺣّﻤﺎم‬ .‫ﺧﺒﺮﻧﻲ ﻋﻦ رﻗِﻤﻬِﺎ‬.‫– ﺣﺴﻨ ًﺎأ‬
:‫ﺖ‬ ْ ‫وأﺿﺎﻓ‬
.‫– اﻟﻮﺳﺦ ﻳﻀﺎﻳﻘﻨﻲ‬

TT:

“Have you checked in?” she asked.

He shook his head and said: “Almost”.
“Did you ask for a room with a bathroom?”
 “Yes”.
“Good. Give me the number, my room hasn’t got one”.
And then she added: “I get fed up with the dirt”.

In some parts of the source text, the emphasis is placed on the completion of the
acts, viz. ‫( ﺳﺄﻟﺘﻪ‬she asked him), ‫( ﻫّﺰ رأﺳﻪ‬he shook his head), ‫( ﻗﺎل‬he said), and
‫(أﺿﺎﻓﺖ‬she added). However, in the interrogative sentences ‫أﺣﺠﺰت‬and ‫أ ﻃ ﻠ ﺒ ﺖ ﻏ ﺮ ﻓ ﺔ‬
ّ ‫ ﺑﺤ‬, the emphasis is put on the duration of the described actions that began in
‫ﻤﺎم‬
the past and are seen relevant to the moment of speaking. In the target text,
however, the tense in one of the interrogative sentences, ← 76 | 77 → namely
‫ﻤﺎم‬ّ ‫ أ ﻃ ﻠ ﺒ ﺖ ﻏ ﺮ ﻓ ﺔ ﺑ ﺤ‬has been changed into a simple past tense, thus changing the
emphasis. Had the translator given full consideration to the emphasis (aspect) in
such a sentence, s/he could have suggested a rendering like this: Have you asked
for a room with a bathroom?
Finally, the following example quoted from Karīm ‘Abid’s story (‫ﻏﺮام اﻟﺴﻴﺪة )ع‬
(The Passion of Lady A), translated by Erick Winkel (2010: 63–64) may be
considered:
ST:

.‫ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﻋﺎدت اﻟﻔﺘﺎﺗﺎن إﻟﻰ اﻟﺒﻴﺖ ﻟﻢ ﺗﻜﻦ اﻵﻧﺴﺔ )ع(ﺗﻌﺮف ﻣﺎذا ﺣﺪث ﻟﻠﺮﺟﻞ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ وﻫﻲ ﺗﻐﻴ ّﺮ ﺛﻴﺎﺑﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻋﻜﺲ ﻣﺎ‬. ‫ ﻓﻬﻲ ﻟﻢ ﺗﺠﺪ ﻓﻴﻬﻢ ﻣﻦ ﻳﺜﻴﺮ إﻫﺘﻤﺎﻣﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ‬.‫وﺣﻴﺪة ً ﺗﻔﻜ ّﺮ ﺑﻄﻠﺒﺔ ﻗﺴﻢ اﻟﻠﻐﺔ اﻟﻔﺮﻧﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺗﺘﻮﻗّﻊ ﻗﺒﻴﻞ دﺧﻮل اﻟﺠﺎﻣﻌﺔ‬

TT:

The two ladies returned to the house. Miss A did not know what happened
with the man. She changed her clothes and concentrated on thinking about
the male students in the French Department. She hadn’t found any of them
who could rouse her interest, which was the opposite of how she felt before
she went to the university.

The change in aspect from a past continuous tense, expressed by ‫ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ وﻫﻲ ﺗﻐﻴ ّﺮ‬in
the source text, to a simple past tense in the target text, does produce a change in
time reference, affecting the pragmatic communicative effect, in that the
emphasis in the source text is on the continuity of the action in a specific period
of time, whereas in the target text the emphasis is put on the completion of the
act of changing her clothes. Further, opting for the connector and to connect the
two events, as in she changed her clothes and concentrated on … does slow
down their pace, thus generating a time gap between the two events. Further, the
translator has opted to disconnect the processes by using two separate sentences.
As a result, the pace of events is slowed down. The original subordinate sentence
… ‫ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﻋﺎدت … ﻟﻢ ﺗﻜﻦ‬is re-presented as two independent sentences in the target
text, thereby generating a feeling that there is probably a time gap between the
two events. ← 77 | 78 →
Further reading

Akmajian, A., Demers, R. A., Farmer, A. K., and Harnish, A. K. (2010).

Linguistics: An Introduction to Language and Communication (6th edn).
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Almanna, A. (2014). Translation Theories Exemplified from Cicero to Pierre
Bourdieu. Germany: Lincom Europa.
——. (2016). The Routledge Course in Translation Annotation: Arabic-English-
Arabic. London/New York: Routledge.
Baker, M. (1992). In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. London/New
York: Routledge.
Farghal, M. (2012). Advanced Issues in Arabic-English Translation Studies.
Kuwait: Kuwait University Press.
Farghal, M., and Almanna, A. (2015). Contextualizing Translation Theories:
Aspects of Arabic-English Interlingual Communication. Newcastle upon
Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Griffiths, P. (2006). An Introduction to English Semantics and Pragmatics.
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Kearns, K. (2000/2011). Semantics. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Kreidler, C. W. (1998). Introducing English Semantics. London/New York:
Routledge.
Yule, G. (1985/1996). The Study of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Questions

1. What is the difference between “tense” and “aspect”? Explain with

illustrative examples.
2. How would you distinguish between an “accomplishment” and “activity”?
3. How would you distinguish between an “accomplishment” and
“achievement”?
4. What is the difference between “telicity” and “atelicity”? Discuss with
illustrative examples.
5. What is the difference between I will drive to London tomorrow and I will
be driving to London tomorrow morning? Discuss. ← 78 | 79 →
Exercises

Exercise 1: Before translating the following sentences, try to identify where the
emphasis is put:

1. Hurry up, the train is leaving.

2. The train has just left.
3. The train has already left.
4. I have been waiting for you for an hour.
5. I have waited for you for an hour.
6. I waited for you an hour ago.

Exercise 2: Before translating the following sentences, try to identify where the
emphasis is put:

.ً ‫س ﻓﻲ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻫﺬا اﻟﻮﻗﺖ ﻏﺪا‬ ُ .1

ُ ‫ﻒ أدر‬ ِ ‫ﺼ‬ّ ‫ن ﻓﻲ اﻟ‬
ُ ‫ﺳﺄﻛﻮ‬
.ٍ‫ﻣﻨﺬ ُ اﻟﺼﺒﺎح اﻟﺒﺎﻛﺮ واﻟﺴﻤﺎُء ﺗﻤﻄﺮ ﺑﻐﺰارة‬ .2
.ً ‫ت ﺗﺸﺨﺮ ﺷﺨﻴﺮا ً ﻗﻮﻳﺎ‬ ْ ‫ﺖ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻬﺎ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺑﺪأ‬ ْ ‫ ﻣﺎ إن أﻏﻤﻀ‬.3
.‫ت‬
ٍ ‫ﺖ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬه اﻟﺠﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺧﻤﺲ ﺳﻨﻮا‬ ُ ‫ن ﻗﺪ ﻋﻤﻠ‬ُ ‫ ﺳﺄﻛﻮ‬،‫ﺑﻌﺪ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ ﺷﻬﻮر‬ .4
.ً ‫ ﻟﻘﺪ زارﻧﻲ أﺧﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺑﻴﺘﻲ اﻟﺠﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﺆﺧﺮا‬.5
.‫ﺖ ﻣﻊ ﺻﺪﻳﻘﺘﻬﺎ ﻟﺸﺮاء ﻫﺪﻳﺔٍ ﻻ ِﺑﻨﺘﻬﺎ‬ ْ ‫ ﺧﺮﺟ‬،‫ﺖ ﺷﻘﺘﻬﺎ‬ ْ ‫ﺑﻌﺪ أن ﻧﻈ ّﻔ‬ .6

Exercise 3: Comment on the translation of the following text extracted from a

short story titled ‫( اﻟﺬي أﺿﺎع أﻣﻪ‬He Who Lost His Mother) by Zaid Dāmāj Mutī‘
(n.d.), paying extra attention to the translation of tenses and aspects:
ST:

.‫…ﻘﺪ أﺿﻌﺖ أﻣﻲ‬

‫– ﺳﻴﺪي ﻟ‬
.‫ﻟﻢ ﻳﻨﻈﺮ اﻟﺮﺟﻞ إﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﻞ واﻛﺐ ﺳﻴﺮه اﻟﻤﺴﺮع … واﻟﺼﺒﻲ ﻳﻬﺮول ﻟﻜﻲ ﻳﺤﺎذﻳﻪ‬
… ‫ﻟ–ﻘﺪ أﺿﻌﺖ أﻣﻲ‬
ً
… ‫ﻧﻈﺮت اﻟﻤﺮأة إﻟﻴﻪ ﺷﺰرا وﺗﻠﻤﺴﺖ ﻣﺤﻔﻈﺘﻬﺎ اﻟﻴﺪوﻳﺔ ﺑﺤﺮﻛﺔ ﺗﻠﻘﺎﺋﻴﺔ‬
TT:

– “I’ve lost my mum, sir”.

The man didn’t look at him; rather, he continued walking quickly as the boy
hurried to keep up with him. ← 79 | 80 →
– “I’ve lost my mum, madam”.
The lady looked at him askance and automatically ran her hand over her
handbag.

Exercise 4: Before translating the following sentences, try to identify the

differences between the following pairs:

.‫ﻞ ﻓﻲ ﺑﺮﻳﻄﺎﻧﻴﺎ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻌﺎم اﻟﻤﺎﺿﻲ‬ َ ‫ﺔ ﻷﻋﻤ‬ ُ ‫ﻲ اﻟﻔﺮﺻ‬

ّ ‫ﺢﻟ‬ْ ‫ ﻟﻢ ﺗﺴﻨ‬-‫أ‬ .1
.‫ﻲ اﻟﻔﺮﺻُﺔ ﻷﻋﻤﻞ ﻓﻲ ﺑﺮﻳﻄﺎﻧﻴﺎ‬ ّ ‫ﺢﻟ‬
ْ ‫ ﻟﻢ ﺗﺴﻨ‬،‫ﻟﻐﺎﻳﺔ اﻟﻌﺎم اﻟﻤﺎﺿﻲ‬ -‫ب‬
.‫ ﻣﺎ ﻋﺪا رﺋﻴﺲ اﻟﻘﺴﻢ‬،‫ﻒ راﺗﺒﻪ أﻣﺲ‬ ٍ ‫ﻢ ﻳﺘﺴﻠ ّﻢ أي ﻣﻮﻇ‬-‫أﻟ‬ .2
.‫ ﻣﺎ ﻋﺪا رﺋﻴﺲ اﻟﻘﺴﻢ‬،‫ﻒ راﺗﺒﻪ‬ ٍ ‫ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺘﺴﻠ ّﻢ أي ﻣﻮﻇ‬،‫ ﻟﻐﺎﻳﺔ ﻳﻮم أﻣﺲ‬-‫ب‬
.‫ﻲ ﻳﻮم أﻣﺲ ﻻ أﺧﻲ وﻻ أﺧﺘﻲ‬ ّ ‫ﻞﺑ‬ْ ‫ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺘ ّﺼ‬-‫أ‬ .3
.‫ﻲ ﻻ أﺧﻲ وﻻ أﺧﺘﻲ‬ ّ ‫ﻞﺑ‬ْ ‫ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺘ ّﺼ‬،‫ ﻟﻐﺎﻳﺔ ﻳﻮم أﻣﺲ‬-‫ب‬

Exercise 5: Translate the following text extracted from Mary Ali’s text titled
Women’s Liberation through Islam, published on 24 June 2013
(<http://www.islamreligion.com>), to a professional level. Then, annotate your
own translation, paying special attention to grammatical issues, in particular
those related to tenses and aspects.

A Muslim woman must cooperate and coordinate with her husband. There
cannot, however, be cooperation with a man who is disobedient to God. She
should not fulfill his requests if he wants her to do something unlawful. A
husband also should not take advantage of his wife, but be considerate of her
needs and happiness.
| 81 →

CHAPTER 6

Modality
Key terms

• Ability and lack of ability

• Advisability
• Deontic modality
• Epistemic modality
• Expectations
• Futurity
• Lost opportunities
• Modal verbs
• Modality
• Necessity and lack of necessity
• Obligation
• Possibility/likelihood
• Permission
• Polite request
• Preference
• Prohibition

The previous chapters considered some grammatical issues, such as causativity,

transitivity, affixation, tense, and aspect. This chapter, completes the
introduction to these grammatical issues by touching on modality and its types
and functions in both Arabic and English. Further, this chapter provides the
reader with an approach to translating modality from Arabic into English and
vice versa. ← 81 | 82 →

6.1 Modality

While communicating with each other, language users are in need of expressing
their own attitudes, opinions, or moods towards what happens, towards what
exists in the outside world, towards the truth of an utterance, or towards the
event described by that utterance. To do so, they need to fall back on modality.
Modality is a concept used widely in a direct link with such notions as:

• Obligation:
We must not lose the match tomorrow, or we will be out of the tournament.

• Necessity:
I haven’t visited my friend for ten years, so I will have to visit her this summer.

• Lack of necessity:
In order to apply for this job, you must speak two languages, but you don’t have
to have a degree in international relations.

• Prohibition:
You mustn’t use your mobile during takeoff.

• Expectation:
There are plenty of petrol stations in the town; it should not be too difficult to
find somewhere to get petrol.

• Advisability:
She should/ought to consult her doctor immediately.

• Possibility:
She may be in the office. Have you called her?

• Ability:
She can speak three languages in addition to her mother tongue.

• Request:
Would you switch on the light, please?

• Permission:
May I open the window, sir? ← 82 | 83 →

• Preference:
I would rather stay at home tonight than go out.
• Lost opportunities:
You should have asked me earlier. Now, it’s too late.

• Habitual past:
My father used to smoke 20 cigarettes a day.

In what follows, the types of modality and main functions achieved by modality
in Arabic and English will be explained.

6.2 Types of modality

In English, modality is most commonly expressed by modal verbs, such as shall,

will, would, can, could, may, might, must, and so on. However, sometimes
modality is expressed by

• phrases, such as be going to, be used to, be supposed to, etc.

• adverbs, such as possibly, probably, etc.
• clauses, such as it is possible that, it is likely that, it is unlikely that, it is
probable that, etc.

In Arabic, although there is no well-defined class of modals perfectly

corresponding to English modal verbs and expressions (Abdel-Fattah 2005;
Almanna 2016; Al-Qinai 2008; Aziz 1989; Farghal and Shunnaq 1999),
modality can be expressed by

• modalized particles, such as ‫ ﺳـــ‬, ‫ﺳﻮف‬, ‫ﻟﻌﻞ‬, ‫ ﻗﺪ‬, etc.

• modalized verbs, such as ‫ ﻳ ُﺤﺘﻤﻞ‬, ‫ ﻳ ُﺴﺘﺤﺴﻦ‬,‫ ﻳ ُﺮّﺟﺢ‬, ‫ﻳﺘﻮّﺟﺐ‬, ‫ﻳﻨﺒﻐﻲ‬, ‫ ﻳﺘﻌﻴ ّﻦ‬, ‫ﻳﺠﺐ‬, ‫ﻳ ُﻔﺘﺮض‬
‫ ﻳ ُﺴﺘﺒﻌﺪ‬, ‫ ﻳ ُﺤﺒ ّﺬ‬, ‫ﻀﻞ‬ ّ ‫ ﻳ ُﻔ‬, ‫ ﻳﺴﺘﻄﻴﻊ‬,, etc.
• modalized prepositions, such as ‫ﻠﻰ‬,‫ ﻟـ ﻋ‬, etc.
• modalized prepositional phrases, such as ‫ﻦ اﻟﻤﻔﺮوض‬,‫ﻣﻦ اﻟﺠﺎﺋﺰﻣ‬, ‫ﻦ اﻟﻤﻤﻜﻦ‬,‫ﻣﻦ اﻟُﻤﺮّﺟﺢﻣ‬
ِ‫ ﺑﻤﻘﺪورِه‬, ‫ﻤﺘﻌﻴ ّﻦ‬ ُ ‫ﻦ اﻟ‬,‫ﻤﺴﺘﺤﺴﻦ ﻣ‬ ُ ‫ﻦ اﻟ‬,‫ﻤ ﺤ ﺒ ّﺬﻣ‬
ُ ‫ﻣﻦ ا ﻟ‬, ‫ﻀ ﻞ‬ ُ ‫ﻦ ا ﻟ‬,‫ﻤﺴﺘﺒﻌﺪ ﻣ‬
ّ ‫ﻤﻔ‬ ُ ‫ﻣﻦ اﻟ‬, ‫ﻤﺤﺘﻤﻞ‬
ُ ‫ﻦ اﻟ‬,‫ﻦ ا ﻟﻮ ا ﺟ ﺐ ﻣ‬, ‫ﻣ‬
ِ‫ ﺑﺈﻣﻜﺎﻧ ِﻪ‬,, etc. ← 83 | 84 →

In general, modality can be classified into two main types, viz. “deontic
modality” and “epistemic modality” (Almanna 2016; Halliday 1970; Hoye 1997;
Jarjour 2006; Lyons 1977; Perkins 1983, among others).

6.2.1 Deontic modality

The word “deontic” means “duty”, “necessity” or “obligation”. It “is

obligation/necessity-oriented. In other words, it describes how things ought to
be” (Almanna 2016: 94). However, some researchers (cf. Downing and Locke
1992; Farghal and Shunnaq 1999; Jarjour 2006) hold that deontic modality is
also used to indicate “permission”.

I haven’t visited my family for ten years, so I will have to visit them this
summer.
(obligation and/or necessity)

When you finish, you may leave. (permission)

6.2.2 Epistemic modality

The term “epistemic” means “to understand” or “to have knowledge”. Therefore,
to express the degree of their commitment to the truth of the proposition, the
language users can use modal verbs epistemically (cf. Almanna 2016; Downing
and Locke 1992; Farghal and Shunnaq 1999; Jarjour 2006).

He’s studied well; he should pass the exam (expectation).

6.3 Translating modality

As Arabic does not have a well-defined class of modals precisely corresponding

to English modal verbs and expressions on the one hand, and modality in general
is characterized by ambiguity, contextuality, and indeterminacy on the other (cf.
Abdel-Fattah 2005; Almanna 2016; Bybee and Fleischman ← 84 | 85 → 1995),
identifying the function of the modal verb in question should be paid extra
attention. Thus, in translating modality, we would like to suggest the following
four steps adopted with a slight modification from Bell’s (1991) cognitive
approach:
1. visual recognition (i.e., reading the original text with a view to identifying
the modal verb used) – this is an easy task.
2. identifying the function of modality in the source text – this is the most
difficult and challenging task.
3. mechanism of lexical search – this requires translation trainees to develop a
contrastive competence.
4. encoding the draft semantically, pragmatically, lexico-grammatically and
stylistically in the target text – here, the translators need to pay attention to
the linguistic and stylistic norms of the target language.

As an illustration, the following example may be considered:

I had to get up early yesterday; there were a lot of things to be done.

1. visual recognition: try your hand at identifying the modal verb used in the
source text: it is had to.
2. the function of the modal verb: obligation and/or necessity + in the past.
3. mechanism of lexical search: had to can be translated in Arabic into

… ‫ ﻛﺎن ﻳ ُﻔﺘﺮض‬،‫ ﻛﺎن ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻔﺮوض‬،‫ ﻛﺎن ﻳﻨﺒﻐﻲ‬،‫ﻲ‬

ّ ‫ﻛﺎن ﻋﻠ‬

4. encoding the draft semantically, pragmatically, lexico-grammatically and

stylistically in the target language, as in:

.‫ﻆ ُﻣﺒﻜ ّﺮا ً أﻣﺲ؛ إذ ﻛﺎن ﻟﺪيّ اﻟﻜﺜﻴﺮ ﻣﻦ اﻻﻟﺘﺰاﻣﺎت‬

َ ‫ﻲ أن أﺳﺘﻴﻘ‬
ّ ‫ﻛﺎن ﻋﻠ‬

To make this point clear, these two examples extracted from Hans Küng’s book
Islam: Past, Present and Future (cited in and translated by Al-Shuraīqī 2016: 23)
may be given full consideration: ← 85 | 86 →
ST:

The Islamic economic system could not become the equal of the European. It
was also vitally important that until well into the twentieth century, almost all
Islamic countries were economically dependent on the European colonial
powers.

TT:
 ‫وﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻬﻢ‬.‫وﻟﻢ ﻳﺴﺘﻄﻊ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎدي اﻹﺳﻼﻣﻲ أن ﻳﻜﻮن ﻧﺪا ً ﻟﻠﻨﻈﺎم اﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎدي ﻟﻠﺪول اﻷوروﺑﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺘﻤﺪ اﻗﺘﺼﺎدﻳﺎ ً ﻋﻠﻰ‬. ‫ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻏﺎﻟﺒﻴﺔ اﻟﺪول اﻹﺳﻼﻣﻴﺔ‬،‫ذﻛﺮه أﻧﻪ وﺣﺘﻰ ﻓﺘﺮة ﻣﺘﻘﺪﻣﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻘﺮن اﻟﻌﺸﺮﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻗﻮى اﻻﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎر اﻷوروﺑﻲ‬

In the original text, the writer uses the modal verb could in the negative form to
express the inability of the Islamic economic system to become the equal of the
European in a specific period of time in the past. So, here three elements need to
be given full consideration through the nexus of translation, that is, ability,
negation, and past. Being fully aware of these three elements, the student
translator has resorted to ‫ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺴﺘﻄﻊ‬, thus reflecting the inability of the Islamic
economic system to become the equal of the European in a specific period of
time in the past.
Following is a second example (p. 24):
ST:

One might think of the unconditional prohibition against usury, which is

hardly compatible with the modern international financial system.

TT:

‫ﻤﺎﻟﻲ‬.‫ وﻫﻮ اﻷﻣﺮ اﻟﺬي ﻣﻦ اﻟﺼﻌﺐ ﺗﻮاﻓﻘﻪ ﻣﻊ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻟ‬،‫وﻗﺪ ﻳﻔﻜﺮ اﻟﺒﻌﺾ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺘﺤﺮﻳﻢ اﻟﻤﻄﻠﻖ ﻟﻠﺮﺑﺎ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﻲ اﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ‬

In the source text, the modal verb might is used epistemically to express the
writer’s commitment to the truth of the proposition. Therefore, the function of
the modal verb might here is to indicate a possibility. Being aware of the
function of the modal verb used, the translator has opted for the modalized
particle ‫ ﻗﺪ‬, thus accurately reflecting the degree of certainty. ← 86 | 87 →

6.4 Modality: Different functions

As hinted above, modality can achieve wide-ranging functions; therefore,

translators need to give full consideration to these functions prior to adopting
their own translation strategy. In what follows, some light will be shed on the
main functions achieved by modality in both languages.

6.4.1 Obligation and necessity

To express obligation or necessity in English, must, have to, and had to can be
used, as in the following examples:

I haven’t visited my friend for three years, so I will have to visit her this
summer.
Due to the traffic system, you cannot turn right here, you must turn left.
He left before the end of the meeting; he had to go home early.

In Arabic, however, to express obligation or necessity, the following modalized

verbs, prepositional phrases, and expressions may be used:

…‫ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻮاﺟﺐ‬،‫ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻀﺮوري‬،‫ ﻳ ُﻔﺘﺮض‬،‫ ﻳﺘﻮّﺟﺐ‬،‫ ﻋﻠﻰ‬،‫ ﻳﻨﺒﻐﻲ‬،‫ ﻳﺘﻌﻴ ّﻦ‬،‫ﻳﺠ•ﺐ‬

…‫ ﻛﺎن ﻣﻦ اﻟﻮاﺟﺐ‬،‫ ﻛﺎن ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻔﺮوض‬،‫ ﻛﺎن ﻳ ُﻔﺘﺮض‬،‫ ﻛﺎن ﻳﻨﺒﻐﻲ‬،‫ ﻛﺎن ﻳﺘﻌﻴ ّﻦ‬،‫ﻛﺎ•ن ﻳﺠﺐ‬

Consider the translations of the above sentences:

.‫ﻲ زﻳﺎرﺗﻬﺎ ﻫﺬا اﻟﺼﻴﻒ‬

ّ ‫ ﻟﺬا ﻋﻠ‬،‫ﻟﻢ أُزر ﺻﺪﻳﻘﺘﻲ ﻣﻨﺬ ﺛﻼث ﺳﻨﻮات‬
‫ﺟﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ(أن‬
ّ ‫ﻳﺘﻮ‬/‫ ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻚ أن ﺗﺴﺘﺪﻳﺮ ﻳﻤﻴﻨ ًﺎ ﻫﻨﺎ؛ ﻳﺠﺐ ﻳ)ﺠﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ‬،‫ﺑﺴﺒﺐ اﻻ ِزدﺣﺎم اﻟﻤﺮوري‬
.‫ﺗﺴﺘﺪﻳﺮ ﻳﺴﺎًرا‬
ً.‫ﻣﺒﻜ ّﺮا‬
ُ ‫ﻏﺎدر اﻟﻤﻜﺎن ﻗﺒﻞ ا ِﻧﺘﻬﺎء اﻻ ِﺟﺘﻤﺎع ﻷﻧﻪ ﻛﺎن ﻳ ُﻔﺘﺮض أن ﻳﺬﻫﺐ إﻟﻰ اﻟﺒﻴﺖ‬

6.4.2 Lack of necessity and prohibition

To express lack of necessity or prohibition in English, must not and do not have
to can be used, as in the following examples: ← 87 | 88 →

She does not have to wear glasses when driving, but she usually does.
You mustn’t use your mobile during takeoff.
In order to apply for this job, you must speak two languages, but you don’t
have to have a degree in international relations.

In Arabic, however, to express lack of necessity or prohibition, the following

modalized verbs, prepositional phrases, and expressions may be used:
 …‫ ﻟﻴﺲ ُﻣﻠﺰًﻣﺎ‬، (‫ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻟﺰاًﻣﺎ )ﻋﻠﻴﻚ‬،‫ ﻻ داﻋﻲ ﻟـ‬،‫ ﻻ ﺣﺎﺟﺔ إﻟﻰ‬،‫ ﻳﺘﻌﻴ ّﻦ أﻻ‬،‫ﻳﺠﺐ أﻻ‬ •

Consider the translations of the above sentences:

.‫ وﻟﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﻋﺎدة ﻣﺎ ﺗﻔﻌﻞ ذﻟﻚ‬،‫ﻻ ﻳﺘﻮّﺟﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ أن ﺗﻠﺒﺲ ﻧﻈﺎراﺗﻬﺎ ) ﻋﻮﻳﻨﺎﺗﻬﺎ( أﺛﻨﺎء اﻟﻘﻴﺎدة‬
.‫ﻳﺠﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ أﻻ ﺗﺴﺘﻌﻤﻞ ﻧﻘﺎﻟﻚ )ﻣﻮﺑﺎﻳﻠﻚ( أﺛﻨﺎء إﻗﻼع اﻟﻄﺎﺋﺮة‬
ً ‫ وﻟﻜﻦ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻟﺰا‬،‫ﻛﻲ ﺗﻘﺪ ّم ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺬه اﻟﻮﻇﻴﻔﺔ ﻳﺘﻮّﺟﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ أن ﺗﺘﻜﻠ ّﻢ ﻟﻐﺘﻴﻦ‬
‫ ﻟﺪﻳﻚ‬. ‫ﻣﺎ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ أن ﺗﻜﻮن‬
‫) ﺗﺤﻤﻞ( ﺷﻬﺎدة ﻓﻲ اﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎت اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬

Note that must not indicates that we still have a necessity and/or obligation not to
do something (prohibition) and that is why it is important to reflect such a
necessity in your translation, as in:

…‫ ﻳ ُﻔﺘﺮض أﻻ‬، … ‫ § أﻻ‬،… ‫ ﻳﺘﻮّﺟﺐ أﻻ‬،… ‫ﻳﺠﺐ أﻻ‬ •

However, do not have to indicates that the necessity and obligation have been
removed; hence our suggestion:

… ‫ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻟﺰاًﻣﺎ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ‬،… ‫ ﻻ داﻋﻲ ﻟـ‬، … ‫ﻻ ﺣﺎﺟﺔ إﻟﻰ‬ •

6.4.3 Advisability, opinion, and expectation

To express advisability, an opinion, or an expectation in English, should and

ought to can be used, as in the following examples:

The government should/ought to do more to help homeless people.

You look very tired; you ought to/should go to bed.
I believe that teachers should have higher salaries. ← 88 | 89 →

In Arabic, however, to express advisability, an opinion, or an expectation, the

following modalized verbs, prepositional phrases, and expressions may be used:

… ‫ ﻳ ُﺴﺘﺤﺴﻦ‬، (‫ ﻳﺘﻌﻴ ّﻦ )ﻋﻠﻴﻚ‬،‫ ﻳﻨﺒﻐﻲ‬،‫• ﻋﻠﻴﻚ‬

… ‫ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻘﺮر‬،‫ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺘﻮﻗﻊ‬،‫• ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻔﺮوض‬

Consider the translations of the above sentences:

 .(‫ﻲﻠ(ﻰ اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣﺔ أن ﺗﻌﻤﻞ اﻟﻜﺜﻴﺮ ﻟﻤﺴﺎﻋﺪة اﻟﻨﺎس اﻟﻤﺸﺮدﻳﻦ )اﻟﺬﻳﻦ ﺑﻼ ﻣﺄوى‬ ‫)ﻳﻨﺒﻐ ﻋ‬
.‫ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ ) ﻳ ُﺴﺘﺤﺴأﻦن( ﺗﺬﻫﺐ إﻟﻰ اﻟﻔﺮاش‬،‫ﺗﺒﺪو ﻣﺘﻌﺒ ًﺎ ﺟﺪا‬
.‫ﺐ ﻋﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬ ُ ‫ﻤﻌﻠ ّﻤﻴﻦ ا)ﻟ‬
َ ‫ﻤﺪّرﺳﻴﻦ ﻳ(ﻨﺒﻐﻲ أن ﻳﺘﻘﺎﺿﻮا رواﺗ‬ ُ ‫أﻋﺘﻘﺪ ﻓ)ﻲ رأﻳﻲأ(ن اﻟ‬

6.4.4 Lost opportunities

To talk about lost opportunities in English, should or ought to followed by a past

participle may be used, as in the following examples:

We lost the match but we should have won because we were better than them.
I feel sick; I should not have eaten so much rice.
You should have consulted your doctor a long time ago.

In Arabic, however, to talk about lost opportunities, the following modalized

verbs, prepositional phrases, and expressions preceded by ‫ ﻛﺎن‬may be employed:

‫ ﻛﺎن ﻳﺘﻌﻴ ّﻦ‬،‫ ﻛﺎن ﻳ ُﻔﺘﺮض‬،‫ ﻛﺎن ﻳﻨﺒﻐﻲ‬،‫ﻛﺎن ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻔﺮوض‬ •

Consider the translations of the above sentences:

.‫ ﻟﻜﻦ ﻛﺎن ﻳ ُﻔﺘﺮضﻛﺎ)ن ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻔﺮوض( أن ﻧﻔﻮز ﻷﻧﻨﺎ ﻛ ُﻨﺎ أﻓﻀﻞ ﻣﻨﻬﻢ‬،‫ﻟﻘﺪ ﺧﺴﺮﻧﺎ اﻟﻤﺒﺎراة‬
.‫ﻲ أﻻ آﻛﻞ اﻟﻜﺜﻴﺮ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺮز‬
ّ ‫أﺷﻌﺮ ﺑﺎﻹﻋﻴﺎء؛ إذ ﻛﺎن ﻳﺘﻌﻴ ّﻦ ﻋﻠ‬
.| 89 ← ‫ﻛﺎن ﻳﺘﻌﻴ ّﻦ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ(أن ﺗﺴﺘﺸﻴﺮ اﻟﻄﺒﻴﺐ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻣﺪة‬/‫ ﻛﺎن ﻳ ُﻔﺘﺮض‬/‫ﻛﺎن ﻳﻨﺒﻐﻲﻛﺎ)ن ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻔﺮوض‬
90 →

6.4.5 Possibility/likelihood

To express possibility/likelihood in English, these may be used:

• “may” or “might”
• “maybe” or “perhaps”
• It is “probable”/“possible”/“likely”/“unlikely” that
• “possibly” or “probably”

as in the following examples:

She may be in the office. Have you called her?

He might be playing football now.
 You might have left it in the shop.

In Arabic, however, to express possibility/likelihood, the following modalized

particles, verbs, prepositional phrases, and expressions may be employed:

‫ﻤﺤﺘﻤﻞ‬ُ ‫ ﻣﻦ اﻟ‬،‫ ﻳ ُﺤﺘﻤﻞ‬،‫• ﻗﺪ‬

‫رﺑ ّﻤﺎ‬ •
‫ﻤﺴﺘﺒﻌﺪ‬
ُ ‫ ﻣﻦ اﻟ‬،‫ﻤﺤﺘﻤﻞ‬ُ ‫ ﻣﻦ اﻟ‬،‫ﺟﺢ‬
ّ ‫ﻤﺮ‬ُ ‫• ﻣﻦ اﻟ‬

Consider the translations of the above sentences:

‫ﻫﻞ اﺗ ّﺼﻠﺖ ﺑﻬﺎ؟‬.‫ﺗﻜﻮن ﻓﻲ ﻣﻜﺘﺒﻬﺎ‬ (‫ رﺑ ّﻤﺎ‬،‫ ﻳ ُﺤﺘﻤﻞ‬،‫ﻗﺪ ﻣ)ﻦ اﻟُﻤﺤﺘﻤﻞ‬

.‫ﻣﻦ اﻟُﻤﺤﺘﻤﻞ )رﺑ ّﻤﺎ(أﻧﻪ ﻳﻠﻌﺐ ﻛﺮة اﻟﻘﺪم اﻵن‬
.‫ ﻳ ُﺤﺘﻤﻞ( أﻧﻚ ﻗﺪ ﺗﺮﻛﺘﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﺤﻞ‬،‫رﺑ ّﻤﺎ ﻣ)ﻦ اﻟُﻤﺤﺘﻤﻞ‬

Note that in legislative texts, may means “be allowed to”, thus it is translated
into ‫ ﻟـ‬, ‫ ﻳﺠﻮز‬, ‫ ﻳﺤﻖ‬.

The landlord may rescind the rental contract without the consent of the
tenant in case of emergency.

.| 90 ← (‫ ﻳﺠﻮﻟزﻠ(ﻤﺎﻟﻚ أن ﻳﻔﺴﺦ ﻋﻘﺪ اﻹﻳﺠﺎر ﻣﻦ دون ﻣﻮاﻓﻘﺔ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ اﻟﻄﻮارئ‬/‫ﻳﺤﻖ‬

91 →

The tenant may not assign the rental contract to a third party without the
written consent of the landlord.

.‫ﻻ ﻳﺤﻖ ﻟﻠﻤﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮ أن ﻳﺘﻨﺎزل ﻋﻦ ﻋﻘﺪ اﻹﻳﺠﺎر ﻟﻠﻐﻴﺮ ﺑﺪون ﻣﻮاﻓﻘﺔ ﺧﻄﻴ ّﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻚ‬
Or

…‫ﻻ ﻳﺠﻮز ﻟﻠﻤﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮ‬

… ‫ﻟﻴﺲ ﻣﻦ ﺣﻖ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮ أن‬

Note that in religious texts, may is used for supplication in this formula:

May + Allah/God + Verb 1

May Allah reward you.

May Allah rest him in peace.

Note that in interrogative sentences, may is used for asking permission; thus it is
translated into

‫ ﻫﻞ ﺑﺈﻣﻜﺎﻧﻲ أن‬،‫ﻲ‬
ّ ‫ أﺗﺴﻤﺢ ﻟ‬،‫ﻲ‬
ّ ‫• ﻫﻞ ﻟ‬

May I open the window, sir?

May I use your pen, please?

6.4.6 Ability, lack of ability, and (not) giving permission

To express ability, lack of ability, and/or (not) giving permission in English, can,
could, or be able to can be used, as in the following examples:

She can speak three languages in addition to her mother tongue.

Although he spoke quickly, I could understand what he said.
She will be able to buy this house next year.

In Arabic, however, to express ability, lack of ability, or (not) giving permission,

the following modalized verbs, prepositional phrases, and expressions may be
used:

…92 | 91 ← (‫ ) ﻻ( ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻪ‬،‫ )ﻟﻴﺲ( ﺑﻤﻘﺪوره‬،‫ )ﻟﻴﺲ( ﻟﻪ اﻟﻘﺪرة‬،‫→ ﻻ( ﻳﺴﺘﻄﻴﻊ‬ •

Consider the translations of the above sentences:

.‫ﺗﺴﺘﻄﻴﻊ ) ﺑﻤﻘﺪورﻫﺎ( أن ﺗﺘﻜﻠ ّﻢ ﺛﻼث ﻟﻐﺎت ﺑﺎﻹﺿﺎﻓﺔ إﻟﻰ ﻟﻐﺘﻬﺎ اﻷم‬

 .ِ‫ إﻻ إﻧﻨﻲ ﺗﻤﻜ ّﻨﺖ ﻣﻦ ﻓﻬِﻤﻪ‬،‫ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ أﻧﻪ ﺗﻜﻠ ّﻢ ﺑﻬﺪوء‬
.‫ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﻄﺎﻋﺘﻬﺎ( ﺷﺮاء ﻫﺬا اﻟﻤﻨﺰل ﻓﻲ اﻟﺴﻨﺔ اﻟﻤﻘﺒﻠﺔ‬/‫ﺳﻴﻜﻮن ﺑﻤﻘﺪورﻫﺎ ) ﺑﺈﻣﻜﺎﻧﻬﺎ‬

6.4.7 Futurity

To express futurity in English, will, shall, or be going to can be used, as in the

following examples:

When will you know your exam results?

I am going to travel to London next week.
She won’t be able to attend the meeting.

In Arabic, however, to express futurity, the following modalized particles, verbs,

prepositional phrases, and expressions may be employed:

‫ ﻟﻦ‬،‫ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻨﻴ ّﺔ‬،‫ ﻳﻨﻮي‬،‫ ﺳﻮف‬،‫ﺳـــ‬ •

Consider the translations of the above sentences:

‫ﺞ ا ِﻣﺘﺤﺎﻧﺎﺗﻚ؟‬
َ ‫ﻣﺘﻰ ﺳﺘﻌﺮف ﻧﺘﺎﺋ‬
.‫أﻧﻮي اﻟﺴﻔﺮ )ﻓﻲ اﻟﻨﻴ ّﺔ أن أﺳﺎﻓﺮ أو ﺳﺄﺳﺎﻓﺮإﻟ(ﻰ ﻟﻨﺪن ﻓﻲ اﻷﺳﺒﻮع اﻟُﻤﻘﺒﻞ‬
.‫ﻟﻦ ﺗﺘﻤﻜﻦ ﻣﻦ ﺣﻀﻮر اﻻ ِﺟﺘﻤﺎع‬

Note that in legislative texts, shall means “must”, thus it is translated into ‫ﻣﻦ اﻟﻮاﺟﺐ‬
‫ﻳﺠﺐ‬, ‫ﺟﺐ‬
ّ ‫ﻳﺘﻮ‬, or just a simple present tense.

The tenant hereby shall make no structural alterations without the landlord’s
written consent.

.‫ﻳﻠﺘﺰم اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮ ﺑﻤﻮﺟﺐ ﻫﺬا اﻟﻌﻘﺪ ﺑﺄﻻ ﻳﺠﺮي أيّ ﺗﺮﻣﻴﻤﺎت ﻣﻦ دون ﻣﻮاﻓﻘﺔ اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻚ اﻟﺨﻄﻴ ّﺔ‬

The first Party hereto shall conform to the conditions prescribed herein and
pay the rent in full not later than the tenth day of each month.

‫ وﻳﺪﻓﻊ اﻹﻳﺠﺎر‬. ‫ﻳﺠﺐ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻄﺮف اﻷول ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬا اﻟﻌﻘﺪ أن ﻳﺘﻘﻴ ّﺪ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮوط اﻟﻤﻨﺼﻮص ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻌﻘﺪ‬
93 | 92 ← ‫ﻞ ﺷﻬﺮ‬ ّ ‫ﻛﺎﻣﻼ ً ﻓﻲ ﻣﺪة ﻻ ﺗﺘﺠﺎوز اﻟﻴﻮم اﻟﻌﺎﺷﺮ ﻣﻦ ﻛ‬ →
Or

… ‫ﻳﻠﺘﺰم اﻟﻄﺮف اﻷول‬

Note that in interrogative sentences, Shall I…? or Shall we …? is used to express

suggestions, thus it may be translated into Arabic as … ‫ ﻫﻞ ﺗﻘﺘﺮح‬, ‫ﻣﺎ رأﻳﻚ‬, etc. or
just ‫ﻫﻞ‬, as in the following example:

Shall we go to the cinema this evening?

(‫)ﻣﺎ رأﻳ ﻫﻚ‬
‫ﻞ ﻧﺬﻫﺐ إﻟﻰ اﻟﺴﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻫﺬا اﻟﻤﺴﺎء؟‬

6.4.8 Polite request

To express a polite request in English, sentences beginning with: Will you…?,

Would you…?, or Could you…? can be used, as in the following examples:

Would you switch off the light, please?

Could you tell me in detail what happened last night?
Can you pass me the salt, please?

In Arabic, however, to express a polite request, these structures may be

employed:

an imperative sentence + … ‫ رﺟﺎء‬،‫ ﻟﻮ ﺳﻤﺤﺖ‬،‫• ﻣﻦ ﻓﻀﻠﻚ‬

an imperative sentence + (… ‫ ﺑﺎرك اﻟﻠﻪ ﻓﻴﻚ‬،‫ ) رﺑﻲ ﻳﺨﻠﻴﻚ‬some religious •
expressions
… ‫…ﻫﻞ ﻟﻚ أن‬ ، ‫ ﻫﻞ ﺗﺘﻜّﺮم ﺑـ‬، … ‫ﻲ أن‬
ّ ‫• ﻫﻞ ﻟ‬

Consider the translations of the above sentences:

‫ أو ﻫﻞ ﺗﺘﻜ ّﺮم ﺑﺈﻏﻼق اﻹﻧﺎرة ﻟﻮ ﺳﻤﺤﺖ؟‬.‫ﻣﻦ ﻓﻀﻠﻚ ) ﻟﻮ ﺳﻤﺤﺖ(إ ِﻏﻠﻖ اﻹﻧﺎرة‬

‫ﻤﺎ ﺣﺪث اﻟﺒﺎرﺣﺔ؟‬
ّ ‫ﻫﻞ ﻟﻚ أن ﺗﺨﺒﺮﻧﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻔﺼﻴﻞ ﻋ‬
‫ أو ﻣﻦ ﻓﻀﻠﻚ ﻧﺎوﻟﻨﻲ اﻟﻤﻠﺢ؟‬.‫ ﺟﺰاك اﻟﻠﻪ ﺧﻴًﺮا‬،‫ﻧﺎوﻟﻨﻲ اﻟﻤﻠﺢ‬

6.4.9 Preference

To express preference in English, would prefer, would better, or would rather

can be used, as in the following examples: ← 93 | 94 →

I would rather stay at home tonight than go out.

She would prefer to study translation than English.
I would prefer to travel by train.

In Arabic, however, to express preference, the following modalized verbs,

prepositional phrases, and expressions may be used:

‫ﻤﺴﺘﺤﺴﻦ‬
ُ ‫ ﻣﻦ اﻟ‬،‫ﻀﻞ‬
ّ ‫ﻤﻔ‬
ُ ‫ ﻣﻦ اﻟ‬،‫ ﻳ ُﺴﺘﺤﺴﻦ‬،‫ ﻳ ُﺤﺒﺬ‬،‫ﻳ ُﻔﻀﻞ‬ •
‫أ ُﺣﺒﺬ أن‬/‫أﻓﻀﻞ أن‬ •

Consider the translations of the above sentences:

.‫اﻟﻴﻠﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ أن أﺧﺮج‬ ‫أﻓﻀﻞ أن أﺑﻘﻰ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺒﻴﺖ ﻫﺬ‬

.‫ﺗ ُﺤﺒﺬ أن ﺗﺪرس اﻟﺘﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ أن ﺗﺪرس اﻟﻠﻐﺔ اﻹﻧﻜﻠﻴﺰﻳﺔ‬
.ِ‫ﻞ )أ ُﺣﺒﺬ( أن أﺳﺎﻓﺮ ﺑﺎﻟِﻘﻄﺎر‬
ُ ‫أﻓﻀ‬

Note that I’d better is different from you’d better as the former is used to express
“preference” while the latter is used to express “advisability”. Consider the
following two examples:

I’d better get back to work. (preference)

You’d better tell her everything. (advice)
Further reading

Almanna, A. (2016). The Routledge Course in Translation Annotation: Arabic-

English-Arabic. London/New York: Routledge.
Almanna, A., and Almanna, F. (2008). Translation: History, Theory and
Practice (in Arabic). London: Sayyab Books Ltd.
Al-Qinai, J. (2008). “Translating Modals between English and Arabic”,
Translation and Interpreting Studies, Vol. 3.1/3.2, pp. 30–67.
Aziz, Y. (1989). A Contrastive Grammar of English and Arabic. Iraq: Mosul
University Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1970). “Functional Diversity in Language as Seen from a
Consideration of Modality and Mood in English”, Foundations of
Language: International Journal of Language and Philosophy, Vol. 6, pp.
322–361. ← 94 | 95 →
Hoye, L. (1997). Adverbs and Modality in English. London: Longman.
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Perkins, M. R. (1983). Modal Expressions in English. London: Frances Pinter.
Questions

1. Are there certain categories for modal verbs in Arabic? Discuss.

2. Modality in language falls into two main categories. What are they? Discuss
with illustrative examples.
3. The modal verb may has a number of functions. What are they and how do
you translate it?
4. Modality is characterized by ambiguity, contextuality, and indeterminacy.
Explain with illustrative examples.
5. What are the main functions of shall?
6. What are the main functions of can?
7. What are the main functions of should or ought to?
8. How would you express “lost opportunities” in Arabic?
9. How would you express “preference” in English?
10. How would you express “futurity” in English?
Exercises

Exercise 1: Translate the following sentences into Arabic, paying special

attention to modality:

1. I will issue another cheque within two weeks.

2. I am going to study English at the University of Exeter in Britain next year.
3. Those students should not be playing tennis at this time. They ought to be at
school. ← 95 | 96 →
4. You ought to improve your English if you decide to stay in the English
department.
5. She should consult her doctor immediately.
6. You can use my mobile.
7. He shouldn’t make a rushed decision.
8. You must keep it secret. You mustn’t tell anyone.
9. Could you please translate this sentence?
10. Would you like me to show you the city’s main landmarks?
11. Would you like to have your breakfast in the garden?
12. I am not sure if they will be able to come tomorrow.
13. You can write your CV now, but you don’t have to do so immediately.
14. He was able to run ten miles without stopping yesterday.
15. You cannot smoke here.

Exercise 2: Identify the functions of the modal verbs (highlighted for you) and
then translate them into Arabic:

1. In order to apply for this job, you must speak English, but you don’t have
to have a degree in languages.
2. She has failed her exam; she has to retake it.
3. You mustn’t use your mobile in class.
4. Look! He is going to fall down the hole.
5. I sent the letter two weeks ago, so it ought to have arrived by now.
6. She has been studying hard for the exam, so she should pass it.
7. This is the best book that I’ve read. You must read it.
‫‪8. We ought to have called and invited her if we had known that.‬‬
‫‪9. He would rather join the army than study at the university.‬‬
‫‪10. The weather is very cold outside. If you go out now, you will catch cold.‬‬

‫‪Exercise 3: Identify the functions of the modalized verbs, particles, and‬‬

‫‪expressions and then translate them into English:‬‬

‫‪.1‬ﻋﻠﻴﻚ أن ﺗﺴﺘﺄذن ﻣﻦ واﻟﺪك ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﺬﻫﺎب إﻟﻰ اﻟﺤﻔﻠﺔ ﻷﻧﻚ ﻻ ﺗﺰال ﺻﻐﻴًﺮا‪.‬‬
‫ﻣ‪.2‬ﻦ اﻟُﻤﺤﺘﻤﻞ أن أﺑﻴﻊ ﺳﻴﺎرﺗﻲ وأﺷﺘﺮي واﺣﺪة ﺟﺪﻳﺪة ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ وﺿﻌﻲ اﻟﺠﺪﻳﺪ‪.‬‬
‫→ ‪ .3 ← 96 | 97‬ﺑﺈﻣﻜﺎﻧﻚ أن ﺗﺮﻛﻦ ﺳﻴﺎرﺗﻚ ﻫﻨﺎ‪ ،‬وﻟﻜﻦ ﻳﺠﺐ أﻻ ﺗﺘﺠﺎوز اﻟﻤﺪة اﻟﻤﺤﺪدة‪ ،‬وإﻻ ﺳﺘﺘﻌّﺮض‬
‫إ‪.‬ﻟﻰ ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻔﺔ ﻣﺮورﻳﺔ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺒﺎﺋﻊ ﺗﺴﻠﻴﻢ اﻟﺸﻘﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺪة ﻻ ﺗﺘﺠﺎوز ‪ 15‬ﻳﻮًﻣﺎ‪.‬‬ ‫‪.4‬‬
‫ﻢ إ‪.‬ﺑﻼغ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ‬‫ﻤﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮ أن ﻳ ُﺮﻣﻢ اﻟﺸﻘﺔ وﻳﺴﺘﻘﻄﻊ ﻧﻔﻘﺎت اﻟﺘﺮﻣﻴﻢ ﻣﻦ أﺟﺮة اﻟﺒﻴﺖ ﺷﺮﻳﻄﺔ أن ﻳﺘ ّ‬ ‫‪ .5‬ﻟﻠ ُ‬
‫اﻟﻌﻘﺎر ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﺒﺪء ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺮﻣﻴﻤﺎت‬
‫ّ‬
‫ﻤﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮ ﺑﺈﺧﻼء اﻟﻌﻴﻦ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮة إن ﺗﺨﻠﻒ‬
‫ﻳﺤﻖ ﻟﺼﺎﺣﺐ اﻟﻌﻘﺎر رﻓﻊ دﻋﻮى ﻗﻀﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻳﻄﺎﻟﺐ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ اﻟ ُ‬ ‫‪.6‬‬
‫ﻤﺒﺮم ﺑﻴﻨﻬﻤﺎ ‪ .‬ﻟﻤﺪة ﺷﻬﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻔﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻌﻘﺪ اﻟ ُ‬
‫ﻤﺘ ّ‬
‫ﻤﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮ ﻋﻦ دﻓﻊ اﻷﺟﺮة اﻟ ُ‬ ‫اﻟ ُ‬
‫‪ .7‬أﻧﻮي اﻟﺴﻔﺮ إﻟﻰ اﻟﻬﻨﺪ ﻹﺟﺮاء ﻓﺤﻮﺻﺎت ﻃﺒﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺲ ﻛﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻗﺎﻋﺔا ‪.‬‬
‫ﻻ ِﻣﺘﺤﺎن‪ ،‬وﻟﻜﻦ‬ ‫ﺳﺎ ﻷﻧﻬﻢ ﺳﻴﻮﻓّﺮون ﻗﻮاﻣﻴ َ‬
‫ﻻ ﺣﺎﺟﺔ إﻟﻰ أن ﺗﺠﻠﺐ ﻣﻌﻚ ﻗﺎﻣﻮ ً‬ ‫‪.8‬‬
‫ﻳ ُﻤﻜﻨﻚ أن ﺗﺠﻠﺐ واﺣﺪ ًا إن ﺷﻌﺮت أﻧﻪ أﻛﺜﺮ ﻓﺎﺋﺪة ﻣﻦ ﻗﻮاﻣﻴﺴﻬﻢ‬
‫‪.9‬ﻛﻨﺖ أﻋﺮف أﻧﻚ ﻗﺪ ﻋ ُﺪت ﻣﻦ ﺳﻔﺮﺗﻚ ﻟﻜﻨﺖ أوّل اﻟﺤﺎﺿﺮﻳﻦ‪ .‬وﻟﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﺻﺪ ّﻗﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻟ ﻳﻢﻜ‪.‬ﻦ ﻋﻨﺪي أي ﺧﺒﺮ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎن‬
‫ﻟﻮ‬
‫ﻲ وﺗﺨﺒﺮﻧﻲ‬
‫اﻟﻤﻔﺮوض أن ﺗﺘﺼﻞ ﺑ ّ‬
‫ت ﻟﺘ ُﻬﻨ ّﺌﻪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺣﻪِ وﻟﻢ ﺗﺄ ِ‬
‫ﻤﺴﺘﺒﻌﺪ أﻧﻬﺎ ﺳﻤﻌﺖ ﺑﺨﺒﺮِ ﻧﺠﺎ ِ‬
‫ﻣﻦ اﻟ ُ‬ ‫‪.10‬‬

‫‪Exercise 4: In order to translate modality from language A to language B, the‬‬

‫‪translator needs to detect the function of the modal verb used. In this chapter, we‬‬
‫‪have provided the reader with an approach to translating modality. Discuss it‬‬
‫‪with illustrative examples.‬‬
‫‪Exercise 5: What are the functions of don’t have to and must not in these two‬‬
‫‪examples:‬‬

‫‪1.‬‬ ‫‪You don’t have to be a good tennis player to enjoy the game.‬‬
‫‪2.‬‬ ‫‪You mustn’t eat in class.‬‬
| 99 →

CHAPTER 7

Lexical Semantics
Key terms

• Antonymy
• Homonymy
• Homophony
• Hyperonymy
• Hyponymy
• Lexical semantics
• Polysemy
• Reference
• Referent
• Referring expression
• Sense
• Synonymy

In another area of semantics, “lexical semantics”, the focus of attention is shifted

towards the study of word meaning, and the lexical relations that a word has
with others. In lexical semantics, lexical relations, such as synonymy, antonymy,
hyponymy, hyperonymy, polysemy, homonymy, and the like, are given full
consideration. This chapter studies these relations in a direct link with the actual
act of translating. ← 99 | 100 →

7.1 Reference versus sense

Reference refers to the relationship between words or expressions (technically

known as “referring expressions”) inside the linguistic system and objects
(technically known as “referents”) in the real world. When you hear or read, for
instance, the word chair, and you are familiar with its meaning in English, you
will have a mental image of it – something that has a seat, a back, and usually
four legs; something that you can sit on, move, touch, and so on, as in the
following diagram:
This theory (known as “naming theory”) does not work with abstract words that
do not refer to anything in the real world, such as happiness, sadness, beauty,
courage, cowardice, and so on. Hearing or reading these words does not conjure
up any mental image in our mind. Does that mean that these words are
meaningless? In this regard, Goddard (1998/2011: 4; emphasis in the original)
rightly comments:

People sometimes think that the meaning of an expression is simply – and

merely – the thing that it identifies or “picks out” in the world (the so called
REFERENT). […] to see that meaning is distinct from reference, we only have
to think of words ← 100 | 101 → which do not refer to anything at all […].
These words are not meaningless, so whatever the meaning of a word may be,
it must be something other than what the word refers to.

In addition to their denotative meanings (i.e., dictionary meanings), lexical items

acquire part of their meanings from their relations with other lexical items inside
the linguistic system and another part from the context in which they occur. In
this respect, Kreidler (1998: 46) holds:
 The meaning that a lexeme has because of these relationships is the sense of
that lexeme. Part of this relationship is seen in the way words do, or do not,
go together meaningfully.

In semantics, “sense” refers to the relationship that a lexical item has with other
lexical items inside the linguistic system. For instance, if an Arabic learner with
a basic level asks you about the meaning of the lexical item ‫( ﺳﻌﺎدة‬happiness) in
a sentence like ‫ أﺷﻌُﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺴﻌﺎدة‬, you may resort to using lexical items that have
strong relationships with the word in question, such as

• the adjective ‫( ﺳﻌﻴﺪ‬derived from the noun ‫ ) ﺳﻌﺎدة‬along with its synonyms,
such as ‫ ﻓَﺮِح‬, ‫ ُﻣﺒﺘﻬِﺞ‬, ‫ﻣﺴﺮور‬, etc., or its antonyms, such as ‫ﺣﺰﻳﻦ‬, ‫ ﺗﻌﻴﺲ‬, etc.
• the opposite of ‫ ﺳﻌﺎدة‬, i.e., ‫ﺣﺰن‬along with its synonyms, such as ‫ ﺗﻌﺎﺳﺔ‬, and so
on.

In another example, we may go for other relations that the word in question has
with other words, such as one-to-many relations (also known as “whole-part
relations”), as in ‫( ﺟﺴﻢ‬body) and its hyponyms, such as ‫( ﻳﺪ‬hand), ‫( ﺳﺎق‬leg), ‫وﺟﻪ‬
(face), and so on. By contrast, words like ‫(ﻋﻴﻦ‬eye), ‫( أﻧﻒ‬nose), ‫( ﻓﻢ‬mouth), ‫ﺧﺪ‬
(cheek), and the like, have many-to-one relations (also known as “part-whole
relations”) with the word ‫( وﺟﻪ‬face). Cast in more technical terms,

• the word ‫( ﺟﺴﻢ‬body) is a hyperonym of words like ‫( ﻳﺪ‬hand), ‫( ﺳﺎق‬leg), ‫وﺟﻪ‬

(face), etc. ← 101 | 102 →
• the word ‫( ﻳﺪ‬hand) is a hyponym of ‫( ﺟﺴﻢ‬body)
• the word ‫( وﺟﻪ‬body) is a hyperonym of words like ‫( ﻓﻢ‬mouth), ‫(ﻋﻴﻦ‬eye), ‫ﺧﺪ‬
(cheek), etc.
• the word ‫( ﻓﻢ‬mouth) is a hyponym of ‫( وﺟﻪ‬face)
• the word ‫( ﻓﻢ‬mouth) and ‫(أﻧﻒ‬nose) are co-hyponyms

In what follows, these lexical relations that a lexical item may have with other
lexical items will be examined in detail.

7.2 Synonymy
When words can be used by a language user to mean the same thing in a given
context, then they are synonymous. Examples of synonymy in English include
verbs like to start and to begin; adjectives like big, large, and huge; nouns like
father and dad; and adverbs like fast, quickly, and rapidly, and so on. Examples
of synonymy in Arabic include, for instance, verbs like َ ‫ﺳﻌِﺪ‬ َ ,‫ح‬
َ ‫ ﻓَﺮ‬, and ‫ﺞ‬
َ َ‫;ا ِﺑﺘﻬ‬
adjectives like ‫ وﺳﻴﻢ‬and ‫ ;ﺟﻤﻴﻞ‬nouns like ‫ ﺳﻨﺔ‬and ‫ ;ﻋﺎم‬and so on. However, it is
worth noting that although synonyms are instances of both mutual entailment
and co-hyponyms, they are rarely fully identical in all contexts (cf. Kreidler
1998: 97; Palmer 1976: 60). In this respect, Palmer (ibid.) rightly comments that
“no two words have the exactly the same meaning. Indeed it would seem
unlikely that two words with exactly the same meaning would both survive in a
language”. He holds that there are at least five ways in which they differ (pp.
60–64):

1. some sets of synonyms belong to different dialects of the language, as

in:

American English British English

• fall autumn
• mall shopping centre
• bookstore bookshop
• apartment flat
• downtown city centre
• soccer football
• check cheque
• elevator lift
• gas petrol
• highway motorway
• subway underground ← 102 | 103 →

2. some sets of synonyms are used in different styles or registers, as in:

Formal Informal
• commence start
• gentleman man or chap
• terminate end
• purchase buy
 3. some sets of synonyms are said to be different in their emotive or
evaluative meanings, as in:

• stateman politician
• hide conceal

4. some sets of synonyms are collocational restricted. For example, in

English the adjectives fast and quick are co-hyponyms, but we say fast
food, not quick food, and we say a quick shower, not a fast shower.
Similarly, we say beautiful weather, beautiful dog or beautiful village,
but not handsome weather, handsome dog or handsome village.

5. some words are close in meaning or their meanings overlap, as in, for
example, the verb to govern and its synonyms, such as to direct, to
control, to determine, to require, etc. Their meanings overlap since we
can have a set of synonyms for each lexical item.

At times, the same lexical item may have a different antonym, depending on the
context in which it occurs, as in the following sentence:

It is a deep river.

Here, it is acceptable to say It is not a shallow river, but not It is a profound

river as the opposite of the adjective deep in this context is shallow.
Arabic shows preference for “semantic repetition” in which, at least, two
synonyms, or near synonyms, are used in juxtaposition. To translate such a
semantic repetition from Arabic into English, the translator could opt for one of
the four techniques suggested by Dickins et al. (2002: 60–61). These are

1. merging, that is, merging the two synonymous words used in the
source text into one word in the target text.
2. grammatical transposition, that is, changing the part of speech of one of
the synonymous words used in the source text, such ← 103 | 104 → as
changing a noun into an adjective, a verb into an adverb, and so on.
3. semantic distancing, that is, translating the two synonymous words
used in the source text into two words, but their meanings are slightly
different in the target language.
 4. maintenance, that is, maintaining the same form of semantic repetition
along with the synonyms used.

As an illustration, the following example quoted from ‘Abdul-Sattār Nāsir’s

story (2009: 21) ‫( ﺛﻼث ﻗﺼﺺ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﻟﻠﻨﺸﺮ‬Three Stories not for Publishing) may be
considered:
ST:

‫ وﺗﻮّج اﻣﺮأة أﺧﺮى ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﺮش‬،‫ﺛﻢ وّزع اﻟﻤﻠﻚ ﻧﺼﻒ أﻣﻮاﻟﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻔﻘﺮاء واﻟﻤﻌﺪﻣﻴﻦ واﻟﻤﻨﺎﻓﻘﻴﻦ واﻟﺜﺮﺛﺎرﻳﻦ‬
… ‫ وﻋﺎش اﻟﻨﺎس ﻓﻲ ﻓﺮح واﺑﺘﻬﺎج‬،‫اﻟﻤﻤﻠﻜﺔ‬

The synonyms or near-synonyms in the source text, viz. ‫ اﻟﻔﻘﺮاء واﻟﻤﻌﺪﻣﻴﻦ‬and ‫ﻓﺮح‬
‫ واﺑﺘﻬﺎج‬can be merged into one word, as in:

• the king distributed half of his wealth to the poor, the hypocrites and the
gossips.
• the people lived in happiness.

Or, they can be maintained as in:

• the king distributed half of his wealth to the poor, the needy, the
hypocrites and the gossips.
• the people lived in delight and happiness.

As the near-synonyms ‫ اﻟﻔﻘﺮاء واﻟﻤﻌﺪﻣﻴﻦ‬show a slight difference in meaning in

Arabic in terms of the degree of poverty, they lend themselves to the poor and
the needy respectively. In the second example, a grammatical transposition, in
which the Arabic doublet can be replaced by the English adjective-noun phrase,
is preferred here to maintain the general effect of the emphasis provided by such
a repetition in the source text, as in:
TT:

Then, the king distributed half of his wealth to the poor, the needy, the
hypocrites, and the gossips. He also crowned another queen to sit on the
throne of the kingdom. The people lived in great happiness. ← 104 | 105 →
7.3 Antonymy

When words have opposite meanings in a given context, they are antonyms.
Examples of antonymy in English and Arabic include adjectives like

big ‫ﻛﺒﻴﺮ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ small ‫ﺻﻐﻴﺮ‬

tall/long ‫ﻃﻮﻳﻞ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ short ‫ﻗﺼﻴﺮ‬
old ‫ ﻛﺒﻴﺮ‬/‫ﻗﺪﻳﻢ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ young/new ‫ﺷﺎب‬/‫ﺻﻐﻴﺮ‬
narrow ‫ﺿﻴ ّﻖ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ wide ‫ﻋﺮﻳﺾ‬
high ‫ﻋﺎٍل‬ ‫ـــــ‬ low ‫ﻣﻨﺨﻔﺾ‬
deep ‫ﻋﻤﻴﻖ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ shallow ‫ﺿﺤﻞ‬
thick ‫ﺳﻤﻴﻚ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ thin ‫ﻧﺤﻴﻒ‬
heavy ‫ﻏﺎﻣﻖ‬/‫ﺛﻘﻴﻞ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ light ‫ ﻓﺎﺗﺢ‬/‫ﺧﻔﻴﻒ‬
strong ‫ﻗﻮي‬ ‫ـــــ‬ weak ‫ﺿﻌﻴﻒ‬

Examples of antonymy in English and Arabic include nouns like:

woman ‫ا ِﻣﺮأة‬ ‫ـــــ‬ man ‫رُﺟﻞ‬

girl ‫ﺑ ِﻨﺖ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ boy ‫وﻟﺪ‬
husband ‫زوج‬ ‫ـــــ‬ wife ‫زوﺟﺔ‬
male ‫ذﻛﺮ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ female ‫أﻧﺜﻰ‬

In modern semantics, antonymy is divided into three types, viz. “gradable

antonyms”, “nongradable antonyms”, and “relational antonyms”. To begin with,
gradable antonyms (also known as “nonbinary antonyms”) refer to gradable
adjectives, such as

fast ‫ﺳﺮﻳﻊ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ slow ‫ﺑﻄﻲء‬

tall ‫ﻃﻮﻳﻞ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ short ‫ﻗﺼﻴﺮ‬
cold ‫ﺑﺎرد‬ ‫ـــــ‬ hot ‫ﺣﺎر‬
big ‫ﻛﺒﻴﺮ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ small ‫ﺻﻐﻴﺮ‬
cheep ‫رﺧﻴﺺ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ expensive ‫ﻏﺎٍل‬
beautiful ‫ﺟﻤﻴﻞ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ ugly ‫ﻗﺒﻴﺢ‬

Or they refer to gradable adverbials, such as:

 politely ‫ﺑﺄدب‬ ‫ـــــ‬ rudely/impolitely ‫ﺑﻮﻗﺎﺣﺔ‬
gently ‫ﺑﻠﻄﻒ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ ferociously ‫ﺑﻮﺣﺸﻴ ّﺔ‬
slowly ‫ﺑﺒﻂء‬ ‫ـــــ‬ quickly 106 | 105 ← ‫ﺑﺴﺮﻋﺔ‬
→

This is because in these examples “we have two fully ‘gradable’ adjectives, that
is, adjectives with a ‘comparative’ and a ‘superlative’ forms” (Cowie 2009: 38).
However, other English adjectives, such as open and shut, single and married,
awake and asleep, alive and dead, right and wrong, or their equivalents in
Arabic like ‫ ﻣﻔﺘﻮح‬and ‫ﻣﻐﻠﻖ‬, ‫أﻋﺰب‬and ‫ ﻣﺘﺰوّج‬, ‫ ﺻﺎٍح‬/‫ ُﻣﺴﺘﻴﻘﻆ‬and‫ ﻧﺎﺋﻢ‬, ‫ﻲ‬
ّ ‫ﺣ‬and ‫ﻴﺖ‬,‫ ﻣ‬and ‫ﺻﻮاب‬
and ‫ﺧﻄﺄ‬, respectively, are opposite ends of a scale that do not have various
intermediate terms – somebody is either alive or dead; s/he cannot be alive and
dead at the same time. These nongradable antonyms are also known as “binary
antonyms” or “complementary pairs”.
The third type of antonymy is called relational antonymy (also known as
“converses” or “converseness”). It refers to pairs of words, such as give/receive
or father/son that share the same/some semantic features, but the focus or
direction is reversed. For instance, when we say Dr Tom is Peter’s advisor, this
implies that Peter is one of the Dr Tom’s advisees, and when we say ‫ﻟﻴﻠﻰ زوﺟﺔ أﺣﻤﺪ‬
(Layla is Ahmed’s wife), this implies that ‫( أ ﺣ ﻤ ﺪ ز و ج ﻟ ﻴ ﻠ ﻰ‬Ahmed is Layla’s
husband). These two examples clearly illustrate the relationship between the
words advisor/advisee and wife/husband from an opposite point of view.
Examples of relational antonyms in Arabic and English include words like

student ‫ﻃﺎﻟﺐ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ teacher ‫ُﻣﻌﻠﻢ‬/‫ُﻣﺪرس‬

husband ‫زوج‬ ‫ـــــ‬ wife ‫زوﺟﺔ‬
patient ‫ﻣﺮﻳﺾ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ doctor ‫ﻃﺒﻴﺐ‬
employer ‫ب اﻟﻌﻤﻞ‬ ّ ‫ر‬ ‫ـــــ‬ employee ‫ﻣﻮّﻇﻒ‬/‫ﻋﺎِﻣﻞ‬
give ‫ﻳﻌﻄﻲ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ take ‫ﻳﺄﺧﺬ‬
borrow ‫ ﻳﻘﺘﺮض‬/‫ﻳﺴﺘﻌﻴﺮ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ lend ‫ﻳ ُﺴﻠ ّﻒ‬/‫ﻳ ُﻘﺮض‬
buy ‫ﻳﺸﺘﺮي‬ ‫ـــــ‬ sell ‫ﻳﺒﻴﻊ‬
rent ‫ﻳﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ let ‫ﻳﺆّﺟﺮ‬
in front of ‫أﻣﺎم‬ ‫ـــــ‬ behind ‫ﺧﻠﻒ‬
above ‫ﻓﻮق‬ ‫ـــــ‬ below ‫ﺗﺤﺖ‬

In this regard, Thakur (1999: 22) holds that “the addition of the comparative
suffix –er and, similarly, the use of the periphrastic more changes gradable
adjectives into converse terms”. So, adjectives, such as tall and short, rich and
poor are examples of gradable antonyms, but taller than and shorter than, richer
than and poorer than are examples of converse terms. This is ← 106 | 107 →
because when we say Tom is taller than Peter implies that Peter is shorter than
Tom, and so on.
In the actual act of translating any text, the translators, for various reasons,
may opt for what is called “modulation” by Vinay and Darbelnet (1958/1995:
89). Modulation refers to “a variation of the form of the message, obtained by
changing point of view”. To illustrate, the following translation provided by one
of my MA students can be discussed:
ST:
The Sultanate’s finance management has realized the effects of the decline in
oil prices on sources of budget finance, therefore it identified alternatives that
do not prejudice the citizens’ interests and social services.
TT:

‫وﻷن إدارة اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺴﻠﻄﻨﺔ أدرﻛﺖ اﻵﺛﺎر اﻟﻤﺘﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺒﻮط أﺳﻌﺎر اﻟﻨﻔﻂ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺼﺎدر ﺗﻤﻮﻳﻞ‬
‫اﻻﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ‬. ‫ ﻓﺈﻧﻬﺎ ﺣﺪدت اﻟﺒﺪاﺋﻞ اﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻨﻔﻊ ﻣﺼﺎﻟﺢ اﻟﻤﻮاﻃﻨﻴﻦ واﻟﺨﺪﻣﺎت‬،‫اﻟﻤﻴﺰاﻧﻴﺔ‬

As can been seen, the student translator, when translating do not prejudice, has
opted for the verb ‫( ﺗﻨﻔﻊ‬to benefit) in place of the direct translation, i.e., ‫ﻻ ﺗﻀّﺮ‬
(lit. not harm). This is an example of modulation as the translator has changed
the form of the message from negative into affirmative without changing the
meaning. It is worth noting that such modulation is optional in the sense that
Vinay and Darbelnet (ibid.) use the term as there is no harm in Arabic to say ‫اﻟﺘﻲ‬
‫( ﻣﻦ ﺷﺄﻧﻬﺎ ﻋﺪم اﻹﺿﺮار ﺑـ‬that would not harm/prejudice …).

7.4 Polysemy

Polysemy (from a Greek word polysemia, which means many meanings) refers
to a lexeme that has two or more related meanings. The difference between
polysemy and homonymy (see below) is subtle, and there is no ← 107 | 108 →
clear-cut distinction. In an attempt to make a distinction between polysemy and
homonymy, lexicographers suggest that there will be a single entry with a
numbered list of the distinguishable meanings of the word if a word has several
related meanings, that is, polysemy. However, there will be two separate entries
when the two words are treated as having two unrelated meanings, that is,
homonymy (cf. Fromkin et al. 2003: 180; Kreidler 1998: 52; Yule 1985/1996:
121). The noun eye, for example, has multiple related meanings, such as an eye
of a person, an eye of a needle, and so on, so it is an example of a polysemous
lexeme. The same holds true for words like head, shoulder, foot, hand, mouse,
and bright, as in:

• head ~ a head of a person ‫رﺋﻴﺲ‬

~ a head of a department ‫رأس‬
~ a head of lettuce ‫رأس‬
~ a head of a nail ‫رأس‬

• shoulder ~ a shoulder of a person ‫ﻛﺘﻒ‬

~ a shoulder of a roadway ‫ﻣﺘﻦ‬
َ
• foot ~ a foot of a person ‫ﻗﺪم‬
~ a foot of a mountain ‫ﺳﻔﺢ‬

• hand ~ a hand of a person ‫ﻳﺪ‬

(‫ﻋﻘﺮب‬
~ a hand of a clock or a watch
‫)اﻟﺴﺎﻋﺔ‬
• mouse ~ a mouse as an animal (‫ﻓﺄر)ة‬
~ a mouse of a computer ‫ﻣﺎوس‬

• bright ~ bright meaning shinning ‫ﻣﺸﺮِق‬

ُ
~ bright meaning intelligent ‫ذﻛﻲ‬

Like English, Arabic has a lot of examples of polysemous words. These are
some:

root ~ the part of a plant that grows under the

ground ‫ﺟﺬر‬ •
root ~ the root of a hair or tooth
soap ~ a substance that is used by people for
washing their bodies, etc. ‫ﺻﺎﺑﻮﻧﺔ‬ •
kneecap ~ the bone that covers the front of the
knee ← 108 | 109 →
foot ~ the lowest part of a person or animal’s ‫ﻗﺪم إﻧﺴﺎن أو ﺣﻴﻮان‬ •
leg
foot ~ a measure of length ‫ وﺣﺪة ﻗﻴﺎس‬:‫ﻗﺪم‬ •
foot ~ the part of a socket in which a person ‫ﻗﺪم اﻟﺠﻮارﻳﺐ‬ •
puts his/her foot
Below are two examples of polysemy from the Holy Quran:
ST:

(71 '‫ﻳﺎ( أﻫﻞ اﻟﻜﺘﺎب ﻟ َِﻢ ﺗﻠﺒﺴﻮن اﻟﺤﻖ ﺑﺎﻟﺒﺎﻃﻞ وﺗﻜﺘﻤﻮن اﻟﺤﻖ وأﻧﺘﻢ ﺗﻌﻠﻤﻮن‬،‫آل ﻋﻤﺮان‬

TT:

People of the Book! Why do you confound the truth with vanity, and conceal
the truth and that wittingly?
(Arberry 1955/1996)

Here, the polysemous word is ‫ ﺗﻠﺒﺴﻮن‬from the verb ‫ﺲ‬ َ َ ‫ﻟ َﺒ‬, which literally
َ َ ‫ﻟﺒ‬/‫ﺲأ‬
means to dress somebody or cover somebody with clothes. However, in this
verse, it is used by Allah while addressing the people of the Torah and Bible to
mean to mix or to mingle the truth with falseness.
ST:

(15 ‫( واﻟﻼﺗﻲ ﻳﺄﺗﻴﻦ اﻟﻔﺎﺣﺸﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻧﺴﺎﺋﻜﻢ ﻓﺎﺳﺘﺸﻬﺪوا ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻦ أرﺑﻌﺔ ﻣﻨﻜﻢ ﻓﺈن ﺷﻬﺪوا‬،‫اﻟﻨﺴﺎء‬
‫ﻦﻲ) اﻟﺒﻴﻮت ﺣﺘﻰ ﻳﺘﻮﻓﺎﻫﻦ اﻟﻤﻮت أو ﻳﺠﻌﻞ اﻟﻠﻪ ﻟﻬﻦ ﺳﺒﻴﻼ‬
‫ﻓﺄﻣﺴﻜﻮﻫ ﻓ‬

TT:

As for those of your women who are guilty of lewdness, call to witness four of
you against them. And if they testify (to the truth of the allegation) then
confine them to the houses until death take them or (until) Allah appoint for
them a way (through new legislation).
(Pickthall 1930/2006)

Here, the polysemous word is ‫ ﺗﺄﺗﻮن‬, derived from the verb ‫ﺗﻰ‬,‫ أ‬which literally
means to come. However, in this verse, it is used to refer to the commitment of
adultery or iniquity. ← 109 | 110 →

7.5 Homonymy
Like polysemy, homonymy also refers to a word with two or more different
meanings. However, in the case of homonymy, the word has multiple, unrelated
meanings. Examples of homonymy in English include words like:

• can ~ a modal verb ‫ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻪ‬،‫ﻳﺴﺘﻄﻴﻊ‬

~ a metal or plastic container used for ‫ﻋ ُﻠﺒﺔ‬
holding or carrying liquid
• spring ~ an act of jumping up ‫ﻗﻔﺰة أو وﺛﺒﺔ‬
~ the season of the year that follows ‫ﻓﺼﻞ اﻟﺮﺑﻴﻊ‬
winter
~ a place where water comes up ‫ﻳﻨﺒﻮع أو ﻧﺒﻊ‬
naturally from under the ground
• pupil ~ part of the eye ‫ﺑﺆﺑﺆ اﻟﻌﻴﻦ‬
~ a school child ‫ﺗﻠﻤﻴﺬ‬

• bank ~ a financial institution where money is (‫ﻣﺼﺮف ) ﺑﻨﻚ‬

kept safely for its customers
~ the ground along the side of a river or ‫ﺿﻔﺔ‬
canal
~ as a verb meaning to expect or trust ‫ﻳﻌﺘﻤﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
somebody to do something, or
something to happen
• race ~ a competition between people, ‫ﺳﺒﺎق‬
animals, cars, and the like
~ one of the groups into which people ‫ﻋﺮق‬
ِ
can be divided according to their
origin, colour, etc.
• mole ~ a small animal with dark fur ‫ﺧﻠﺪ أو ﻃﻮﺑﻴﻦ‬
~ a small dark spot on a person’s skin ‫ﺧﺎل أو ﺷﺎﻣﺔ‬

• match ~ an organized game or sports event ‫ﻣﺒﺎراة‬

~ as a verb meaning to have the same ‫ ﻳﻨﺴﺠﻢ ﻣﻊ‬،‫ ﻳﻼﺋﻢ‬،‫ﻳﻄﺎﺑﻖ‬
colour or pattern of something else 111 | 110 ← →

Below are some examples of homonymy in Arabic:

liquid ~ a substance, such as water, etc., that is

not solid and can be poured ‫ﺳﺎﺋﻞ‬ •
asker or
~ the person who asks or begs
beggar
grandfather ~ the father of one’s father or mother ّ ‫ﺟﺪ‬ •
seriousness ~ the quality of being serious
greet(ed) ~ to welcome people when meeting
 them ‫ﺳﻠ ّﻢ‬ •
hand(ed) ~ to give or pass something to
somebody
maternal uncle ~ one of the brothers of one’s mother
‫ﺧﺎل‬ •
mole ~ a small dark spot on a person’s skin
that never goes away

7.6 Homophones

Homophones refer to lexical items that have different meanings and different
spellings, but the same pronunciation. Examples of homophones in English
include words like:

feet ‫ﻗﺪم‬ ‫ـــــ‬ feat ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺟﺴﻮر‬

write ‫ﻳﻜﺘﺐ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ right ‫ ﻳﻤﻴﻦ‬/‫ﺻﻮاب‬/‫ﺣﻖ‬
soul ‫روح‬ ‫ـــــ‬ sole ‫وﺣﻴﺪ‬/‫أﺧﻤﺲ اﻟﻘﺪم‬
meet ‫ﻳﺼﺎدف‬ ‫ـــــ‬ meat ‫ﻟﺤﻢ‬
hour ‫ﺳﺎﻋﺔ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ our ‫ﺧﺎﺻﺘﻨﺎ‬
there ‫ﻫﻨﺎك‬ ‫ـــــ‬ their ‫ﺧﺎﺻﺘﻬﻢ‬
hear ‫ﻳﺴﻤﻊ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ hair ‫ﺷﻌﺮ‬
buy ‫ﻳﺸﺘﺮي‬ ‫ـــــ‬ bye ً ‫وداﻋﺎ‬
through ‫ﺧﻼل‬ ‫ـــــ‬ threw ‫رﻣﻰ‬
eight ‫ﺛﻤﺎﻧﻴﺔ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ ate ‫أﻛﻞ‬
new ‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ knew ‫ﻋﺮِف‬
sea ‫ﺑﺤﺮ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ see ‫ﻳﺮى‬
tire ‫ﻳﺘﻌﺐ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ tyre 112 | 111 ← ‫→ إﻃﺎر‬
lesson ‫درس‬ ‫ـــــ‬ lessen ‫ ﻳﻘﻠﻞ‬/‫ﻳﻘّﻞ‬
suite ‫ﺟﻨﺎح‬ ‫ـــــ‬ sweet ‫ﺣﻠﻮى‬/‫ﺣﻠﻮ‬
not ‫ﻟﻴﺲ‬/‫ ﻻ‬/‫ ﻣﺎ‬/‫ﻟﻢ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ knot ‫ﻋﻘﺪة‬/‫ﻳﺮﺑﻂ‬
no ‫ ﻛﻼ‬/‫ﻻ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ know ‫ﻳﻌﺮف‬
night ‫ﻟﻴﻠﺔ‬ ‫ـــــ‬ knight ‫ﻓﺎرس‬

Examples of homophones in Arabic include words, such as ‫( ﻋﺼﺎ‬stick) and ‫(ﻋﺼﻰ‬to

disobey), ‫( ﻳﺤﻴﻰ‬Yahya) and ‫( ﻳﺤﻴﺎ‬to live), ‫(ﻋﻠﻰ‬on) and ‫( ﻋﻼ‬to become high), ‫ﺑﻨﻮ‬
(sons of) and ‫( ﺑﻨﻮا‬they built), and the like. In some dialects, such as Iraqi,
Kuwaiti and Omani, however, words like ‫( ﻇﻞ‬to remain) and ‫( ﺿﻞ‬to go wrong),
ّ ‫( ﻇ‬to believe) and ‫ﻦ‬
‫ﻦ‬ ّ ‫( ﺿ‬to be stingy), ‫( ﺣﻀَﺮ‬to attend) and ‫( ﺣﻈﺮ‬to ban), and the
like are considered examples of homophones as they are pronounced in a similar
way.

7.7 Lexical relations and translation

This section will illuminate the importance of appreciating and, then, reflecting
the source text semantic relations in the target text. To get the discussion started,
the following two examples quoted from Muhsin Al-Ramlī’s story (2009: 31)
ّ ‫(ﺚ ﻋﻦ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺣ‬Search
‫ﻲ‬ ‫اﻟﺒﺤ‬ for a Live Heart) may be given careful consideration:
ST:

… ‫ﻳﻨﺘﺎﺑﻨﻲ ﺧﺠﻞ ﻗﺎﺑﺾ وﻛﺂﺑﺔ ﺛﻘﻴﻠﺔ ﺣﻴﻦ أﺿﺤﻚ‬

TT:

I have a feeling of deep shame and sadness when laughing …

Here, there is an example of textual restructuring. Grammatically speaking, the

doer of the first process ‫( ﺧﺠﻞ ﻗﺎﺑﺾ وﻛﺂﺑﺔ ﺛﻘﻴﻠﺔ‬deep shame and serious depression)
needs to be reorganized in the target text to ensure that it reads smoothly and
cogently. ← 112 | 113 →
Approached from a syntactic perspective, the original sentence consists of
two clauses conjoined by ‫(ﺣﻴﻦ‬when). To begin with the first clause, it has two
noun phrases conjoined by the additive connector ‫( و‬and) to form one unit,
namely ‫( ﺧ ﺠ ﻞ ﻗ ﺎ ﺑ ﺾ و ﻛ ﺂ ﺑ ﺔ ﺛ ﻘ ﻴ ﻠ ﺔ‬deep shame and serious depression). This noun
phrase is assigned the semantic role of theme by the verb ‫ﺘﺎب‬.‫ اﻧ‬To put this
differently, in this clause, there are two arguments along with the main verb ‫ﺘﺎب‬,‫اﻧ‬
viz. the pronoun ‫( ﻧﻲ‬me) in the objective case filling the role of experiencer, and
‫( ﺧﺠﻞ ﻗﺎﺑﺾ وﻛﺂﺑﺔ ﺛﻘﻴﻠﺔ‬deep shame and serious depression) filling the role of theme.
However, in the second clause ‫(ﺣ ﻴ ﻦ أ ﺿ ﺤ ﻚ‬when I laugh), there is only one
argument, viz. I filling the primary role of actor and secondary role of
experiencer along with the main verb ‫( ﺿﺤﻚ‬laugh) and the connector ‫(ﺣﻴﻦ‬when)
conjoining the two clauses to form one complex sentence (for more details on
semantic roles, see Chapter 8 in this book).
ST:

… ‫ وأﻓﺘﺢ ﻗﻤﻴﺼﻲ وﺻﺪري‬،‫ﻓﺄﺻﻌﺪ إﻟﻰ ﺳﻄﺢ اﻟﺪار ﻓﻲ ﻣﻨﺘﺼﻒ اﻟﻠﻴﻞ‬

TT:

In the middle of the night I go upstairs, undo my shirt, bare my chest…

The verb ‫( ﻓﺘﺢ‬to open) in Arabic is used widely to denote a quite good number
of actions, for example:

‫ﻓﺘﺢ ﺑﺎﺑ ًﺎ‬

‫ﻓﺘﺢ ﻣﺪﻳﻨﺔ‬
(‫ﻗﻤﻴﺼﻪ( ﻓﺘﺢ أزرار‬
‫ﻓﺘﺢ زﺟﺎﺟﺔ‬
‫ﻓﺘﺢ ﺻﺪره‬

However, in English, native speakers of English use different verbs for each
activity, thus creating a variety of unmarked collocations, as in:

to open a door
to conquer a city ← 113 | 114 →
to undo a button
to unscrew a bottle
to bare one’s chest

This is an example of particularizing translation or translation by a hyponym in

which the denotative meaning of the word used in the target text is narrower and
more specific than that of the word used in the original text. Also, in English
both nouns ‫( ﻗﻤﻴﺺ‬shirt) and ‫( ﺻﺪر‬chest) need a verb.
To illuminate the importance of giving full consideration to the semantic
relations through the nexus of translation, the following example from ‘Abdul-
Sattār Nāsir’s story (2009: 15) ‫( ﺛ ﻼ ث ﻗ ﺼ ﺺ ﻟ ﻴ ﺴ ﺖ ﻟ ﻠ ﻨ ﺸ ﺮ‬Three Stories not for
Publishing) may be considered:
ST:
 ،‫ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺗﺄﻛﺪ ﻟﻪ أﻧﻬﺎ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﺑﻤﻔﺮدﻫﺎ‬،‫ وﻣﺎ أن اﻗﺘﺮب ﻣﻨﻬﺎ‬،ً ‫ ﻓﺮآﻫﺎ ﻋﺎرﻳﺔ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﺎ‬،‫دﺧﻞ اﻟﻤﻠﻚ ﻋﻠﻰ زوﺟﺘﻪ‬
… ‫وأن ﺣﺎرﺳﻪ »اﻷﻣﻴﻦ « ﻳﻨﺎم ﻫﺎﻧﺌﺎ ً ﻣﻌﻬﺎ‬
« ‫ﺧﺮج اﻟﺤﺎرس ﻣﻦ ﻏﺮﻓﺔ »اﻟﻤﻠ وﻚﻓ‬
‫ ﻛﺎن اﻟﺤﺎرس ﻗﺪ‬،‫ وﻋﻨﺪ اﻟﺒﺎب‬،‫ﻲ ﺑﻄﻨﻪ أﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺟﺮح ﻋﺮﻳﺾ ﻋﻤﻴﻖ‬
. … ‫ﻣﺎت‬

TT:

When the king came in, he saw that his wife was completely naked. The
moment he approached her, he realized that she was not alone. His “faithful”
bodyguard was sleeping peacefully next to her.

The guard ran out of the king’s bedroom, his belly bearing more than a wide,
deep gash. He died by the door.

The denotative meaning of the verb ‫ ﺧﺮج‬is to go out. However, giving full
consideration to the context in which it is used and focusing on transferring the
image conjured up in the mind of the original reader, rather than adhering to the
denotative meanings of the individual lexical items, the phrasal verb to run out
could be chosen. This is because stabbing somebody with a dagger or a knife
causes him/her to run out of the place rather than leaving the place quietly.
Further, the word ‫ ُﺟﺮح‬can be translated into wound, gash, etc. However, taking
into account the context in which it is used and the semantic features of each
lexical item, one would go for the noun ← 114 | 115 → gash rather than wound.
This is because the lexical item gash is a hyponym, that is, a type of the lexical
item wound – a gash is a long, deep wound. As such, translating the lexical item
‫ﺟﺮح‬ُ whose denotative meaning is wider and less specific than the lexical item
gash is an example of particularizing translation or translation by a hyponym.
Following is another example extracted from Yāsmīn bin Zarāfa’s story ‫داﻧﺎ‬
‫(واﻟﻔﺌﺮان‬Dana and the Mice) translated into English by Fred Pragnell (2013: 1–2;
bilingual edn):
ST:

‫ أدواﺗﻬﺎ‬،‫…ﺎﻧﺖ ﻏﺮﻓﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺪوام ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﻨﻈﻤﺔ‬

‫ وﺗﺤﺐ اﻷوﺳﺎخ ﻛ‬،‫ ﺗﻜﺮه اﻟﻨﻈﺎﻓﺔ‬،‫داﻧﺎ ﻃﻔﻠﺔ ﻣﻬﻤﻠﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺮواﺋﺤﻬﺎ‬ … ‫ وأﺣﺬﻳﺘﻬﺎ ﺗﻨﺎم ﻗﺮﺑﻬﺎ‬،‫ ﺧﺰاﻧﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻔﺘﻮﺣﺔ واﻟﺜﻴﺎب ﺗ ُﻄ ِﻞ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ‬،‫ﻣﺒﻌﺜﺮة ﻋﻠﻰ اﻷرض‬
‫اﻟﻜﺮﻳﻬﺔ‬

TT:
 Dana was a careless child. She hates cleanness and likes dirtiness. Her room
was always messy; her stuff was scattered on the floor. Her cupboard was
open and the clothes peeped out. She was sleeping beside her stinky shoes.

As can be seen, the original writer introduces two pairs of antonyms, viz. ‫ﺗﻜﺮه‬
(to hate) versus ‫ﺐ‬ ّ ‫( ﺗﺤ‬to love or to like), and ‫( ﻧﻈﺎﻓﺔ‬cleanness) versus ‫اﻷوﺳﺎخ‬
(dirtiness) in a very short extract. Further, there are two synonymous words,
namely ‫( ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﻨﻈﻤﺔ‬not organized) and ‫( ﻣﺒﻌﺜﺮة‬scattered), used in the original text.
These synonymous words lend themselves to messy and scattered respectively.
Being fully aware that these antonyms and synonyms fall in parallel structures,
thus acquiring stylistic features that need to be reflected in the target text, the
translator has intrinsically managed the text and reflected these stylistic features.
Here is another example from Enid Blyton’s story Mr Twiddle in Trouble
Again (1947), translated by one of the BA students at the University of Nizwa
(Al-Hinai 2015: 22–23):
ST:

“Oh, foolish man! Oh, stupid, ridiculous man! Oh, silly, silly man! I told you
those boots were to be soled – s-o-l-e-d, Twiddle, and you went and sold them
– s-o-l-d. I wanted you to get new soles put under them – and you go and sell
them! Twiddle, will you ever, ever, do anything really sensible? No, you never
will”. ← 115 | 116 →

TT:

ّ ‫ﻟﻘﺪ «وﻫﻲ ﺗﺘﻬ‬

‫ﺠﻰ‬ .‫ ﻳﺎ ﻟﻠﻌﺠﺐ أﻳﻬﺎ اﻟﺴﺨﻴﻒ‬،‫ أﻳﻬﺎ اﻟﻐﺒﻲ! اﻷﺑﻠﻪ‬،‫ أﻳﻬﺎ اﻟﺮﺟﻞ اﻷﺣﻤﻖ!ﻳﺎ اﻟﻬﻲ‬،‫ﻳﺎ ﻟﻠﻌﺠﺐ‬
‫( اﻟﻜﻠﻤﺔ‬S-O-LE-D) ‫( ﺗﻮدﻳﻞ‬soled) ‫ﻗﻠﺖ ﻟﻚ ﺑﺄن اﻷﺣﺬﻳﺔ ﻳﺠﺐ أن ﺗﺒﻄ ّﻦ أردﺗﻚ أن ﺗﺤﺼﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ ﺑﻄﺎﻧﺔ‬،(sold) (S-O-L-D) ‫ ﻫﻞ‬،‫ ﺗﻮدﻳﻞ‬.‫ وأﻧﺖ ذﻫﺒﺖ ﻟﺒﻴﻌﻬﺎ‬،‫ﺖ ذﻫﺒﺖ وﺑﻌﺘﻬﺎ ﺟﺪﻳﺪة‬ .‫ﺣﺮﻓًﺎ ﺣوﺮأﻧﻓًﺎ‬
‫»ذﻟﻚ أﺑﺪ ًا‬. ‫ ﻟﻦ ﺗﻔﻌﻞ‬.‫ﻘﺎ؟ ﻛﻼ‬ً ‫ﻣﺎ ﺑﺄﻣﺮ ﻣﻌﻘﻮل ﺣ‬
ً ‫ﻟﻚ أن ﺗﻘﻮم ﻳﻮ‬

Here, there is an example of homophony (i.e., two words have the same
pronunciation but with different meanings) in which two lexical items, viz. sold
(the past participle of the verb to sell) and soled (the past participle of the rarely
used verb to sole) are used in juxtaposition, thus creating a confusing situation to
one of the in-text participants. Having given full consideration to such a lexical
relation between these two words and their roles in developing the text, the
translation trainee has intrinsically managed the text by adding ‫( وﻫﻲ ﺗﺘﻬّﺠﻰ‬while
she is spelling), thus reflecting the in-text participant’s tone of indignation.
Further reading

Francis, G. (1993). “A Corpus-Driven Approach to Grammar: Principles,

Methods and Examples”. In M. Baker, G. Francis, and E. Tognini-Bonelli
(eds), Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair.
Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 137–156.
Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., and Hyams, N. (2003). An Introduction to Language
(7th edn) USA: Heinle, a Part of Thomson Corporation.
Goddard, C. (1998/2011). Semantic Analysis: A Practical Introduction. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Palmer, F. R. (1976). Semantics: A New Outline. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, Concordance and Collocation. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
——. (1998). “The Lexical Item”. In E. Weigand (ed.), Contrastive Lexical
Semantics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. ← 116 | 117 →
——. (2008). “The Phrase, the Whole Phrase and Nothing But the Phrase”. In S.
Granger and F. Meunier (eds), Phraseology: An Interdisciplinary
Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 407–410.
Questions

1. How would you define the following terms: “antonymy”, “polysemy”, and
“homonymy”?
2. What is the difference between “sense” and “reference”?
3. Are there absolute synonyms? Discuss with illustrative examples.
4. Do these words fear, love, car, teacher, and company refer to objects in the
real world?
5. What are the main aspects of weakness of “naming theory”?
Exercises

Exercise 1: Among the following pairs of antonyms, which are gradable and
which are nongradable?

1. ‫ﺣﺎﺿﺮ –ﻏﺎﺋﺐ‬
2. ‫ﻲ –ﻣﻴﺖ‬ّ ‫ﺣ‬
3. ‫ﺣﺰﻳﻦ – ﺳﻌﻴﺪ‬
4. ‫راﺳﺐ – ﻧﺎﺟﺢ‬
5. ‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﺷﺮﻋﻲ – ﺷﺮﻋﻲ‬
6. ‫ﺧﻄﺄ – ﺻﺢ‬
7. ‫ﻛﺒﻴﺮ – ﺻﻐﻴﺮ‬
8. ‫ﻏﺒﻲ –ذﻛﻲ‬
9. ‫ﺿﻌﻴﻒ – ﻗﻮي‬
10. 118 | 117 ← ‫→ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺆدب –ﻣﺆدب‬

Exercise 2: What is the basic lexical relation between the following pairs of
lexical items?

1. vehicle – pickup
2. bus – train
3. fruit – apple
4. burger – chicken burger
5. cold – hot
6. chair – furniture
7. teacher – student
8. strong-minded – stubborn
9. hammer – screwdriver
10. lawyer – solicitor

Exercise 3: Decide whether the two lexical items in each of the following pairs
are homophones or not:

1. son – sun
‫‪2.‬‬ ‫‪court – caught‬‬
‫‪3.‬‬ ‫‪ate – eight‬‬
‫‪4.‬‬ ‫‪by – bye‬‬
‫‪5.‬‬ ‫‪tail – tale‬‬
‫‪6.‬‬ ‫‪no – know‬‬
‫‪7.‬‬ ‫‪new – knew‬‬
‫‪8.‬‬ ‫‪sea – see‬‬
‫‪9.‬‬ ‫‪meet – meat‬‬
‫‪10.‬‬ ‫‪great – greet‬‬

‫‪Exercise 4: Decide whether the two lexical items in each of the following pairs‬‬
‫‪are homophones or not:‬‬

‫ﻛﻞ ﻣﺘﻨﻲ – ﻛﻠ ّﻤﺘﻨﻲ‬ ‫‪.1‬‬

‫ﺐ –ذﻫ َ‬
‫ﺐ‬ ‫ذﻫ ْ‬ ‫‪.2‬‬
‫ﻋﺼﺎ –ﻋﺼﻰ‬ ‫‪.3‬‬
‫ﻇﻦ – ﺿﻦ‬ ‫‪.4‬‬
‫آل–آل‬ ‫‪.5‬‬
‫→ ﻋَﺪ ُوّ – ﻋَﺪ ْو ← ‪119 | 118‬‬ ‫‪.6‬‬

‫‪Exercise 5: The following text is extracted from ‘Abdul-Hamīd Al-Gharbāwī’s‬‬

‫‪ (Face). Translate it into English. Then, annotate your own‬وﺟﻪ )‪story (n.d.‬‬
‫‪translation, focusing on the semantic relations.‬‬

‫إﻟﻰ اﻟﻐﺎﺋﺒﺔ اﻟﺤﺎﺿﺮة دوﻣﺎ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺬاﻛﺮة‪.‬وﻣﺎذا ﺑﺈﻣﻜﺎﻧﻲ أن أﻓﻌﻞ؟‬

‫ﻚ اﻟﺤﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺎﻟﺤﺪﻳﺪ ﻓﺘﻮﻗﻒ اﻟﻘﻄﺎر‪.‬‬
‫اﺣﺘ ّ‬
‫ﻔﺢ ﻣﺠﻠﺔ ﺛﻘﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﺑﺎذﺧﺔ آﺗﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ إﺣﺪى دول اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺞ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺖ أﺟﻠﺲ وﺣﺪي‪ ،‬ﻗﺒﻞ دﺧﻮﻟﻪ اﻟﻤﺤﻄﺔ ﺑﻘﻠﻴﻞ‪ ،‬أﺗﺼ ّ‬
‫اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻲ‪ ،‬وﻋﻦ ﻳﻤﻴﻨﻲ وﺷﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﻣﻘﻌﺪان ﻓﺎرﻏﺎن‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﻦ أﻗﺒﻠﺖ ﻫﻴﻔﺎء ﺗﺴﻴﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻬﻞ‪ ،‬ﻳﺴﺘﺮ ﺷﻌﺮﻫﺎ ﺧﻤﺎر‬
‫أﺳﻮد‪ ،‬أﺑﺖ ﺧﺼﻠﺔ ﻣﻨﻪ إﻻ أن ﺗﻔﻀﺢ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﻮر وﺗﻌﻠﻦ ﻋﻦ ﻟﻮﻧﻪ ‪.‬ﻓﺎﻧﺴﻠﺖ ﻣﻦ ﺗﺤﺖ اﻟﺨﻤﺎر ﺷﻘﺮاء‬
| 121 →

CHAPTER 8

Semantic Roles
Key terms

• Actor
• Affected participant (patient)
• Affecting participant (stimulus) Agent
• Argument
• Associate (predicate)
• Benefactor (benefactive)
• Causer
• Experiencer
• Goal
• Instrument
• Location
• Positioner
• Recipient
• Resultant (effect)
• Semantic case
• Semantic role
• Source
• Theme
• Theta role

In semantics, instead of focusing on the meanings of the lexical items utilized by

the language user (be it a speaker or writer) to describe a particular situation,
special attention can be paid to their semantic roles in the situation described. A
semantic role (also known as a “theta role”, “semantic case”, or “thematic role”)
is the underlying relationship that an entity (semantically ← 121 | 122 → called
“argument”) such as a person or thing has with the main verb in a clause. This
chapter gives full consideration to these underlying relationships that entities
have in certain situations.

8.1 Semantic roles

In a situation like The boy opened the door with the key, there is a verb
describing an action (i.e., opening the door), and three noun phrases or
arguments describing the roles that the entities (such as people, places, things,
etc.) have with the main verb in the clause. Cast in more technical terms, in the
above situation, the boy fills the role of agent (also known by some scholars as
“actor”), the door fills the role of theme, and the key fills the role of instrument,
as shown below:
The boy opened the door with the key.
agent = opener action theme = opened instrument
As discussed above, some scholars use “agent” and “actor” to refer to the same
referent. However, in this chapter, a distinction will be made between them.
Agent is the initiator of the action who is responsible for his/her decision
(Kearns 2000/2011: 207). It can be distinguished from actor by inserting words
and expressions, such as deliberately, on purpose, or in order to, as in:
He closed the window.
He [deliberately] closed the window. So, he fills the role of agent.
However, in a sentence like this:

She left the window open.

there are two different interpretations: ← 122 | 123 →

a. She left the window open [on purpose]; therefore, she fills the role of agent.
b. She [carelessly] left the window open; therefore, she fills the role of actor.

In another situation when a noun phrase designates an entity as an entity that has
a feeling, a perception, or a state, it will fill the role of experiencer. Consider the
following example:
She heard the explosion in the street.
experiencer = hearer verb theme = heard location
To reinforce the point, in a situation like this:

The scene frightened my little daughter.

my little daughter is the one who experienced the fear through her perception. As
such, my little daughter fills the role of experiencer (i.e., the entity that
perceives a particular mental or emotional process or state). With psychological
verbs or verbs of perception (such as see, hear, smell, taste, understand, frighten,
and the like), there is no physical action; therefore, the entity perceiving a
particular mental or emotional process or state is labelled experiencer (for more
details, see Kearns 2000/2011: 212–213; Yule 1985/1996: 116–117).

8.2 Types of semantic roles

Depending on the verb per se, there are a number of noun phrases that have
relations with the verb and fill different semantic roles in the clause or sentence.
Some verbs, such as sleep may have only one argument, as in I slept while
others may have two, three, or more, as in I gave him a book for his brother in
which there are four arguments, viz. I, him, a book, and his brother. ← 123 | 124
→
These noun phrases or arguments fill different roles in a clause or sentence.
Further, the same argument in a given clause may fill more than one role, as in I
gave her a gift in which there are three arguments, namely I filling the role of
agent and source, her filling the role of goal and recipient (or may fill the role
of benefactor), and a gift filling the role of theme.
Agent, actor, theme, and experiencer are the main semantic roles that have
been discussed by many scholars in different coursebooks. However, there are
other types of semantic roles, such as affecting (stimulus), affected (patient),
associate (predicate), location, instrument, source, goal, recipient, causer,
resultant (effect), benefactor (benefactive), and so on that we need to be
familiar with (see below).
It will now be shown how verbs, such as to kill, to see, to paint, to destroy, to
walk, to give, to make, and to like in these situations may have different semantic
roles:
The man killed the thief.
Here, there are two arguments, viz. the man (the one who killed, i.e., killer)
filling the role of agent, and the thief (the one who was killed, i.e., killee) filling
the role of patient, that is, the affected participant.

The man killed the thief with a knife.

Here, there are three arguments, viz. the man filling the role of agent, the thief
filling the role of patient or affected participant, and a knife filling the role of
instrument, that is, the entity with which the agent did the action.

I saw an insect on the wall.

Here, there are three arguments, viz. I filling the role of experiencer, an insect
filling the role of theme, and on the wall filling the role of location.

I painted the chair with the new brush.

Here, there are three arguments, viz. I filling the role of agent, the chair filling
the role of affected participant (patient), and the new brush filling the role of
instrument. ← 124 | 125 →

I painted a new painting.

Here, there are two arguments, viz. I filling the role of agent, and a new painting
filling the role of resultant (effect).

The flood destroyed the crop.

Here, there are two arguments, viz. the flood filling the role of causer, and the
crop filling the role of affected participant (patient).

I walked home through the park from the office.

Here, there are four arguments, viz. I filling the role of agent or actor, home
filling the role of goal (i.e., endpoint), the park filling the role of path (i.e., the
pathway of a motion), and the office filling the role of source (i.e., starting
point).

She gave me a book.

Here, there are three arguments, viz. she filling the role of agent or actor and
source, me filling the role of recipient and goal for sure (and may fill the role of
benefactor), and a book filling the role of theme.

She gave me a book for my brother.

Here, there are four arguments, viz. she filling the role of agent or actor and
source, me filling the role of recipient and goal, a book filling the role of
theme, and my brother filling the role of benefactor.

I was given a book.

Here, we have three arguments, viz. I filling the role of goal (i.e., the endpoint of
the book), and recipient (i.e., the receiver of the book), a book filling the role of
theme, and the implicit initiator of the action somebody filling the role of agent
and source.

She made him a cake. ← 125 | 126 →

Here, there are three arguments, viz. she filling the role of agent and source, him
filling the role of goal, recipient and benefactor, and a cake filling the role of
resultant.

She made him angry.

Here, while she fills the role of affecting participant (stimulus) and him fills
the role of experiencer as he was experiencing anger, the adjective angry is an
associate (predicate). However, it can be argued that him angry is a third
argument assigned a theme semantic role by the verb made.

My brother likes music.

Here, there are two arguments, viz. my brother filling the role of experiencer,
and music filling the role of affecting participant (stimulus).
These semantic roles can be summarized as follows:

Agent The role of an argument that performs an action deliberately, or

accidently but affecting another entity, as in: She broke the glass.
He opened the window.
The dog ate the loaf of the bread.
Actor The role of an argument that performs an action without affecting
another entity, as in: My little son left the door open.
I gave him the book.
Theme The role of an argument that undergoes the action, but does not
change its state, as in: I saw an insect on the wall.
She borrowed the book from her friend.
The room is small.
Affected The role of an argument that undergoes an action and changes its
participant state because of another entity or due to the described event, as
(patient) in: The boy broke the window.
The window was broken by the wind. ← 126 | 127 →
Experiencer The role of an argument that perceives a particular mental or
emotional process or state, as in: She felt sad.
The scene frightened my friend.
Affecting The role of an argument that identifies the source of sensory or
participant emotional feeling that affects another entity without any action,
(stimulus) as in: My daughter likes watching TV.
Music delights me.
She hates these programmes.
Instrument The role of an argument with which the agent performs the
action, as in: He signed the contract with a pen.
I locked the door with the key.
She ate the rice with a tea spoon.
Location The role of an argument that identifies the location of an entity,
as in: I saw the man in the street.
She put the book on the desk.
Source The role of an argument that tells the starting point of an entity
(i.e., the starting point from which it moves), as in: She borrowed
the book from the library.
My friend travelled from London to Paris.
Goal The role of an argument that tells the endpoint of an entity (i.e.,
the endpoint to which it moves), as in: He handed the letter to
the dean.
The boy went home.
Path The role of an argument that is the pathway of a motion and
through which an entity moves, as in: She walked home through
the park.
 The girl went from home to school through the narrow street.
Recipient The role of an argument that names the receiver of the entity, as
in: I showed her the photo.
I sent him an e-mail. ← 127 | 128 →
Benefactor The role of an argument that names the benefactor of the action,
as in: The teacher gave me the book for my brother.
She made a cake for her son.
Causer The role of an argument that is directly involved in the causation
of an event, as in The crop was destroyed by the flood.
The heavy rain has destroyed the harvest.
Resultant The role of an argument that comes into existence as a result of
(effect) the agent’s action, as in: She made a cake.
She baked a pie.
Associate The role of an argument that tells the status of another argument,
(predicate) as in: My father is a teacher.
The glass is empty.
It cost 10 US dollars.

8.3 Semantic roles and translation The most important

part in translation is reflecting the message intended
by the original text producer. Therefore, changing
the verbs used in the original text, or adding,
deleting, or changing the semantic roles filled by
these arguments, will definitely create slightly or
completely different mental images and messages.
As an illustration, the following example along with
three different translations selected from many
translations produced by translation trainees may be
discussed: ST:
 She gave me a book for my brother. ← 128 | 129 →

TT 1:

.‫أﻋﻄﺘﻨﻲ ﻛﺘﺎﺑ ًﺎ ﻋﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ أﺧﻲ‬

Back-translation: She gave me a book via my brother.

TT 2:

.‫أﻋﻄﺘﻨﻲ ﻛﺘﺎﺑ ًﺎ‬

Back-translation: She gave me a book.

TT 3:

.‫أﻋﻄﺘﻨﻲ ﻛﺘﺎﺑ ًﺎ ﻷوﺻﻠﻪ إﻟﻰ أﺧﻲ‬

Back-translation: She gave me a book to hand [it] to my brother.

In the source text, there is a transitive verb, that is, to give (in the past tense and
active voice) and four arguments, viz. she filling the role of agent and source, me
filling the role of recipient and goal, a book filling the role of theme, and my
brother filling the role of benefactor.
In translation 1, the trainee has not changed the verb when opting for ‫ﻋﻄﻰ‬,‫ أ‬but
she has changed the semantic roles filled by the four arguments. To begin with,
the argument ‫(أﺧﻲ‬my brother) fills the role of first recipient and goal of the verb
‫ﻋﻄﻰ‬in‫(ﻄﺖ أﺧﻲ أ‬she
‫أﻋ‬ gave my brother) and agent 2 of the verb ‫ﻋﻄﻰ‬in ‫(ﻋﻄﺎﻧﻲ أ‬he
‫أ‬ gave
me). Further, the role of benefactor is filled by the speaker expressed by the
objective pronoun ‫( ﻧﻲ‬me).
In translation 2, the trainee has not changed the verb, but resorted to deleting
one of the arguments (i.e., for my brother which fills the role of benefactor), thus
hiding the explicit benefactor my brother and giving rise to the possibility of
considering the speaker him/herself as filling the role of benefactor.
In translation 3, the trainee has successfully rendered the verb along with its
four arguments and their semantic roles when opting for the expression ‫ﻷوﺻﻠﻪ‬
(to give it to or to hand it to).
 To demonstrate how not giving full consideration to the semantic roles may
seriously affect the accuracy of the translation, the following translation
produced by a translation trainee can be analysed and evaluated:

ST:

Abu Hamza denies US terror charges. ← 129 | 130 →

TT:

.‫أﺑﻮ ﺣﻤﺰة اﻟﻤﺼﺮي ﻳﻨﻔﻲ ﺗﻬﻤﺔ اﻻرﻫﺎب اﻟﻤﻮﺟﻪ إﻟﻴﻪ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻮﻻﻳﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة‬

In the source text, Abu Hamza fills the role of actor, US terror charges fills the
role of theme, and there is no location. However, in the target text, the
translation trainee, getting confused, has changed the adjective US modifying the
theme into the expression ‫(ﻓﻲ اﻟﻮﻻﻳﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة‬i.e., in the US, which fills the role of
location), thereby creating a completely different mental image. Had the
translator given full consideration to the verb and its semantic roles, she could
have suggested something like:
.‫ﻧﻔﻰ )ﻳﻨﻔﻲ( أﺑﻮ ﺣﻤﺰة ﺗﻬﻢ اﻹرﻫﺎب اﻷﻣﺮﻳﻜﻴﺔ‬
To further illustrate the importance of giving full consideration to the main verb
in a clause along with the semantic roles filled by the arguments that have
relations with the verb, these two examples extracted from Lubna Mahmūd
Yāsīn’s story (n.d.) ‫( ﺑ ﺼ ﻤ ﺔ ﻣ ﻮ ا ﻃ ﻦ‬A Citizen’s Fingerprint) translated for the
purposes of this study may be considered: ST:

.‫ﻓﺘﺢ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ ﻟﻴﺠﺪ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ ﻓﺎﺧﺮ‬ … ‫ﻗﺎم أﺣﺪﻫﻢ ﺑﻨﺰع اﻟﻘﻴﻮد اﻟﺘﻲ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺣﻮاﺳﻪ‬

TT:

One of them removed the shackles which were placed on his senses. He
opened his eyes to find himself in a luxurious office.

In analysing the semantic roles in this example, the above extract can be divided
into two main segments:
‫• ﻗﺎم أﺣﺪﻫﻢ ﺑﻨﺰع اﻟﻘﻴﻮد اﻟﺘﻲ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺣﻮاﺳﻪ‬
‫ﻓﺘﺢ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ ﻟﻴﺠﺪ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ ﻓﺎﺧﺮ‬ •
In the first segment, there are two clauses, viz. ‫ ﻗﺎم أﺣﺪﻫﻢ ﺑﻨﺰع اﻟﻘﻴﻮد‬and ‫اﻟﺘﻲ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫ ﺣﻮاﺳﻪ‬. In the first clause, the verb ‫ ﻗﺎم ﺑﻨﺰع‬, derived from the verb ‫ ﻧﺰع‬, has two
arguments, viz. ‫( أﺣﺪﻫﻢ‬one of them) filling the role of agent ← 130 | 131 → and
‫( اﻟﻘﻴﻮد‬restraints) filling the role of theme. As for the relative clause ‫ا ﻟ ﺘ ﻲ ﻛ ﺎ ﻧ ﺖ ﻋ ﻠ ﻰ‬
‫( ﺣﻮاﺳﻪ‬which had covered his senses), the relative pronoun ‫(اﻟﺘﻲ‬which), which
refers back to ‫( اﻟﻘﻴﻮد‬restraints), fills the role of positioner, and the whole clause
fills the role of location.
In the second segment, however, there are two clauses, viz. ‫ ﻓﺘﺢ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ‬and ‫وﺟﺪ‬
‫ ﻧ ﻔ ﺴ ﻪ ﻓ ﻲ ﻣ ﻜ ﺘ ﺐ ﻓ ﺎ ﺧ ﺮ‬connected by ‫( ﻟـ‬to). In the first clause, there are two
arguments that have a relation with the verb ‫( ﻓﺘﺢ‬to open). They are the implicit
pronoun ‫( ﻫﻮ‬he) filling the role of actor, and ‫( ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ‬his two eyes) filling the role of
theme. Similarly, in the second sentence, there are three arguments that have a
relation with the verb ‫( وﺟﺪ‬to find), viz. an implicit pronoun filling the role of
actor, ‫( ﻧﻔﺴﻪ‬himself) filling the role of theme, and ‫( ﻓﻲ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ ﻓﺎﺧﺮ‬in a luxurious
office) filling the role of location.
Being aware of the importance of reflecting the exact message sent out by the
author, the translator has successfully rendered the verbs ‫ ﻗﺎم ﺑﻨﺰع‬, ‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‬, ‫ ﻓﺘﺢ‬, and
‫ ﻳﺠﺪ‬along with their arguments, thus maintaining the semantic roles intact.
However, the change in aspect from a past perfect tense in the original text,
expressed by ‫(ﻲ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺣﻮاﺳﻪ‬i.e., ‫اﻟﺘ‬ first the restraints had covered his senses, and
then one of them removed the restraints) to a simple past tense in the target text,
expressed by were placed, does produce a change in time reference, affecting the
pragmatic communicative effect, in that the emphasis in the original text is on
the sequence of events, whereas in the target text the emphasis is put on the
completion of the described actions (for more details on tenses and aspects, see
Chapter 5 in this book).
Here is a second example:
ST:

… ‫ ﻧﻌﻢ … وﻣﺎذا ﻓﻲ ذﻟﻚ‬:‫أﺟﺎب اﻟﻀﺎﺑﻂ وﻫﻮ ﻳﺮﺗﺪي اﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﺠﻤﻊ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﺎﻟﻲ واﻟﺴﺨﺮﻳﺔ‬

TT:

The officer answered, wearing a smile simultaneously imbued with arrogance

and sarcasm: “Yes, what about it?”

In the original text, there are four arguments, namely ‫( اﻟﻀﺎﺑﻂ‬the officer) filling
the role of actor, the clause ‫( وﻫﻮ ﻳﺮﺗﺪي اﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﺠﻤﻊ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﺎﻟﻲ واﻟﺴﺨﺮﻳﺔ‬while he was
wearing a smile simultaneously imbued with arrogance and sarcasm) filling ←
131 | 132 → the role of manner, and two themes ‫( ﻧﻌﻢ‬yes) and ‫( وﻣﺎذا ﻓﻲ ذﻟﻚ‬and
what about that). Further, the clause of manner ‫وﻫﻮ ﻳﺮﺗﺪي اﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﺠﻤﻊ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫( واﻟﺴﺨﺮﻳﺔ‬while he was wearing a smile simultaneously imbued with arrogance
and sarcasm) can be further broken down into two main arguments (i.e., ‫( ﻫﻮ‬he)
filling the role of actor and ‫( اﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ‬a smile) filling the role of theme) that have an
underlying relation with the verb ‫( ﻳﺮﺗﺪي‬to wear). Being fully aware of the
importance of reflecting the meaning meant by the author, the translator has
successfully rendered the verbs along with their arguments, thus reflecting the
semantic roles in the target text.
Further reading

Carter, R. (1998). Vocabulary: Applied Linguistic Perspectives. London/New

York: Routledge.
Cowie, A. P. (2009). Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kearns, K. (2000/2011). Semantics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kreidler, C. W. (1998). Introducing English Semantics. London/New York:
Routledge.
Yule, G. (1985/1996). The Study of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Questions

1. How would you define “arguments” and “semantic roles”?

2. What is the difference between “grammatical relations” and “semantic
roles”?
3. Explain how the same argument may have more than one semantic role.
4. Some scholars state that some weather verbs, such as rain, snow, and the
like have no argument. Discuss.
5. What is the difference between “agent” and “actor”, on the one hand and
between “theme” and “affected participant” on the other? ← 132 | 133 →
Exercises

Exercise 1: Provide the reader with illustrative examples to the following

semantic roles:
1. agent
2. recipient
3. source
4. goal
5. location
6. instrument
7. causer
8. resultant
9. patient
10. stimulus
Exercise 2: Read the following sentences carefully in order to label their
semantic roles filled by the arguments in each clause. Then translate them into
Arabic and annotate any shift that may occur in the semantic roles through the
nexus of translation:
1. I went to London.
2. She sent me an e-mail yesterday.
3. When I was in Egypt, I was given many lectures in an Egyptian dialect.
4. The harvest has been destroyed by the flood completely.
5. I spent many hours designing a cover for your book.
6. My boss wrote a recommendation letter for me.
7. Peter borrowed some money from his friend.
8. The party delighted him.
9. The shoe hurts her foot.
10. He smelled a nasty smell.
Exercise 3: In the following text (taken from John Ruskin’s fairy tale The King
of the Golden River and translated by one of the BA translation ← 133 | 134 →
students at the University of Nizwa), there are many arguments that fill the role
of agent and causer. Try to identify them with your students and then discuss
how the translation student has dealt with them: ST:
 Things went on in this manner for a long time. At last came a very wet
summer, and everything went wrong in the country round. The hay had
hardly been got in when the haystacks were floated bodily down to the sea by
an inundation; the vines were cut to pieces with the hail; the corn was all
killed by a black blight.

TT:

‫ ﻣﻤﺎ أﻓﺴﺪ ﻛﻞ ﺷﻲء ﻓﻲ‬،‫ﺛﻢ ﺟﺎء ﺻﻴﻒ ﺷﺪﻳﺪ اﻟﺮﻃﻮﺑﺔ‬ .‫ﺳﺎرت اﻷﻣﻮر ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺬا اﻟﻨﺤﻮ ﻟﻔﺘﺮة ﻃﻮﻳﻠﺔ‬
‫ ودﻣﺮت ﺣﺒﺎت اﻟﺒﺮد‬،‫ﻬﻢ اﻟﺤﺼﻮل ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻘﺶ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺟﺮﻓﺖ اﻟﺴﻴﻮل أﻛﻮام اﻟﺘﺒﻦ اﻟﻰ اﻟﺒﺤﺮ‬.‫ﻦﻼ ﻟد‬ َ ‫ﺴﻟﺒ‬
‫ﻟﻢ ﻳﺘ ا‬
ُ
‫ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ اﻟﺒﻼد‬. ‫ وأﺗﻠ ِﻒ ﻣﺤﺼﻮل اﻟﺬرة ﺑﺎﻟﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻌﻈﻢ‬،‫أﺷﺠﺎر اﻟﻌﻨﺐ‬

Exercise 4: Translate the following text extracted from Mary Ali’s text titled
Women’s Liberation through Islam, published on 24 June 2013
(<http://www.islamreligion.com>), by paying special attention to the main verb
in each clause and its arguments along with their semantic roles: ST:

A Muslim woman has the privilege to earn money, the right to own property,
to enter into legal contracts and to manage all of her assets in any way she
pleases. She can run her own business and no one has any claim on her
earnings, including her husband.
| 135 →

CHAPTER 9

Semantic Principles
Key terms

• Collocation
• Compositionality
• Idiom principle
• Idioms
• Lexical features
• Open choice principle
• Phrasal verbs
• Phraseological features
• Phraseological tendency
• Slot-and-filler principle
• Terminological tendency

Semantically speaking, in order to produce utterances or understand them,

language users (be they speakers or writers) rely on two features, namely lexical
features and phraseological features (cf. Francis 1993; Sinclair 1991, 1998).
These two types of features cover both compositional meaning and unitary
meaning. This chapter explores two aspects of word use and word meaning in
terms of Sinclair’s (1991, 1998) distinction between the “open choice principle”
(or “terminological tendency”) and the “idiom principle” (or “phraseological
tendency”). ← 135 | 136 →

9.1 Semantic principles

As suggested above, in order to produce or understand utterances, language

users rely on both lexical and phraseological features. To do so, they consciously
or subconsciously follow two principles, namely the open choice principle (or
terminological tendency) and the idiom principle (or phraseological tendency).
At times, the lexical items have both a terminological tendency and a
phraseological tendency, as in literal phrasal verbs, such as sit down, stand up,
come in, put down, pick up, and so on. In this type of phrasal verbs, in which a
verb is followed by a directional particle, it is not difficult to figure out their
meanings because both terminological tendency and phraseological tendency are
in harmony. However, at other times, there is some sort of tension between these
two tendencies, as in, for example aspectual phrasal verbs, such as take off, set
up, etc., or idiomatic phrasal verbs, such as keep up, brush off, zone out, close in
on, wind up, and zero in on. In these two types of phrasal verbs, especially the
idiomatic phrasal verbs, the meaning of the whole phrasal verb is not related to
the meanings of its constituents (for further details, see Almanna 2010; Celce-
Murcia and Larsen-Freeman 1999, among others). Such tension has encouraged
lexicographers to take into account both tendencies while designing their
dictionaries. In the past, they used to focus mainly on the terminological
tendency.

9.2 The open choice principle

To begin with the open choice principle, a language user can sometimes elicit
the meaning of the whole sentence or clause from its words and their
arrangements – the syntax of any language can specify the slots into which
memorized items can be inserted. This principle tells us the basic restrictions on
the possible choices of lexical items that can be utilized by a language ← 136 |
137 → user to syntactically fill in every slot identified in any given text (Sinclair
1991: 109). For example, the meaning of the sentence:

My friend will travel to London next week.

is compositionally driven by the meanings of its lexical items along with the
grammatical markers used in the sentence:

• friend preceded by the possessive pronoun my that functions as a deictic

expression referring to the speaker.
• travel in the future tense indicated by the modal verb will.
• London preceded by the preposition to, thus indicating the final destination of
the actor.
• week preceded by the word next, thus functioning together as a deictic
 expression indicating when the actor of the action will travel.

To elaborate, the following example may be considered:

.‫ث ﻳﻄﺎردﻧﻲ ﻓﻲ أﺣﻼﻣﻲ ﻣﻨﺬ ﺳﻨﺘﻴﻦ‬ ُ ‫ﻻ ﻳﺰا‬

ِ ‫ل ﻣﺸﻬﺪ ُ اﻟﺤﺎد‬

Again, the meaning of the above sentence is compositionally driven by the

meanings of its lexical items along with the grammatical markers used in it:

• ‫ﻣﺸﻬﺪ‬ (scene) although it is not preceded by a definite article, such as ‫(أل‬the),

it is defined as it is followed by a defined noun ‫(اﻟﺤﺎدث‬the accident). It is
assumed here that ‫( ﻣﺸﻬﺪ اﻟﺤﺎدث‬the scene of the accident) is known to the
addressee. Otherwise, the speaker needs to run a preparatory check: “if I
uttered it, would the addressee know which ‫( ﻣﺸﻬﺪ‬scene) I am talking about?”
• the verb ‫( ﻳﻄﺎرد‬lit. to chase) is in the present tense. The emphasis is placed on
both the continuity of the described action at the moment of speaking
indicated by ‫( ﻻ ﻳﺰال‬still) and the duration of the action that began in the past
(two years ago) and is seen relevant to the present indicated by ‫( ﻣﻨﺬ‬for/since).
• the pronoun ‫( ﻧﻲ‬me) is in the objective case referring to the speaker. ← 137 |
138 →
• the noun ‫( أﺣﻼم‬dreams) is the plural form of ‫( ﺣﻠﻢ‬dream); it is followed by the
possessive pronoun ‫( ي‬my) referring to the speaker.

Paying undivided attention to the meanings of the lexical items or expressions

along with the grammatical markers used in it on the one hand, and taking into
account the linguistic and stylistic norms of the target language on the other, a
professional translator may well suggest a rendering like this:

The scene of the accident has been haunting my dreams for two years.

For Sinclair (1991: 109), the open choice principle is:

a way of seeing language as the result of a very large number of complex

choices. At each point where a unit is complete (a word or a phrase or a
clause), a large range of choices opens up and the only restraint is
grammaticalness.

Closely related to Sinclair’s open choice principle is “compositionality”.

Compositionality means that the meaning of a word, phrase, clause, or sentence
is determined by the meanings of its components (semantics) and the way they
are put together to form words, phrases, clauses, or sentences (morphology and
syntax) (for more details, see Farghal and Almanna 2015: 66–78; Griffiths 2006:
17–19; Kearns 2000/2011: 57–78). The meaning of a word, for instance, is
determined by the meanings of its morphemes, and the meaning of a clause or
sentence is determined by its parts. Therefore, a language user cannot understand
the meaning of the following sentence unless s/he knows the meanings of its
parts and the way they are ordered to form such a sentence:

I have been working in this company for ten years. (The year of uttering the
sentence is 2016).

• I: the actor referring to the speaker; the pronoun I does not indicate the
speaker’s gender, age, etc., but we can guess that his/her age is over twenty-
eight.
• have been working: work means to do a job that needs a physical or mental
effort in order to earn money. From its position in the sentence, it is a verb in
the continuous perfect tense, so the aspect is perfect ← 138 | 139 →
progressive, emphasizing that the speaker started working in the company in
2006 and is still working at the moment of uttering his/her sentence.
• in this company: company means a business organization selling goods or
services. The demonstrative pronoun this along with the preposition in means
that the speaker works in the company that has been mentioned earlier by
him/her or by the addressee, or it might be the place of uttering his/her
sentence.
• for ten years: covering the whole period from 2006 up to 2016.

Giving full consideration to the meanings of the parts of the above sentence and
the way they are ordered to form such a sentence on the one hand, and paying
extra attention to the linguistic and stylistic norms of the target language on the
other, a well-trained translator may suggest a translation like this:

.‫ﻞ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬه اﻟﺸﺮﻛﺔ‬

ُ ‫ت وأﻧﺎ أﻋﻤ‬
ٍ ‫ﻣﻨﺬ ُ ﻋﺸﺮ ﺳﻨﻮا‬
Or

.‫ﻞ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬه اﻟﺸﺮﻛﺔ ﻣﻨﺬ ﻋﺸﺮ ﺳﻨﻮات‬

ُ ‫ل أﻋﻤ‬
ُ ‫ﻻ أزا‬

However, in any language, there are a great number of expressions whose

meanings cannot be figured out by relying on the meanings of their parts and the
way they are ordered to form larger units. In what follows, these exceptions will
be discussed.

9.3 The idiom principle

The idiom principle, however, posits that a language user “has available to him
or her a large number of semi-preconstructed phrases that constitute single
choices, even though they might appear to be analysable into segments” (Sinclair
1991: 110). For example the word cheese has a relationship ← 139 | 140 → with
words like butter, milk, yogurt, and so on as they all parts of dairy products (see
semantic fields and semantic relations in this book). Therefore, in a sentence like
this:

a native speaker expects expressions like some cheese, some butter, some milk,
some eggs, some milk, a cup of coffee, a cup of tea, and the like to syntactically
fill in the slot identified in the above sentence. Such a principle is known as
“slot-and-filler”, as it tells the reader/listener the basic restrictions on the
possible choices of lexical items that can be utilized by a language user to
syntactically fill in every slot identified in any given text (Sinclair 1991: 109).
However, the same word cheese in a sentence like this:

It seems that his brother is a big cheese in one of the major companies in the
country.

cannot be replaced with one of the expected words/expressions above as the

word cheese in the idiomatic expression a big cheese refers to an important or
powerful person in a group or organization.
The same holds true for lexical items like butter and milk in these two
sentences:

This is your grade in the exam, so don’t try to butter me up.

You have to do your best if you don’t like your presentation to be just milk
and water. ← 140 | 141 →

In the first example, to butter up means to treat somebody nicely in hopes of

receiving special favours. As for the second example, milk and water means
weak or feeble. Therefore, the meanings of to butter up and milk and water are
not related directly to the denotative meanings of their receptive constituents,
that is, butter + up and milk + water.
Similarly, when you hear somebody saying:

At the beginning of an exam, I always have butterflies in my stomach.

most English speakers will recognize that s/he does not mean literally to have
butterflies in his/her stomach, but rather, it means s/he is very nervous or
worried. The phrase to have butterflies in one’s stomach, then, is not
compositional since its overall meaning, that is, to be nervous or worried, does
not derive from the meanings of its components.

9.4 Idioms versus collocations

Unlike collocations, which “are fairly flexible patterns of language which allow
several variation in form”, idioms allow no variation (Baker 1992: 63). Thus,
fear-related idioms like

• to have/get cold feet

• to have your heart in your mouth
• to show the white feather
• to be yellow
• to have no guts
• to get the wind up

cannot be respectively modified into something like

• to have/get frozen feet

• to have your mouth in your feet
• to show the blue feather ← 141 | 142 →
• to be red
• to have no stomach
• to get the storm up

Idiomatic expressions allow almost no variation in form under normal

circumstances and “present particular difficulties because they are restricted
collocations which cannot normally be understood from the literal meaning of
the words which make them up” (Carter 1998: 65). To put this differently, to
elicit the meaning of an idiomatic expression, language users and translators
cannot rely on the open choice principle, that is to say, relying on the meanings
of its components. Rather, they need to resort to the idiom principle by treating
the idiomatic expression as one unit. A few more examples may serve to show
how translators need not to depend on the open choice principle only, but they
need to rely on the idiom principle as well:

When he saw the scene, he lost his nerve and got the wind up suddenly.
When he was surrounded by the enemy, he showed the white feather and
surrendered.
When he heard the explosion, he had his heart in his mouth.

As stated above, these idiomatic expressions, viz. to get the wind up, to show the
white feather, and to have your heart in your mouth cannot be understood
without treating them as units. They are fear-related idioms meaning to be
frightened, to exhibit cowardice, and to be extremely afraid respectively.
Therefore, they lend themselves into something like this in Arabic:

.‫ ﻳﺮﺗﺠﻒ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺨﻮف‬،‫ ﻓﺠﺄة‬،‫ ﻓﻘﺪ أﻋﺼﺎﺑﻪ وأﺧﺬ‬،‫ﺣﻴﻨﻤﺎ رأى اﻟﻤﺸﻬﺪ‬

.‫ ﺧﺎف ﻓﺴﻠ ّﻢ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ‬،‫ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﺣﺎﺻﺮه اﻟﻌﺪو‬
.‫ وﻗﻊ ﻗﻠﺒﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻗﺪﻣﻴﻪ‬،‫ت اﻻ ِﻧﻔﺠﺎر‬
َ ‫ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﺳﻤﻊ ﺻﻮ‬

Collocation, on the other hand, means the tendency of two or more lexical items
to co-occur together in certain contexts. Adjectives like fast and quick, for
instance, are synonyms as they share the sense of “doing something at speed”.
However, the adjective fast collocates well with nouns like food and train, but
not meal or shower, while the adjective quick collocates well with nouns like
meal and shower, but not food or train. Collocations are language-specific, that
is, what is considered as collocation cannot be taken for granted in another.
Further, they are not governed by fixed rules. ← 142 | 143 → Rather they
arbitrarily co-occur. In touching on the basic characteristic properties of
collocations, Baker (1992: 48) states that

patterns of collocation are largely arbitrary and independent of meaning. This

is so both within and across languages. The same degree of mismatch that can
be observed when comparing the collocational patterns of synonyms and
near-synonyms within the same language is evident in the collocational
patterning of “dictionary equivalents/near equivalents” in two languages.

In a direct link with translation, it is essential that translators while translating

collocation give full consideration to the degree of predictability of lexical co-
occurrence, that is, the degree of its markedness, as opposed to unmarkedness.
Combinations like

‫ ﺣﺒ ّﺔ زﻳﺘﻮن‬،‫ ﻗﻄﻌﺔ ﺣﻠﻮى‬،‫ ﺷﺮﻳﺤﺔ ﻟﺤﻢ‬،‫رﻏﻴﻒ ﺧﺒﺰ‬

are labelled unmarked as they are natural combination for native speakers of
Arabic. Similarly, combinations like bright face, bright child, bright idea, bright
future, bright voice, and so on are unmarked collocations as they sound natural
for native speakers of English. Marked collocations, however, are unnatural
combinations that are deliberately used by the speaker/writer to create new
images (Baker 1992: 51). As an illustration, the following example quoted from
Lubna Mahmūd Yāsīn’s story (n.d.) ‫( ﺑ ﺼ ﻤ ﺔ ﻣ ﻮ ا ﻃ ﻦ‬A Citizen’s Fingerprint)
translated for the purposes of this study may be considered:
ST:

‫ﻳﺒﺘﻠﻌﻪ اﻟﻤﺴﺎء …ﻓﻴﻮﻏﻞ ﻓﻲ أﺣﺸﺎء اﻟﺼﻤﺖ …وﻣﻦ ذا اﻟﺬي ﻳﺴﺘﻄﻴﻊ ﻓﺮاًرا إذا ﻋﺴﻌﺲ اﻷﻟﻢ‬
‫…ﻮﻏﻠﺖ اﻷﺣﺰان ﻓﻲ ﺣﻨﺎﻳﺎ اﻟﻔﺆاد … ﻳﺘﺂﻛﻞ ﻗﻠﺒﻪ … ﺗﺘﺴﺎﻗﻂ أﺷﻼؤه … ﻳﺘﻤّﺰق‬‫داﺧﻞ اﻟﻨﻔﺲ وﺗ‬
‫ﻣﺠﻴﺐ‬ …‫ﺻﻮﺗﻪﻋﻠ‬
ُ ‫ﻰ ﺣﺪود اﻟﺰﻣﺎن وﻻ ﻣﻦ‬

TT:

The night swallows him so he delves ever deeper into the heart of silence.
Who can, then, escape if the pain is densely settled inside the self and sadness
penetrates the depths of the heart? … His heart erodes; his limbs fall off; his
voice gets torn away at the boundaries of time, yet no response comes. ← 143
| 144 →

In this example, the original writer deliberately uses an unnatural combination

‫(أ ﺣ ﺸ ﺎ ء ا ﻟ ﺼ ﻤ ﺖ‬lit. the intestines of silence) to create a new image. So, it is an
example of marked collocation. To reflect the same degree of markedness, the
translators may exclude unmarked collocations, such as wall of silence or a vow
of silence. In this regard, Trotter (2000: 351) rightly comments: “Translation
requires invariance in the markedness of collocates, rather than replacing
abnormal usage in an original with normal usage in translation”.
To illustrate the importance of giving full consideration to collocation and its
degree of predictability, the following two examples from Muhsin Al-Ramlī’s
story (2009: 29) ‫ﻲ‬ ّ ‫(ﺚ ﻋﻦ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺣ‬Search
‫اﻟﺒﺤ‬ for a Live Heart) can be discussed:
ST:

(‫ ﻣﻦ أﺣﺪﻫﺎ ﻣﺎﺳًﺤﺎ‬.‫ وﻋﻠﻰ ﺟﺎﻧﺒﻲ اﻟﻤﻤﺮ أﺑﻮاب ﻣﺮﻗﻤﺔ‬،‫ داﺧﻞ أﺣﺪ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺸﻔﻴﺎت‬،‫ﻫﻮ( ﻓﻳﻲﺨﺮﻣجﻤﺮ ﺿﻴﻖ‬
‫ ﻳﺜﻘﻞ ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻪ اﻷﻟﻢ واﻟﺤﺰن اﻟﺤﺎد ﻓﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ أﺣﻴﺎﻧ ًﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺟﺎﻧﺒﻲ … اﻟﻤﻤﺮ‬،‫ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ‬

Although the adjective ‫( ﺣﺎد‬sharp) in the source text describes both nouns ‫أﻟﻢ‬
(pain) and ‫(ﺣﺰن‬sorrow), it collocates well with the noun pain in English. To find
an adjective that typically collocates with sorrow, a professional translator may
opt for deep. When opting for using two adjectives that collocate well with the
two nouns, viz. pain and sorrow, it will make the target text run more naturally
than the source text, i.e., euphemizing it. To avoid such euphemism on the one
hand, and to maintain the same degree of effect on the other, the translator may
resort to using only one adjective deep, which is typically in collocation with
grief, and, to less degree, with pain, as in:
TT:

In a narrow hospital corridor, there is a succession of numbered doors on

both sides. He himself comes out of one of these doors rubbing his eyes, his
movement weighed down by deep pain and grief; from time to time he leans
for support against both sides of the corridor. ← 144 | 145 →

Here is a second example:

ST:

‫ ﻟﻢ‬،‫ﻟﻢ ﻳﻘﻞ ذﻟﻚ ﻷﻧﻪ ﺑﻼ ﻟﺤﻢ وﻻ ﺷﺤﻢ‬ … ‫ﺧﺬﻧﻲ ﻛﻠﻲ ﺑﻠﺤﻤﻲ وﺷﺤﻤﻲ ) ﻳﻀﺤﻚ( ﻻ … ﻻ‬
ً ‫ ﻳﻜﻦ إﻻ ﻛﻴ‬. :(‫)ﻳﻘﻠﺪه‬
‫ وﻓﻴﻪ ﺑﻀﻌﺔ ﻋﻈﺎم‬،‫ﺴﺎ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺠﻠﺪ اﻟﻤﺒﻠﻞ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﺮق‬

TT:

“Take all of me, my flesh and my fat,” he cries, impersonating the drunkard.
He laughs and says, “No, no, he didn’t say that, for he had neither flesh nor
fat. He was just a bag of skin and bones, drenched in sweat”.

The phrase ‫(ﻟﺤﻤﻲ وﺷﺤﻤﻲ‬lit. my flesh and my fat) is used in Arabic for emphasis to
mean “all” or “personally”, thus it may be translated into an expression like body
and soul, which is an expression used in English to mean “completely”.
However, repeating the components of the phrase in the text many times, such as
‫ﺑﻼ ﻟﺤﻢ وﻻ ﺷﺤﻢ‬ and the like, leaves us with no alternative but the literal
translation. Baker (1992: 72) rightly comments that translators should take into
account “the significance of the specific items which constitute the idiom, i.e.,
whether they are manipulated elsewhere in the source text” or not.
Following is another example quoted from Mahfouz’s (1966: 183) novel
‫( ﺛﺮﺛﺮة ﻓﻮق اﻟﻨﻴﻞ‬Adrift on the Nile) and translated by Frances E. Liardet (1993: 17):

ST:

‫ﺗﻬﻠﻞ وﺟﻪ ﻋﻠﻲ اﻟﺴﻴﺪ ﺑﺘﻔﺎؤل ﻣﺒﺎﻏﺖ ﻓﻘﺎل ﺑﺮﺟﺎء‬:‫و‬

 !‫أراﻫ–ﻦ ﻋﻠﻰ أن رﺟﺐ ﺳﻴﻨﺠﺐ أﻃﻔﺎﻻ‬
:‫ ﺿﺤﻚ رﻏﻢ ﺗﻮﺗﺮ أﻋﺼﺎﺑﻪ وﻗﺎل‬.‫وإذا ﺑﺄﻧﻴﺲ ﻳﻀﺤﻚ‬
.‫– ﻋﻤﻠﺘﻢ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺤﺒﺔ ﻗﺒﺔ‬

TT:

Ali’s face shone with a sudden optimism. “I bet that Ragab will have
children!”
And then Anis laughed. He laughed in spite of his tense nerves. “You’ve made
a mountain out of a molehill”, he said. ← 145 | 146 →

In Arabic, when someone is exaggerating the importance of something trivial or

treating a problem as greater than it is, people can tell him that ‫ﻳﻌﻤﻞ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺤﺒﺔ ﻗﺒﺔ‬
(lit. he’s making a dome from a grain). So, it is an idiomatic expression, and its
meaning cannot be figured out by relying on the meanings of its components.
Rather, it should be treated as one unit. The sentence ‫ ﻳﻌﻤﻞ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺤﺒﺔ ﻗﺒﺔ‬, then, is not
compositional since its overall meaning, that is, making a slight difficulty seem
like a serious one does not derive from the meanings of its components. To
render the same function and impact, the translator may resort to an idiomatic
expression, such as to make a mountain out of a molehill, thus producing a
functional equivalent. As can be seen, the function of the original sentence has
been given full consideration, thus lending itself to a functional equivalent, that
is, You’ve made a mountain out of a molehill.

9.5 Phrasal verbs

English phrasal verbs are very important part of everyday English. Every student
or translator of English needs a basic understanding of the most common phrasal
verbs. Such phrasal verbs undoubtedly constitute one of the major difficulties
English learners as well as translators and interpreters have to contend with
when approaching this type of idiomatic expressions (cf. Almanna 2010; Cowie
and Mackin 1993; McArthur and Atkins 1974; Turton and Manser 1985, among
others).
According to the Longman Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English
(Biber et al. 2002), phrasal verbs consist of a verb, such as to put, to go, to give,
to look, and so on, followed by an adverbial particle, such as off, out, up, at etc.
Commonly, the adverbials used with phrasal verbs have a less than literal
meaning, making the phrasal verb as a whole idiomatic in meaning. It is this
idiomatic meaning that allows the phrasal verb to be replaced with a single word
verb. For instance, the phrasal verb to put off can be replaced with the single
word verb, to postpone (Biber et al. 2002). Phrasal verbs are an essential part of
spoken and written English at all levels, and nobody planning to master the
language can afford to overlook them. ← 146 | 147 →
The most widely used classification is proposed by Celce-Murcia and Larsen-
Freeman (1999) According to Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman (1999: 432–
433), phrasal verbs are divided into three categories: literal (e.g., sit down, stand
up, pass through, etc.), aspectual (e.g., read though, set out, write over, etc.), and
idiomatic (e.g., chew out, run up, tune out, etc.). In distinguishing literal phrasal
verbs from the other types, Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman (ibid.) rely on the
criterion of compositionality, as opposed to noncompositionality. They hold that
literal phrasal verbs are compositional while others are noncompositional.
Actually, their classification is problematic as sometimes we have phrasal verbs
which are noncompositional. Consider, for instance, the phrasal verb to look up.
According to their classification, the meaning of the phrasal verb to look up may
be restricted to gaze upwards. However, this phrasal verb has many other
meanings, such as to seek somebody or something out, to seek information about
somebody or something in a book, to visit somebody, and so forth. Therefore,
phrasal verbs in this study are divided into four categories: literal, aspectual,
idiomatic, and polysemous.

9.5.1 Literal phrasal verbs

Literal phrasal verbs are very easy to understand. For example, it is not difficult
to pinpoint the meaning of sit down, stand up, or come in because their meanings
are obvious. Most commonly, literal phrasal verbs are verbs + directional
particles (ibid.). For instance, sit down, stand up, pick up, bend down, put down,
pass through, fall down, climb up, and so on are all verbs followed by directional
particles.

9.5.2 Aspectual phrasal verbs

Aspectual phrasal verbs are phrasal verbs whose meanings are not as transparent
as literal phrasal verbs; however, their meanings are not idiomatic either (for
further details, see Celce-Murcia and Larsen-Freeman 1999). Examples of this
type of phrasal verbs include set up, take off, start out, and so forth. These
phrasal verbs can be classified into a number of ← 147 | 148 → semantic
classes, depending on the semantic contribution of the particle used, as in:

• inceptive: signaling a beginning state, as in take off, set out, start up, etc.
• continuative: emphasizing the continuity of the action, as in run on and on,
hurry along, read through, skim through, think through, work away, play
around, mess around, travel around, etc.
• iterative: emphasizing the repetition of the action, as in do over and over,
turn over and over, write over, think over, type over, etc.
• completive: emphasizing the completion of the action, as in drink up, eat up,
close up, clean up, catch up, wind up, mix up, find out, fade out, wear out,
blow out, check over, win over, cut off, turn off, burn down, etc.

9.5.3 Idiomatic phrasal verbs

Idiomatic phrasal verbs, however, are phrasal verbs whose meanings are not
easy to predict. To put this differently, the meaning of the whole phrasal verb is
not related to the meanings of its constituents. For example, keep up, brush off,
zero in on, close in on, run up, tune out, zone out, and chew out are all idiomatic
phrasal verbs.

9.5.4 Polysemous phrasal verbs

The final type of phrasal verbs is polysemous. As the name suggests,

polysemous phrasal verbs can have multiple meanings, such as check out, look
up, make up, go off, go out, and set off.
To demonstrate how not giving full consideration to the unitary nature of
these phrasal verbs and relying on the meanings of their constitutes may
seriously affect the whole process of understanding, and then, translation, the
following example along with three translations produced by translation students
of the Department of Translation at the University of Basrah may be considered:
← 148 | 149 →
ST:
 Jehad burst out of the editing suite screaming. He sprinted down the stairs,
his head in his hands, his face ripped with anguish.

TT 1:

‫ ﻣﻨﻔﺰﻋﺎ ووﺟﻬﻪ‬. ‫ﻛﺾ ﺑﺄﻗﺼﻰ ﺳﺮﻋﺔ إﻟﻰ اﻟﻄﺎﺑﻖ اﻟﺴﻔﻠﻲ وﻛﺎن‬.‫ﺧﺮج ﺟﻬﺎد ﻣﻦ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ اﻟﺘﺤﺮﻳﺮ ﺻﺎروﺧﺎر‬
‫ﺣﺎﻣﻼ ﻋﻼﻣﺎت اﻷﻟﻢ‬

TT 2:

‫ اﻟﻄﺎﺑﻖ اﻟﺴﻔﻠﻲ‬.‫اﻧﺪﻓﻊ ﺟﻬﺎد ﻣﻦ ﻗﺴﻢ اﻟﺘﺤﺮﻳﺮ ﻣﻨﻔﺠﺮا ﺑﺎﻟﺼﺮاخ واﻟﻌﻮﻳﻞ وراﻛﻀﺎ ﺑﺄﻗﺼﻰ ﺳﺮﻋﺘإﻟﻪﻰ‬
‫وﻳﺪه ﻋﻠﻰ رأﺳﻪ‬

TT 3:

‫ﺟﻪ ﻋﻼﻣﺎت‬.‫ﺧﺮج ﺟﻬﺎد ﻣﻦ ﻗﺴﻢ اﻟﺘﺤﺮﻳﺮ ﺑﺄﻗﺼﻰ ﺳﺮﻋﺘﻪ وﻫﻮ ﻳﺼﺮخ وﻳﺪه ﻋﻠﻰ رأﺳﻪ وﺑﺪت ﻋﻠﻰو‬
‫اﻟﺤﺰن‬

Here, two phrasal verbs are used in the original text, viz. burst out and sprint
down. To begin with the first phrasal verb to burst out, it has been translated into
‫( ﺧﺮج‬to go out) by one trainee and ‫( اﻧﺪﻓﻊ‬to burst out) by two trainees. In Arabic,
the verb ‫( ﺧﺮج‬to go out) is different from ‫( اﻧﺪﻓﻊ‬to burst out) as the former does
not indicate that the actor of the action Jehad has gone with all haste, while the
latter does. Therefore, one of the trainees has opted for ‫( ﺧﺮج‬to go out) followed
by ‫( ﺑﺄﻗﺼﻰ ﺳﺮﻋﺘﻪ‬with his top speed), to create a similar mental image. As for the
second phrasal verb to sprint out, it has been translated into ‫( رﻛﺾ‬to run)
followed by ‫( ﺑﺄﻗﺼﻰ ﺳﺮﻋﺘﻪ‬with his top speed) by two trainees, while it has been
merged with the verb ‫( ﺧﺮج‬to go out) into one verb by one trainee.
Further reading

Almanna, F. (2010). Dictionary of English Phrasal Verbs. London: Sayyab

Books Ltd.
Baker, M. (1992). In Other Words. London/New York: Routledge. ← 149 | 150
→
Erman, B., and Warren, B. (2000). “The Idiom Principle and the Open Choice
Principle”, Text, Vol. 20 (1), pp. 29–62.
Farghal, M., and Almanna, A. (2015). Contextualizing Translation Theories:
Aspects of Arabic-English Interlingual Communication. Newcastle upon
Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., and Hyams, N. (2003). An Introduction to Language
(7th edn) USA: Heinle, a part of Thomson Corporation.
Sinclair, J. (1998). “The Lexical Item”. In E. Weigand (ed.), Contrastive Lexical
Semantics, pp. 1–24. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
——. (2008). “The Phrase, the Whole Phrase and Nothing but the Phrase”. In S.
Granger and F. Meunier (eds), Phraseology: An Interdisciplinary
Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 407–410.
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., and Martinez, R. (2014). “The Idiom Principle
Revisited”. Applied Linguistics, pp. 1–22. doi: 10.1093/applin/amto54.
Questions

1. What is “compositionality”? Discuss with illustrative examples.

2. Explain Sinclair’s (1991) “open choice principle” and “idiom principle”.
3. Do you agree that in any language there are wide-ranging expressions
whose meanings cannot be figured out by falling back on the meanings of
their parts and the way they are ordered to form larger units? Discuss with
illustrative examples.
4. What is “collocation”, and how would you translate marked collocation, as
opposed to unmarked collocation?
5. There are four types of phrasal verbs. What are they? Explain with
illustrative examples.
Exercises

Exercise 1: Identify the type of the phrasal verb in each sentence (highlighted for
you). Then, translate the sentences into Arabic, paying particular attention to the
phrasal verbs: ← 150 | 151 →

1. No need to press anything, the light goes on automatically when you

approach the door.
2. The manager will consider the proposal that you have put forward.
3. I’ve been trying hard, but it seems it won’t come off my hands.
4. She’s been trying to screw her parents out of thousands of US dollars.
5. My youngest brother monkeyed around with my car yesterday.
6. My sister has been missing many days of college; she is falling behind in
her studies.
7. I hope I’m not butting in, but I must say, it’s a wonderful idea.
8. You’ve been getting at me the whole day, could you please lighten up a
bit?
9. I bought the gift, but I have to wrap it up before going to her birthday party.
10. I was so exhausted after taking the TOEFL test that I nodded off before
dinner.

Exercise 2: How would you translate the following idiomatic expressions

(highlighted for you) idiomatically into Arabic?

1. Why did you ask him such an embarrassing question? You are always
putting your foot in it.
2. When I voted for him, I was convinced he would win, but I backed the
wrong horse.
3. She had to swallow her words when I got the job as she said I’d never ever
get the job.
4. The prime minister, faced with the journalists’ embarrassing questions, let
the cat out of the bag.
5. We don’t want any problem with them, so please keep mum about what
you saw last night.
Exercise 3: In the following sentences, which of the highlighted expressions can
be considered compositional, and which are idioms?

1. The students got into deep water with their teacher for the noise they made.
← 151 | 152 →
2. The text you asked me last week to translate was a hard nut to crack.
3. The police are barking up the wrong tree if they think Tom stole the car.
4. When I saw my little daughter standing in front of the open window, I had
my heart in my mouth.
5. When the lights suddenly went out, my heart missed a beat.

Exercise 4: Translate the following text extracted from Muhsin Al-Ramlī’s story
(2009) ‫ﻲ‬ ّ ‫(ﺤ ﺚ ﻋ ﻦ ﻗ ﻠ ﺐ ﺣ‬Search
‫اﻟﺒ‬ for a Live Heart). Then, annotate your own
translation in terms of (1) translating collocation, and (2) translating idiomatic
expressions:

… … ‫ﻳﻨﻈﺮ إﻟﻰ ﺳﺎﻋﺘ اﻪﻟ(ﻮﻗﺖ ﻣﺮة أﺧﺮى …ﻳﻀﻴﻖ داﺋًﻤﺎ وﻳﺤﺎﺻﺮﻧﻲ ﻛﻬﺬا اﻟﻤﻤﺮ اﻟﺨﺎﻧﻖ( أواه‬
‫ﻤﺮت ﻋﻨﺪ اﻟﻨﺎﻓﺬة ﻟﻴﻞ ﻧﻬﺎر … ﺗﺮﺿﻊ اﻟﺴﺠﺎﺋﺮ وﻋﻴﻨﺎﻫﺎ اﻟﺪاﻣﻌﺘﺎن‬ّ ‫…ﻣﻲ اﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﺴ‬ ‫ﻛﻴﻒ ﻗﻠﺐ أﻣﻲ إذا ً؟ أ‬
‫ﺟﻞ ﻋﻦ ﻛﻞ اﻟﺴﻴﺎرات اﻟﻤﺎرﻗﺔ … ﻳﻨﺰل … ﻗﺪ ﻳﻨﺰل ﻓﻲ أﻳﺔ ﻟﺤﻈﺔ‬ ّ ‫ﺗﺮﻗﺒﺎن اﻟﻄﺮﻳﻖ …ﺗﺮاه ﻳﺘﺮ‬
‫ وﺣﺘﻰ اﻟﺠﻴﺮان ﻳﻮدون ﻟﻮ ﻳﻨﻘﻠﻮا ﻟﻨﺎ ﺧﺒﺮ ﻋﻮدﺗﻪ ﺑﺴﺮﻋﺔ‬،‫ﻤﺎ ﺳﻴﻨﺰل ﻷﻧﻪ ﻻﺑﺪ ّ أن ﻳﻌﻮد‬ ً ‫ﺑﻞ ﺣﺘ‬ …
… ‫ ﻓﻬﻢ ﻳﺪرﻛﻮن ﺑﺄن ﻟﺤﻈﺔ ﺣﺰن إﺿﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﻗﺪ ﺗﻘﻀﻲ ﻋﻠﻴﻨﺎ … رﺑ ّﻤﺎ ﻫﺬه اﻟﻠﺤﻈﺔ‬،‫ﻟﻴﻮﻗﻔﻮا ﺣﺰﻧﻨﺎ‬
‫أو اﻟﻘﺎدﻣﺔ …ﻓﻤﺘﻰ ﺳﻴﺸﻔﻰ؟ ﻣﺘﻰ ﻳﻌﻮد؟ ﻣﺘﻰ؟ ﻣﺘﻰ؟‬
| 153 →

CHAPTER 10

Levels of Meaning
Key terms

• Affective meaning
• Allusive meaning
• Associative meaning
• Attitudinal meaning
• Collocative meaning
• Connotation
• Denotation
• Interpretive semiotics
• Paradigmatic axis
• Reflected meaning
• Semiotics
• Sign
• Signified
• Signifier
• Structural semiotics
• Stylistic meaning
• Syntagmatic axis

The previous chapter considered the two main semantic principles: the open
choice principle and the idiom principle. This chapter gives full consideration to
the levels of meaning, such as denotative meaning, connotative meaning,
affective meaning, allusive meaning, associative meaning, attitudinal meaning,
collocative meaning, reflected meaning, and stylistic meaning. Furthermore, it
highlights the importance of paying extra attention ← 153 | 154 → to
paradigmatic and syntagmatic axes in testing the sign’s significance and, thus,
translation accuracy.

10.1 Denotation versus connotation

Approached from a semiotic perspective, signifiers are often classified into two
main types: a denotative signifier and a connotative signifier (Al-Shehari 2001:
151). According to Peirce, any sign can produce two kinds of meaning:
denotative and connotative. The denotative meaning is the literal (direct)
meaning that can be understood via a direct and clear relationship between the
sign and the thing it refers to. The connotative meaning, on the other hand, is
that meaning which comes into existence as a result of an interaction between
the sign and the user’s context. So, the denotative meaning of the lexical item
‫ ﺣﺪﻳﻘﺔ‬refers to “a piece of land (usually near a house) where flowers and
vegetables are grown usually with a piece of grass” (Oxford Wordpower 2010:
331). However, more recently this word has acquired a connotative meaning in
the Iraqi dialect, particularly by young people, referring to a person (male or
female) who has no couple – a number of related words, such as the verb ‫ﻳﺤﺪ ّق‬
(lit. to garden) and ‫( ﺻﺎﻳﺮ ﺣﺪﻳﻘﺔ‬lit. to become a garden), are derived from its
connotative meaning. Approached from a semiotic perspective, the word ‫ﺣﺪﻳﻘﺔ‬
(garden), in addition to referring to a physical referent in the real world
(denotation), it invokes in the mind of the Iraqi young people the idea of not
having a couple (connotation). So, the relationship between the denotative
meaning and the connotative one is what Peirce calls “interpretant” that works as
a sign.
To elaborate, the word ‫ أﮔﻮل‬used in Kuwait to mean stop talking or stop
exaggerating (connotation) may be discussed here. The word ‫أﮔﻮل‬is derived from
the verb ‫( ﻗﺎل‬to say), which is pronounced in Kuwait and some other places in the
Arab world ‫( ﮔﺎل‬gāl), hence the expression ‫(أﮔﻮل‬agūl), i.e., I say (denotation). To
reinforce the point, the following signs along with their denotative and
connotative meanings in different dialects may be given full consideration: ←
154 | 155 →

(Egyptian dialect) ‫ﮔﺎﻣﺪ‬ •

Denotative meaning: It is derived from the verb َ ‫َﺟَﻤﺪ‬, which is pronounced
in some areas of Egypt ‫( ﮔﻤﺪ‬gamada), hence the
adjective ‫( ﮔﺎﻣﺪ‬gamid). Its literal, straightforward
meaning is to be frozen.
Connotative meaning: STrong, handsome, beautiful, nice, etc.

(Libyan dialect) ‫• ﺷﻴﻮﻋﻲ‬

Denotative meaning: A communist
Connotative meaning: Poor

(Omani dialect) ‫ﻣﻊ ﻧﻔﺴﻚ‬ •

Denotative meaning: Literally means by yourself, alone, etc.

Connotative meaning: It is not your business, go away, etc.

(Omani dialect) ‫• وﺣﺶ‬

Denotative meaning: A monster.

Connotative meaning: An expert.

(Iraqi dialect) ْ ‫ﺷﺮِد‬

ْ ِ‫ا‬ •
Denotative meaning: Literally means to escape.
Connotative meaning: It means handsome, beautiful, breathtaking, etc.

(Iraqi dialect) ‫ﻧﺎﺻﺮﻳﺔ‬ •

Denotative meaning: Nasirriyya is a city in the south of Iraq.

Connotative meaning: It refers to wicked people or sometimes to a wicked

sense of humour.

(Iraqi dialect) ‫ﻳ ُﻐﻨ ّﻲ‬ •

Denotative meaning: It is from the verb to sing; they say: he is singing. ←
155 | 156 →

Connotative meaning: To exaggerate.

At times, the denotative meaning of a certain lexical item or expression in a

given language is wider and less specific than its counterpart in the target
language, thus resulting in particularizing translation as opposed to generalizing
translation. As an illustration, the following example may be considered:

I have to invite all my neighbours to my hen night.

A hen night (also known as a “hen party” or “bachelorette party”) is a party held
for girls who are about to get married, shortly before their wedding. It can be
translated into ‫اﻟﺤﻨ ّﺔ‬/‫ ﻟﻴﻠﺔ اﻟﺤﻨ ّﺎء‬. Here, the denotative meaning of ‫اﻟﺤﻨ ّﺔ‬/‫ ﻟﻴﻠﺔ اﻟﺤﻨ ّﺎء‬is
wider and less specific as it refers to both the hen night and stag night (a stag
night, also known as a “stag party” or “bachelor party”, which is a party held for
men who are about to get married, shortly before their wedding). Translating it
into ‫اﻟﺤﻨ ّﺔ‬/‫ ﻟ ﻴ ﻠ ﺔ ا ﻟ ﺤ ﻨ ّﺎ ء‬/‫ ﺣﻔﻠﺔ‬without specifying it, there would be generalizing
translation, as in:

.‫ﻲ أن أدﻋﻮ ﺟﻤﻴﻊ ﺟﻴﺮاﻧﻲ ﻟﺤﻔﻠﺔ ﺣﻨ ّﺎﺋﻲ‬

ّ ‫ﻋﻠ‬

Following is another example quoted from Enid Blyton’s story Mr Twiddle in

Trouble Again (1947), translated by one of the BA students at the University of
Nizwa (Al-Hinai 2015: 20–21):
ST:

He bent over his work quite angry. Mrs Twiddle blushed, for she hated
anyone to be angry with her. She went out of the shop, furious with Twiddle,
because she thought he had gone with his boots to the other cobbler’s and
hadn’t told her.

TT:

.‫ وﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺗﻜﺮه أن ﻳﻐﻀﺐ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ أﺣﺪ‬،ً ‫اﺣﻤّﺮ وﺟﻪ اﻟﺴﻴﺪة ﺗﻮﻳﺪل ﺧﺠﻼ‬.‫ﺛﻢ اﻧﺤﻨﻰ إﻟﻰ ﻋﻤﻠﻪ وﻫﻮﻏﻀﺒﺎن‬
‫ﺳﻜﺎﻓﻲ اﻵﺧﺮ دون أن‬ . ‫وﺧﺮﺟﺖ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺤﻤﻞ ﺗﺸﺘﺎط ﻏﻀﺒﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﻮﻳﺪل؛ ﻷﻧﻬﺎ اﻋﺘﻘﺪت ﺑﺄﻧﻪ ذﻫﺐ إﻟ اﻰﻻ‬
‫ﻳﺨﺒﺮﻫﺎ‬

Here, the verb to blush meaning to become red in face, especially due to shame,
embarrassment, etc. lends itself in Arabic to (ً ‫ا ِﺣﻤّﺮ وﺟﻬﻪ ) ﺧﺠﻼ ً أو ا ِرﺗﺒﺎﻛﺎ‬. Being fully
aware of the denotative meaning of the verb to blush, the translation student has
resorted to specifying its denotative meaning by adding the word ‫( ﺧﺠﻼ‬shyly).
Similarly, the denotative meaning of the lexical item boots is narrower and more
specific than its expected counterpart in Arabic, that ← 156 | 157 → is, ‫ﺣﺬاء‬
(shoes). Relying on the context, the translator has opted for deleting it
completely. Translating it into ‫( ﺣﺬاء‬shoes), there would be generalizing
translation.

10.2 Connotation: Different overtones

It is worth noting that the connotative meaning is not agreed upon by all people,
rather it varies from one person to another, from one geographical area to
another, from one society or culture to another, and so on. Connotation “refers to
the personal aspects of meaning, the emotional associations that the word
arouses” (Kreidler 1998: 45). Dickins et al. (2002: 66–73) hold that there are six
types of connotative meaning. They are “attitudinal meaning”, “associative
meaning”, “affective meaning”, “allusive meaning”, “collocative meaning”, and
“reflected meaning”. In what follows, these six types of connotative meaning
and more will be discussed in a direct link with the actual act of translation.

10.2.1 Attitudinal meaning

It refers to the attitude that the language user has according to his/her socio-
cultural experiences. For example, all these Arabic verbs in the following
expressions:

(‫ﻳﺸﺮب أو ﻳﺘﻨﺎول )اﻟﺨﻤﺮ‬ •

‫ﻳﺤﺘﺴﻲ اﻟﺨﻤﺮ‬ •
‫ﻤﻢ‬
ّ ‫ﻳﺒﻠﺒﻊ أو ﻳﺘﺴ‬ •

refer to the same activity, that is, drinking alcohol. However, they are different
in connotation. While the first one ‫ ﻳﺘﻨﺎول‬/‫ ﻳﺸﺮب‬is neutral and used in both spoken
and written language and the second one ‫ ﻳﺤﺘﺴﻲ‬is also neutral but used in written
language only, the third one ‫ ﻳﺘﺴّﻤﻢ‬/‫ ﻳﺒﻠﺒﻊ‬has a pejorative overtone, reflecting the
language user’s attitude towards both the act of drinking alcohol and the doer of
the action. ← 157 | 158 →

10.2.2 Associative meaning

Associative meaning is that part of meaning that has to do with the stereotypical
images that have been conjured up in the mind of the language user towards the
lexical items used. When Arab interpreters/translators hear/read the English
word secretary, they automatically associate it with the idea of female gender,
thus rendering it into ‫( ﺳﻜﺮﺗﻴﺮة‬i.e., female secretary).

10.2.3 Affective meaning

Affective meaning refers to that part of meaning that reflects the choice of
lexical items resorted to by the language user and their effect on the addressee.
Imagine that you visited your boss at his office, and after two minutes he got
angry with you, thus telling, asking, or ordering you:

.‫• ﻣﺎ أرﻳﺪ أﺷﻮف وﺟﻬﻚ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﻜﺘﺐ‬

Lit. I don’t want to see your face in the office.

.‫• ا ُﺧﺮْج ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻜﺘﺐ‬

Lit. Go out of the office.

‫ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺗﻐﺎدر اﻟﻤﻜﺘﺐ؟‬،‫ﻣﻦ ﻓﻀﻠﻚ‬ •

Lit. If you don’t mind, is it possible to leave the office?

Although all of them share the same core denotative meaning of go out of the
office, the boss’ attitude to you may produce a different affective impact in each
case: very rude in the first, rude in the second and polite in the third.

10.2.4 Allusive meaning

Allusive meaning is that part of meaning that is attached to a referring

expression in addition to its denotative meaning by virtue of intertextuality, that
is, “an expression evokes an associated saying or quotation in such a way that
the meaning of that saying or quotation becomes part of overall meaning of the
expression” (Dickins et al. 2002: 70). As an illustration, ← 158 | 159 → the
following example quoted from Mahfouz’s novel (1971/1977: 23) ‫ﺑﺪاﻳﺔ وﻧﻬﺎﻳﺔ‬
(The Beginning and the End) may be considered here:

.‫ﻣﻌﺬرة ﻳﺎ ﺑﻨﻲ إن ﺑﻌﺾ اﻟﻈﻦ إﺛﻢ‬

Here, the writer opts for building an intertextual relation with a Quranic verse,
namely verse 12 from ‫(ﺳﻮرة اﻟﺤﺠﺮات‬Sūrāt Al-Hujrāt):

.‫ﻳﺎ أﻳﻬﺎ اﻟﺬﻳﻦ آﻣﻨﻮا اﺟﺘﻨﺒﻮا ﻛﺜﻴﺮا ﻣﻦ اﻟﻈﻦ إن ﺑﻌﺾ اﻟﻈﻦ إﺛﻢ‬
The sentence ‫ن ﺑﻌﺾ اﻟﻈﻦ إﺛﻢ‬,‫ إ‬along with its lexical items in addition to its basic,
straightforward meaning, contains an allusive meaning.

10.2.5 Collocative meaning

Collocative meaning is that part of meaning that is attached to a referring

expression in addition to its denotative meaning by virtue of the meaning of
other words that collocate well with it, thus forming commonly used
expressions. Arabic readers, for instance, tend to say:

‫ﻟﻴﻞ ﻧﻬﺎر‬ •
‫أﺑﺮ ودﺑﺎﺑﻴﺲ‬ •
‫ذﻫﺎﺑ ًﺎ وإﻳﺎﺑ ًﺎ‬ •
‫أﺧﺬ وﻋﻄﺎء‬ •
‫أﺑﻴﺾ وأﺳﻮد‬ •
‫ﺑـﺎﻟﺸﻮﻛﺔ واﻟﺴﻜﻴﻦ‬ •
‫آﺟﻼ ً أم ﻋﺎﺟًﻼ‬ •

However, English native speakers tend to use them the other way round:

• day and night

• pins and needles
• come and go
• giving and taking
• black and white
• with knife and fork
• sooner or later ← 159 | 160 →

To make this point clear, the following example extracted from Muhsin Al-
Ramlī’s story (2009: 37) ‫ﻲ‬ (Search
ّ ‫ﺤﺚ ﻋﻦ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺣ‬ ‫اﻟﺒ‬ for a Live Heart) can be given
serious consideration:

… ‫ﻟﻄﺮﻳﻖ‬.‫أﻣﻲ اﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﺴﻤّﺮت ﻋﻨﺪ اﻟﻨﺎﻓﺬة ﻟﻴﻞ ﻧﻬﺎر … ﺗﺮﺿﻊ اﻟﺴﺠﺎﺋﺮ وﻋﻴﻨﺎﻫﺎ اﻟﺪاﻣﻌﺘﺎن ﺗﺮﻗﺒﺎن ا‬
‫ﺴﻴﺎرات اﻟﻤﺎرﻗﺔ‬ّ ‫ﺟﻞ ﻋﻦ ﻛﻞ اﻟ‬.‫ﺗﺮاﻳهﺘﺮ‬

A number of collocated expressions can be identified in the original text, such as

‫ﺴﻤّﺮت ﻋﻦ اﻟﻨﺎﻓﺬة‬,‫ ﻟﻴﻞ ﻧﻬﺎر ﺗ‬, ‫ﻴﻨﺎﻫﺎ اﻟﺪاﻣﻌﺘﺎن‬,‫ ﻋﻴﻨﺎﻫﺎ ﺗﺮﻗﺒﺎن ﻋ‬, ‫ﺮﺟﻞ ﻋﻦ اﻟﺴﻴﺎرات‬, ‫ﺘ‬and
‫ﻳ‬ ‫ﺴﻴﺎرات اﻟﻤﺎرﻗﺔ‬.‫اﻟ‬
All these are examples of unmarked collocations, that is, they are natural
combinations for native speakers of Arabic. As such, it is essential that
translators while translating collocation pay extra attention to the degree of
predictability of lexical co-occurrence, that is, the degree of its markedness, as
opposed to unmarkedness. Further, as stated above in Arabic when expressions
involving day and night are used, the word ‫( ﻟﻴﻞ‬night) preferably comes before
‫( ﻧﻬﺎر‬day) while in English it should be the other way round (cf. Almanna 2016:
218–219). Giving full consideration to these issues, a professional translator may
well suggest a translation like this:

My mother who remained pinned to the window day and night, puffing on
cigarettes, her tearful eyes checking the road to see if he’s getting out of a
passing car …

As can be seen, the lexical item ‫( ﺳﻴﺎرات‬cars) lends itself to a car, thus resulting
in an intra-system shift to use Catford’s (1965) terminology. Intra-system shifts
occur when the translators, for any reason, ignore the formal equivalent, that is, a
term, expression or structure that formally corresponds to that of the original
text, and, alternatively, opt for a noncorresponding term, expression or structure
in the target language (p. 80).

10.2.6 Reflected meaning

Reflected meaning is that part of meaning that is attached to a referring

expression in a certain context in addition, of course, to its basic, straightforward
meaning. Here, there is a referring expression that refers to a referent in the real
world and another referent or an idea, concept, and so on. Consider, for instance,
the word ‫ ِﺣﻤﺎر‬in Arabic. The word ‫ِﺣﻤﺎر‬, in addition ← 160 | 161 → to its
denotative meaning that refers to an animal like a small horse with long ears
(i.e., donkey) in the real world (referent 1), is used to describe people’s stupidity
(referent 2) in the Arab culture. Another interesting example is the word ‫ ﺑﻮﻣﺔ‬,
which, in addition to its denotative meaning that refers to a bird that flies at night
and lives on catching and eating small animals (i.e., owl), is used as a symbol of
a bad omen in Arabic and wisdom in English. The question that may be raised
here is: how would translators deal with such a cultural clash in which the word
owl is used differently between the interfacing culguages. Try to ponder over
this sentence:
 He is as wise as an owl.

In addition to these six types of connotative meaning that translators need to give
full consideration while translating from one language into another, we can add
another type. We will call it “stylistic meaning”.

10.2.7 Stylistic meaning

STylistic meaning is that part of meaning that distinguishes referring expressions

from one another in terms of their degree of formality, their literary status, their
degree of politeness and euphemism, and so on. As an illustration, the following
referring expressions may be discussed:

‫ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺤﺎﻟﻔﻪ اﻟﺤﻆ‬،‫ أﺧﻔﻖ‬،‫ رﺳﺐ‬،‫ﺳﻘﻂ‬ •

Although all of them share the same core denotative meaning of to fail, they
differ in their stylistic meaning (connotation), thus producing a different impact
in each case:

• ‫ ﺳﻘﻂ‬: dialectal (in Iraq and some gulf countries), informal, and having no
literary status.
• ‫ﺳﺐ‬:‫ ر‬standard, formal, and neutral.
• ‫ﺧﻔﻖ‬:‫ أ‬standard, formal, neutral, and having literary status.
• ‫ ﻟ ﻢ ﻳ ﺤ ﺎ ﻟ ﻔ ﻪ ا ﻟ ﺤ ﻆ‬: standard, formal, and having both literary status and
euphemism. ← 161 | 162 →

10.3 Semiotics

The most common definition of “semiotics” is that it is the study of signs. It is

defined by Stam et al. (1992: 1) as “the study of signs, signification and
signifying systems”. The subject of semiotics is divided by Charles Morris
(1972: 15 cited in Nöth 1990: 50; see also Al-Shehari 2001: 104) into three
branches:

• semantic branch, focusing on the meaning of signs and their relationship with
 what they stand for.
• syntactic branch, dealing with the structural relations between signs.
• pragmatic branch, studying the ways in which signs are used and interpreted.

On the other hand, the subject of semiotics is divided by Fiske (1990: 40) into
three main areas:

• the “sign” itself, that is, the study of signs and their different varieties in
different contexts.
• the “codes” into which signs are constructed and organized.
• the “culture” within which these codes and signs operate.

It is worth noting that there is no single or comprehensive theory of semiotics.

However, two semiotic models, originated in the nineteenth century, are widely
used as the basis for the study of semiotics. Semiotic analysis as a field of
research was established by two scholars adopting two different models: the
Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857–1913) adopting a model known as
“structural semiotics” and the American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce
(1839–1914) adopting a model known as “interpretive semiotics” (for more
details, see Faiq and Sabry 2013: 47; Farghal and Almanna 2015: 155; Grutman
2009: 260). In what follows, particular attention will be paid to de Saussure’s
structural semiotics and the importance of giving full consideration to
paradigmatic and syntagmatic axes in testing the sign’s significance and the
accuracy of the mental image. ← 162 | 163 →

10.4 Paradigmatic and syntagmatic axes

According to de Saussure, there are two ways in which signs are organized into
codes: syntagmatic and paradigmatic (for more details, see Al-Shehari 2001:
159–161; Fiske 1990: 56). The two ways of organizing signs into codes are
described as two axes: the vertical axis is paradigmatic and the horizontal one is
syntagmatic. While the main concern of paradigms is the selection of some signs
and the exclusion of others, syntagms focus on the combination of the selected
signs. Further, these two ways can be used as an approach to testing the sign’s
significance on the one hand, and the translation accuracy/mental image on the
other. To elaborate, the following example extracted from Mary Ali’s text titled
Women’s Liberation through Islam, published on 24 June 2013
(<http://www.islamreligion.com>) along with the translation produced by one of
the BA translation students at the University of Nizwa may be given careful
consideration:
ST:

Muslim women wear the head-covering (hijab) in fulfilment of God’s decree

to dress modestly.

TT:

.‫اﻟﻤﺮأة اﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤﺔ ﻣﻠﺰﻣﺔ ﺑﻠﺒﺲ اﻟﺤﺠﺎب اﺳﺘﺠﺎﺑًﺔ ﻷﻣﺮ اﻟﻠﻪ ﺑﺎﻻﺣﺘﺸﺎم‬

To begin with, examining the original text shows how syntagmatic and
paradigmatic axes constitute the micro signs that form a mental image in the
mind of the hearer/reader. As stated above, a paradigm is a set of signs from
which the one used is chosen. To elaborate, in the original text, the sign wear in
simple aspect is chosen from a set of possible signs, such as can wear, must
wear, should wear, need to wear, and so on. The same holds true for other signs
used, such as

• Muslim instead of Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, etc.

• women instead of girls, ladies, or men. ← 163 | 164 →
• the head-covering instead of scarf, veil, hat, cap, etc.
• in fulfilment of instead of in accordance with, according to, in line with, etc.
• God instead of Allah, prophet, etc.
• decree instead of regulation, rule, instruction, etc.
• modesty instead of chastity, decency, bashfulness, etc.

A syntagm, on the other hand, is the linear arrangement into which the signs,
which are chosen from paradigms, are combined. So the paradigmatic signs:

Muslim – women – wear – the head-covering (hijab) – in fulfilment of – God

– ’s – decree – to – dress – modestly

are combined to formulate the syntagm:

 Muslim women wear the head-covering (hijab) in fulfilment of God’s decree
to dress modestly.

While translating, translators normally rely on the syntagmatic and paradigmatic

axes to produce the final shape of the target text. Any change in these two axes
will undoubtedly create a different mental image. For instance, had the translator
opted for signs, such as

• ‫ﻓﺘﺎة‬ (girl) instead of ‫( اﻣﺮأة‬woman).

• ‫( ﺑﺈﻣﻜﺎﻧﻬﺎ ا ِرﺗﺪاء‬can wear) instead of ‫ﻣﻠﺰﻣﺔ ﺑﻠﺒﺲ‬ ُ (must wear).
• ‫( ﻟ ِﻔﺎع‬scarf) instead of ‫ﺣﺠﺎب‬ ِ (the head-covering [hijab]).
• ‫( ﻣﺮﺿﺎة‬to satisfy) instead of ‫( اﺳﺘﺠﺎﺑﺔ‬in response to).
• ‫(اﻟﻠﻪ واﻟﺮﺳﻮل‬Allah and the Messenger) instead of ‫( اﻟﻠﻪ‬Allah).
• ‫( ﺗﺄد ّب‬politeness) instead of ‫( ا ِﺣﺘﺸﺎم‬modesty).

she would have produced a completely different mental image and an inaccurate
translation, as in:

.‫ﺑﺈﻣﻜﺎن اﻟﻔﺘﺎة ا ِرﺗﺪاء اﻟﻠ ِﻔﺎع ﻣﺮﺿﺎة ﻷواﻣﺮ اﻟﻠﻪ واﻟﺮﺳﻮل ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺄد ّب‬

It might seem reasonable to argue that not taking into account the sign’s
functions would affect both the translation accuracy and image resolution. ←
164 | 165 → To reinforce this point, the following example quoted from
Mahfuz’s (1961/1973: 40) novel ‫(ا ﻟ ﻠ ﺺ و ا ﻟ ﻜ ﻼ ب‬The Thief and the Dogs) and
translated by Adel Ata Elyas (1987: 118) can be discussed:

.‫وﺛﻤﺔ راﺋﺤﺔ ﺳﺤﺮﻳﺔ ﻻ ﺗﺼﺪر إﻻ ﻣﻦ دم أزرق رﻏﻢ أﻧﻔﻪ اﻟﻤﺎﺋﻞ إﻟﻰ اﻟﻔﻄﺲ‬

He felt a magic scent in the air, something he couldn’t identify in spite of his
long sharp nose. It was the smell of aristocracy.

Here, the sign that functions iconically is ‫( دم أزرق‬lit. blue blood). In Arabic, this
expression recalls another signifier, a person of aristocratic or wealthy ancestry,
which refers to the same signified. In other words, the expression ‫ دم أزرق‬in this
context refers to a physical referent in the real world (blue blood) as well as
invoking in the mind of the hearer/reader the image of a person of aristocratic or
wealthy ancestry, thus creating a relationship (interpretant) between blue blood
and a person of aristocratic or wealthy ancestry. It so happens that English
people map and conceptualize such a world experience in a similar way, that is,
blue blood. However, for no obvious reason the translator has given the iconic
function of such a sign a back seat, thus preserving partially the sign’s functions.
Had he opted for the expression blue blood, he would have reflected the original
sign’s functions, thus achieving an optimal equivalent. Optimal equivalent refers
to the possibility of conceptualizing the world experience linguistically in a
similar way in both languages, thus giving rise to full equivalence where both
formal and functional equivalents coincide (for more details, see Baker 1992: 72;
Farghal 2012: 47), as in:
ST:

.‫إن اﻟﺤﺎﺟَﺔ أم اﻻ ِﺧﺘﺮاع‬

TT:

Necessity is the mother of invention.

To further demonstrate how being content with the denotational equivalent of

the source language sign may lead to a different sign in the target language,
thereby affecting the overall meaning of the text, the following ← 165 | 166 →
Quranic verse, along with Ali’s translation (1934/2006: 48) may be given
adequate consideration:
ST:

ُ ‫ﻣﻮا ِﻷ َﻧ‬ َ
‫ﻤﺎ‬
َ ِ‫ﻪ ﺑ‬
َ ‫ﻋﻨﺪ َ ﻟﻠﻪِ إ ِن ﻟﻠ‬
ِ ُ ‫ﺠﺪ ُوه‬
ِ َ ‫ﺧﻴ ْﺮٍ ﺗ‬ ْ ‫ﺴﻜ ُﻢ ﻣ‬
َ ‫ﻦ‬ ِ ‫ﻔ‬ ُ ‫ﻘﺪ‬ َ َ‫ﻤﻮا ﻟﺼﻠ َﻮٰة َ وََءاﺗ ُﻮا اﻟﺰﻛ َﺎة َ و‬
َ ُ ‫ﻣﺎ ﺗ‬ ُ ‫وَأﻗِﻴ‬
‫ﺼﻴٌﺮ‬ َ ‫ﻤﻠ ُﻮ‬
ِ َ‫ن ﺑ‬ َ ْ‫ﺗ َﻌ‬

(The Cow, 110 , ‫)اﻟﺒﻘﺮة‬

TT:

And be steadfast in prayer and regular in charity: And wherever good ye send
forth for your souls before you, ye shall find it with Allah. For Allah sees well
at that ye do. (110)

Here, the lexical term that needs special treatment is ‫( زﻛﺎة‬zakāt); it is a religious
term referring generally to “a certain amount of money gathered from the well-
to-do and paid to the poor; it is also obligatory and constitutes the third of the
five pillars of Islam” (Farghal and Bloushi 2012: 3). The translator has opted for
the lexical item charity whose denotative meaning is wider and less specific than
the Arabic word ‫ زﻛﺎة‬as the former is voluntary while the latter is obligatory. So,
the missing information in terms of intentionality and status as a sign is that the
term ‫ زﻛﺎة‬is associated with obligatory giving. Giving full consideration to the
differences between the source language and target language signifying systems,
Pickthall, another translator of the Holy Quran, has opted for the lexical item
due, that is, a regular payment that you make to be a member of an organization,
thus specifying the denotative meaning of the concept to include the missing
information, that is, being obligatory:

Establish worship, and pay the poor-due; and whatever of good you send
before (you) for your souls, you will find it with Allah. Lo! Allah is Seer of
what you do. (110) (Pickthall, 1930/2006: 18).

Finally, the following example quoted from Mahfuz’s (1959/2006: 219) novel
‫( أوﻻد ﺣﺎرﺗﻨﺎ‬Children of the Alley) and translated by Theroux (1996: 180) may be
considered:

‫ﺑﺨﻴﺮ ﻳﺎﻋﻢ ﺟﻮاد ﺳﺄﻟﺖ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ اﻟﻌﺎﻓﻴﺔ‬

“Fine, Gawad”, said Abda. I hope you are well”. ← 166 | 167 →

Here, the sign that functions iconically is ‫(ﺳﺄﻟﺖ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ اﻟﻌﺎﻓﻴﺔ‬lit. health asked about
you). In this context, it recalls another signifier, that is, the act of wishing ‫ﻛﻦ ﺑﺨﻴﺮ‬
(be fine) or ‫( ا ﺗ ﻤ ﻨ ﻰ أ ن ﺗ ﻜ ﻮ ن ﺑ ﺨ ﻴ ﺮ‬I hope you are fine), which refers to the same
signified. To put this differently, the expression ‫ﺳﺄﻟﺖ ﻋﻠﻴﻚ اﻟﻌﺎﻓﻴﺔ‬in this context
refers to a metaphorical material process to borrow terms from Halliday (1976):
[actor ‫ اﻟﻌﺎﻓﻴﺔ‬+ process of doing ‫(ﺳ ﺄ ﻟ ﺖ ﻋ ﻠ ﻰ‬past tense with an emphasis on the
frequency of the action as a matter of routine, i.e., ‫ )ﺗﺴﺄل ﻋﻠﻴﻚ‬+ goal ‫ ]ك‬as well as
invoking in the mind of the hearer/reader the act of wishing. So, the relationship
between the metaphorical material process and the act of wishing: be fine or I
hope you are fine conjured up in the mind of the hearer/reader is what Peirce
calls “interpretant”, which works as a sign. As it is difficult to find a sign in the
target language with the same iconic function, the indexical and symbolic
functions of this micro sign have been given a front seat. His translation: I hope
you are well reflects closely the original expression’s function, thus preserving
partially the sign’s functions, i.e., indexical and symbolic only.
Further reading

Al-Rubai’i, A. (2005). Translation Criticism. Durham: Durham Modern

Languages Series.
Al-Shehari, K. (2001). The Semiotics and Translation Advertising Texts:
Conventions, Constraints and Translation Strategies with Particular
Reference to English and Arabic, unpublished PhD thesis: University of
Manchester.
Dickins, J., Hervey, S., and Higgins, I. (2002). Thinking Arabic Translation.
London/New York: Routledge.
Faiq, S., and Sabry, R. (2013). “Altered Semiotics through Translation”, Sayyab
Translation Journal, Vol. 5, pp. 45–56.
Grutman, R. (2009). “Multilingualism”. In M. Baker and G. Saldanha (eds),
Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies (2nd edn), pp. 182–185.
London/New York: Routledge.
Hatim, B., and Mason, I. (1990). Discourse and the Translator. London:
Longman.
Pertilli, S. (1992). “Translation, Semiotics and Ideology”, TTR: Traduction,
Terminologie, Redaction, Vol. 5 (1), pp. 233–264. ← 167 | 168 →
Saussure, F. de (1916/1983). Cours de linguistique générale, Paris: Editions
Payot. Translated (1983) by Harris, R. as Course in General Linguistics.
London: Duckworth.
Questions

1. What is the difference between “denotation” and “connotation”? Discuss

with illustrative examples.
2. There are many types of connotative meanings. What are they? Mention
them with illustrative examples.
3. What is the difference between “paradigmatic axis” and “syntagmatic axis”?
4. How would you define “semiotics”?
5. What is a “sign” in semiotics, and how would you test its significance?
Exercises

Exercise 1: How do the following words in each pair differ in connotation?

‫ﺑﺼﻴﺮ‬ vs ‫أﻋﻤﻰ‬
‫ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﻧﻈﺎﻓﺔ‬ vs ‫زﺑ ّﺎل‬
‫ﺷﺮﻳﻜﺔ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻲ‬ vs ‫زوﺟﺘﻲ‬
‫ﻳﺘﺴﻜ ّﻊ‬ vs ‫ﻳﺘﺠﻮّل‬
‫ﻤﻢ‬
ّ ‫ﻳﺘﺴ‬ vs ‫ﻳﺄﻛﻞ‬

Exercise 2: How do the following words in each pair differ in connotation?

a stupid student vs a less able student

the police vs the filth
fat vs overweight
slim vs skinny
strong-minded vs stubborn
statesman vs politician ← 168 | 169 →

Exercise 3: The following text is extracted from John Ruskin’s fairy tale The
King of the Golden River. Comment on the following translation produced by
one of the translation students, paying particular attention to the denotative and
connotative meanings (cited in Al-Khanjarī 2014: 18):
ST:

In a secluded and mountainous part of Stiria there was in old time a valley of
the most surprising and luxuriant fertility. It was surrounded on all sides by
steep and rocky mountains rising into peaks which were always covered with
snow and from which a number of torrents descended in constant cataracts.
TT:

‫ ﻛﺎن ﻫﻨﺎك ﻓﻲ ﻗﺪﻳﻢ اﻟﺰﻣﺎن واد ٍ ﻳﺜﻴﺮ اﻟﺪﻫﺸﺔ ﻟﻜﺜﺮة‬،« ‫ﺳﺘﻴﺮﻳﺎ‬

» ‫ﻓﻲ ﺟﺰء ﻣﻨﻌﺰل وﺟﺒﻠﻲ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﺗﻐﻄﻴﻬﺎ‬ . ‫وﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺗﺤﻴﻂ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻦ ﻛﻞ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺟﺒﺎل ﺷﺎﻫﻘﺔ وﺻﺨﺮﻳﺔ ﻋﺎﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﻘﻤﻢ وداﺋﻤﺎ ﻣﺎ‬.‫ﺧﺼﻮﺑﺘﻪ‬
‫ وﺗﻨﺒﻊ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺷﻼﻻت ﻛﺜﻴﺮة وداﺋﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﺎن‬،‫اﻟﺜﻠﻮج‬

Exercise 4: Translate the following text extracted from Mary Ali’s text titled
Women’s Liberation through Islam, published on 24 June 2013
(<http://www.islamreligion.com>), paying particular attention to levels of
meaning:
ST:

Today people think that women are liberated in the West and that the
women’s liberation movement began in the 20th century. Actually, the
women’s liberation movement was not begun by women, but was revealed by
God to a man in the seventh century by the name of Muhammad, may the
mercy and blessings of God be upon him, the last Prophet of God. The Quran
and the Sunnah of the Prophet are the sources from which every Muslim
woman derives her rights and duties.
| 171 →

CHAPTER 11

Pragmatics

Key terms

• Assertive verbs
• Commissive verbs
• Conditional speech-act verbs
• Cooperative principle
• Declarative verbs
• Direct speech acts
• Directive verbs
• Expressive verbs
• Implicature
• Indirect speech acts
• Maxim of manner
• Maxim of quality
• Maxim of quantity
• Maxim of relevance
• Speech acts
• Unconditional speech-act verbs

The previous chapter considered the different types of meaning and the
importance of giving full consideration to paradigmatic and syntagmatic axes in
testing the sign’s significance and translation accuracy. This chapter examines
some pragmatic issues, such as speech acts, the cooperative principle and its
supportive maxims, and implicature in a direct link with the actual act of
translating a text. ← 171 | 172 →
11.1 Pragmatics: Definition

So far in this book, we have looked into the meaning of lexical items and their
semantic relations, roles, and principles. However, at times, the meaning of a
certain lexical item depends on the context in which it is used. As such, the study
of what is not explicitly said and the role of context in interpreting the
speaker/writer’s intended meaning is called pragmatics. According to Crystal
(1997: 301; emphasis in the original), pragmatics is

the study of LANGUAGE from the point of view of users, especially of the
choices they make, the CONSTRAINTS they encounter in using language in
social interaction, and the effects their use of language has on the other
participants in an act of communication.

Pragmatics is also the study of language use. According to Rowe and Levine
(2006/2009: 174), pragmatics

includes the study of how people use language to establish their identities
through social meaning, to express their emotions through affective meaning,
to perform speech acts with performative sentences, and to carry on
conversations with others.

In what follows, pragmatic issues, such as speech acts, the cooperative principle
and its supportive maxims, and conversational implicature will be introduced
and discussed in a direct link with translation.

11.2 Speech acts

Generally speaking, people use language for a certain purpose, such as for
informing or persuading others, expressing their own feelings, and so on. At
times, what is explicitly said or written is different from what is meant by the
speaker/writer. In such cases, there might be two functions of language: one at
the surface level, which is of use to state something, for example It is cold in
here, and the other hidden, yet signifying doing something, for ← 172 | 173 →
instance Could you please close the window?. In many cases, however, the
underlying function (i.e., Could you please close the window?) overrides the
superficial function (i.e., It is cold in here), thus relaying “added effects, such as
those associated with, say, a request or admonition” (Hatim and Mason 1990:
179). Further, when people try their hands at stating something, they normally
have in their minds a function of doing something – they do not create an
utterance “without intending it to have an effect” (ibid.). To conclude, in a
natural practice of communication, there is an utterance that has three
dimensions: literal (explicit) meaning, pragmatic (implicit) meaning, and the
effect of the utterance on the addressee. In his investigation of the force of
linguistic expressions, Austin (1962) distinguishes three types of act that each
utterance has. They are:

1. locutionary act, referring to the actual act of uttering something, as in It is

cold in here.
2. illocutionary act, referring to the act performed in uttering something, i.e.,
the intended or pragmatic meaning, as in Could you please close the
window?
3. perlocutionary act, referring to the act of producing an effect on the
audience by uttering something, as in, for example, getting the window
closed.

As an explanation, the following example quoted from Mahfouz’s novel (1973)

‫ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟﻘﺼﺮﻳﻦ‬, translated by Hutchins and Kenny (1990) into Palace Walk (cited in
Farghal and Almanna 2015: 107) may be considered:
ST:

:‫وﺻﺎﺣﺖ ﺧﺪﻳﺠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺳﺨﺮﻳﺔ‬

!‫وﻣﺎذا ﺗﺼﻨﻊ إذا ﺑ ُﻠﺖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻔﺴﻚ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻮﻇﻴﻔﺔ؟‬ !… ‫–ﺗﺘﻮﻇﻒ دون اﻟﺮاﺑﻌﺔ ﻋﺸﺮة‬

TT:

Khadija yelled sarcastically, “You want to get a job before you’re fourteen!
What will you do if you wet your pants at work?”

Here, in the original text, the interrogative form ‫و ﻣ ﺎ ذ ا ﺗ ﺼ ﻨ ﻊ ﻟ ﻮ ﺑ ُﻠ ﺖ ﻋ ﻠ ﻰ ﻧ ﻔ ﺴ ﻚ ﻓ ﻲ‬

‫( اﻟﻮﻇﻴﻔﺔ‬literal meaning) performs an illocutionary force of disapproval ← 173 |
174 → (pragmatic meaning). This is an example of an indirect speech act where
there is an indirect relationship between the structure and function. In this
regard, Yule (1996: 54–55) states that “whenever there is a direct relationship
between a structure and a function, we have a direct speech act. Whenever there
is an indirect relationship between a structure and a function, we have an indirect
speech act”.
After Austin, another big name in speech-act theory emerged in 1969. Among
many attempts to classify illocutionary acts, J. Searle (1969) sets up the
following classification:

ASSERTIVE VERBS (REPRESENTATIVES)

Assertive verbs are speech acts that commit a speaker to the truth of the
expressed proposition, e.g., statements of events, facts, descriptions, and so on.
They are “either true or false, and generally they can be verified or falsified – not
necessarily at the time of utterance or by those who hear them, but in a general
sense they are subject to empirical investigation” (Kreidler 1998: 184).
Assertive verbs can be also used in reported speech. While some reported
speech-act verbs focus on information, such as express, declare, announce,
report, mention, etc., or truth-value of utterance, such as affirm, allege, assert,
guarantee, claim, etc., others focus on speaker’s commitment or involvement,
such as deny, profess, protest, etc. or manner of communicating, such as
emphasize, stress, etc. (for more details, see Kreidler 1998: 183–185).

DIRECTIVE VERBS
Directive verbs are speech acts by which the speaker tries to get the addressee to
take a particular action, for example, requesting, commanding, demanding,
advising, suggesting, warning, and the like. To illustrate, the following examples
may be discussed:

You must bring your ID to the exam.

Here, the speaker is in a high position, thus having some degree of control over
the actions of the addressees. Further, the action will happen in the future.
Therefore, it is an act of commanding.
 I advise you to sleep early when you have an exam. ← 174 | 175 →

Here, the speaker expresses his/her opinion about the addressee’s performance;
therefore, it is an act of advising. When the speaker does not have an authority,
the addressee has a choice of performance. However, when the speaker has some
sort of authority, then it becomes a combination of both commanding and
advising.

I warn you not to arrive late to work.

Here, the speaker expresses his/her opinion about the addressee’s performance.
As the speaker has some sort of authority, the act of warning is accompanied by
an implicit act of commanding.

COMMISSIVE VERBS
Commissive verbs are speech acts that commit a speaker to some future actions,
for example, promising, threatening, pledging, vowing, and so on. Consider the
following example:

I promise to bring your book tomorrow.

Here, the commissive verb promise commits the speaker to a course of action in
the future. It is assumed that the speaker, in normal circumstances, is able to
bring the addressee’s book tomorrow, and the addressee has some faith in the
speaker’s ability and intention to bring the book tomorrow.

DECLARATIVE VERBS
Declarative verbs (also known as “performative verbs”) are speech acts that
change the reality to be in line with the proposition of the declaration (e.g.,
baptisms, pronouncing someone guilty, or pronouncing someone husband and
wife). They are effective when they are “spoken by someone whose right to
make them is accepted and in circumstances which are accepted as appropriate”
(Kreidler 1998: 185). Consider the following examples:
 I sentence you to two years in prison.
I hereby declare that Mr Peter Smith graduated from our university in 2000.
I announce you husband and wife. ← 175 | 176 →

Here, in order for the performative acts, expressed by the verbs sentence,
declare, and announce respectively, to be valid, the speaker should have the
right to sentence somebody to prison, declare that somebody graduated from that
institution, or announce somebody husband and wife.

EXPRESSIVE VERBS
Expressive verbs are speech acts that express the speaker’s attitudes and
emotions towards the proposition (e.g., congratulating, apologizing, excusing,
thanking, expressing states of joy, sorrow, and so on). Consider the following
examples:

I apologize for coming without an appointment.

I thank you for your tremendous effort to help my son.
I admit that it was my mistake not hers.

Here, the speaker tries to express three different attitudes or emotions, viz.
apologizing, thanking and admitting a mistake, towards his/her coming without
an appointment, the addressee’s help to his/her son and the mistake made
respectively.
To discuss these speech acts in a direct link with translation, the following
legal text quoted from Omani Labour Law (article 9) along with its official
translation may be given full consideration:
ST:

:‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ اﻟﻌﻤﻞ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﺗﺸﻐﻴﻠﻪ ﻟﺤﺪث أو أﻛﺜﺮ‬

‫ﻳﻀﻊ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺤﻞ اﻟﻌﻤﻞ ﻧﺴﺨﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻷﺣﻜﺎم اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﺘﺸﻐﻴﻞ اﻷﺣﺪاث اﻟﻤﻨﺼﻮص ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ‬
.‫ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬا اﻟﻔﺼﻞ واﻟﺘﻲ ﻳﺼﺪر ﺑﻬﺎ ﻗﺮار ﻣﻦ اﻟﻮزﻳﺮ‬

TT:

If the employer employs one or more juveniles he:

 1-shall keep in the workplace a copy of the rules related to the employment of
juveniles provided in this Chapter, and such rules as may be issued by a
decision of the Minister.

Obligation in Arabic legislative writing is almost exclusively expressed by a

modalized verb, such as, ‫ﻳﺠﺐ‬, ‫ﻳﺘﻮّﺟﺐ‬, etc., a modalized preposition 177 | 176 ← ‫ﻋﻠﻰ‬
→ or just a simple present tense (for more details, see Chapter 6 in this book).
As can be observed, in the original text, the text producer opts for the use of the
modalized preposition ‫ﻠﻰ‬.‫ ﻋ‬The modalized preposition ‫ﻋﻠﻰ‬in Arabic is used to
express the illocutionary force of an order, regulation, etc. As such, this is an
example of a directive act where the addresser (here the parliament) issues a
directive act in an attempt to exercise power over the addressees (employers in
the country), thus controlling their behaviour.
To make this point clear, the following example quoted from Sabra (2005:
36) in which a directive act has been changed into a commissive one may be
considered:
ST:

Tenant shall dispose from the dwelling unit all ashes, rubbish, garbage and
other waste in a clean and safe manner.

TT:

‫اﻟﺴﻜﻨﻴﺔ‬. ‫ﻳﺘﻌﻬّﺪ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮ ﺑﺈزاﻟﺔ ﻛﻞ اﻷﺗﺮﺑﺔ واﻟﻤﺨﻠﻔﺎت واﻟﻘﻤﺎﻣﺔ وﻏﻴﺮﻫﺎ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻔﻀﻼت ﻣﻦ اﻟﻮﺣﺪة‬
‫ﺑﻄﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﻧﻈﻴﻔﺔ وﻣﺄﻣﻮﻧﺔ‬

In English legislative writing, obligation is almost expressed by the modal verb

shall, which has nothing to do with futurity. Shall is used here to express the
illocutionary force of an order. However, in the target text, the directive verb has
been changed into a commissive one ‫( ﻳﺘﻌﻬﺪ‬to undertake) that commits one of
the signed parties to some future actions before the law. Had the translator given
full consideration to the speech act used in the original text along with its
illocutionary force of commanding, s/he could have suggested renderings like:

‫اﻟﺴﻜﻨﻴﺔ‬. ‫ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮ أن ﻳﺰﻳﻞ ﻛﻞ اﻷﺗﺮﺑﺔ واﻟﻤﺨﻠﻔﺎت واﻟﻘﻤﺎﻣﺔ وﻏﻴﺮﻫﺎ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻔﻀﻼت ﻣﻦ اﻟﻮﺣﺪة‬
‫ﺑﻄﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﻧﻈﻴﻔﺔ وﻣﺄﻣﻮﻧﺔ‬

Or
 ‫اﻟﺴﻜﻨﻴﺔ‬. ‫ﻳﻠﺘﺰم اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮ ﺑﺈزاﻟﺔ ﻛﻞ اﻷﺗﺮﺑﺔ واﻟﻤﺨﻠﻔﺎت واﻟﻘﻤﺎﻣﺔ وﻏﻴﺮﻫﺎ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻔﻀﻼت ﻣﻦ اﻟﻮﺣﺪة‬
178 | 177 ← ‫ﺑﻄﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﻧﻈﻴﻔﺔ وﻣﺄﻣﻮﻧﺔ‬ →

To elaborate, these two Reuters news items on the same topic (one in English
and the other in Arabic; 7 April 2015) may be given careful consideration:
ST:

The United States is speeding up arms supplies and bolstering intelligence

sharing with a Saudi-led alliance bombing a militia aligned with Iran in
neighboring Yemen, a senior U.S. diplomat said on Tuesday.

TT:

‫ﻗﺎل أﻧﺘﻮﻧﻲ ﺑﻠﻴﻨﻜﻴﻦ ﻧﺎﺋﺐ وزﻳﺮ اﻟﺨﺎرﺟﻴﺔ اﻷﻣﺮﻳﻜﻲ ﻳﻮم اﻟﺜﻼﺛﺎء إن اﻟﻮﻻﻳﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة ﺗﻌﺠﻞ ﺑﺈﻣﺪادات‬
‫ﻤﻌﺎرﺿﻴﻦ ﻟﻠﺮﺋﻴﺲ اﻟﻴﻤﻨﻲ ﻋﺒﺪ رﺑﻪ‬.‫اﻷﺳﻠﺤﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺤﺎﻟﻒ اﻟﺬي ﺗﻘﻮده اﻟﺴﻌﻮدﻳﺔ ﺿﺪ اﻟﻤﻘﺎﺗﻠﻴﻦ اﻟﺤﻮﺛﻴﻴﻦاﻟ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺼﻮر ﻫﺎدي‬

Here, in the original text, a direct speech act of assertion in the past is used (i.e.,
said). This speech act of assertion is informative (i.e., announcing or reporting
an event). Giving full consideration to the type of speech act and its function, the
translator or trans-editor, when resorting to ‫( ﻗﺎل‬said), has accurately rendered it
into a speech act of assertion in the past to announce or report an event (i.e.,
informative). According to Leech (1983: 224), assertive verbs can be classified
into two types: (1) “informative” (i.e., to announce or report an event), and (2)
“argumentative” (i.e., to express the relationship “between the current truth
claim and other truth claims” made by the speaker and/or the addressee).
To show how not paying extra attention to the type and function of the speech
act may change the overall meaning of the message, the following example
along with its translation (Farghal 2008: 3–4) can be used as an illustration:
ST:

In an interview with Newsweek yesterday, the Israeli Defense Minister said

that the Palestinian suicide operations constitute the main cause for the
Israeli troops’ entering cities in the West Bank. ← 178 | 179 →

TT:
 ‫ادﻋﻰ وزﻳﺮ اﻟﺤﺮب اﻟﺼﻬﻴﻮﻧﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻠﺔ ﻣﻊ ﻣﺠﻠﺔ اﻟﻨﻴﻮزوﻳﻚ أﻣﺲ أن اﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎت اﻻﺳﺘﺸﻬﺎدﻳﺔ اﻟﻔﻠﺴﻄﻴﻨﻴﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻔﻠﺴﻄﻴﻨﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻀﻔﺔ اﻟﻐﺮﺑﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﺘﻠﺔ‬. ‫ﻫﻲ اﻟﺴﺒﺐ اﻟﺮﺋﻴﺲ ﻓﻲ اﺟﺘﻴﺎح ﻗﻮات اﻻﺣﺘﻼل اﻹﺳﺮاﺋﻴﻠﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﺪن‬

Here, in the original text, the news reporter opts for a direct speech act of
assertion in the past said to announce or report an event, i.e., informative.
However, the translator has resorted to a direct speech act of assertion ‫(ادﻋﻰ‬to
claim) in the past to express the relationship between the current truth claim and
other truth claims made by the speaker or the addressee (i.e., argumentative).
In touching on speech acts, Leech (1983) distinguishes between two types:

1. conditional speech-act verbs referring to verbs, such as to ask, to request, to

want to know, to inquire, and so on that give the addressee some sort of
freedom to cooperate or not.
2. unconditional speech-act verbs referring to verbs, such as to order, to
command, to insist, to urge, to press, and so on that leave the addressee with
no option other than complying unconditionally.

Much of what follows in this chapter is designed to illustrate implicature and the
cooperative principle in a direct link with translation.

11.3 Implicature and the cooperative principle

Unlike speech acts that focus on conventional forms used to express different
illocutionary forces in a given language, conversational implicature refers to
language users’ ability to figure out what is not explicitly said. To do so,
language users rely on a number of “shared assumptions and expectations” (Yule
1985/1996: 127). Conversational implicature is defined by Griffiths (2006: 134)
as ← 179 | 180 →

inferences that depend on the existence of norms for the use of language, such
as the whispered agreement that communicators should aim to tell the truth
[…]. Speakers, writers and addressees assume that everyone engaged in
communication knows and accepts the communicational norms. This general
acceptance is an important starting point for inferences, even if individuals
are sometimes unable to meet the standards or occasionally cheat (for
 instance, by telling lies).

H. Paul Grice (1975) states that when we communicate with people, we

unconsciously assume that we, and the people we are talking to, will cooperate
to achieve mutual conversational ends. According to Grice, such a
conversational cooperation manifests itself in a number of conversational
maxims:

1. Maxim of Quality:
• do not say anything which you believe to be false.
• do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.

2. Maxim of Quantity:
• make your contribution only as informative as is required for the current
purposes of the exchange.
• do not make your contribution more informative than is required.

3. Maxim of Relevance:
• be relevant.

4. Maxim of Manner:
• avoid obscurity and ambiguity.
• be brief.
• be orderly.

Giving full consideration to the contextual situation and the level of interactional
collaboration presented in a particular conversational exchange, translators need
to make fundamental decisions with respect to the transfer of perceived
illocutionary force and perlocutionary effect of the original utterances. To this
end, they need to intrinsically manage the original utterances to have them
reflect effectively the cooperative principle and its maxims.
At times, language users opt to communicate with each other directly, thus
observing the cooperative principle along with its supportive maxims, ← 180 |
181 → viz. maxim of quality (speaking the truth), maxim of quantity (employing
the right amount of language), maxim of manner (expressing things clearly and
unambiguously), and maxim of relevance (being relevant). However, at other
times, they resort to communicating indirectly by flouting these maxims. In this
regard, Farghal and Almanna (2015: 111–112) comment:

Flouting or exploiting a maxim fits quite well within the assumption of

“cooperation” in human interaction. That is to say, the speaker is well aware
of two things: first, the fact she or he is flouting a maxim of conversation and,
second, the assumption that the hearer can figure out the conversational
implicature in that utterance.

For instance, if you were at home, and your daughter told you:

Daughter: I went to the supermarket and lost my money.

Father: Wonderful.

Here, the lexical item wonderful in such a situation cannot be interpreted out of
its context by relying, for instance, on its denotative meaning only. One of the
interlocutors (father) flouts Grice’s cooperative principle and its supportive
maxims. However, “the process of communication continues uninterrupted,
thanks to human rationality and reasoning, which is based on the cooperative
principle between producer and receiver in communication” (Farghal and
Almanna 2015: 112).
To elaborate, the following example extracted from Mahfouz’s novel (2006:
473) ‫ أوﻻد ﺣﺎرﺗﻨﺎ‬, translated by Philip Stewart into Children of Gebelaawi (1995:
301) and by Peter Theroux (1996: 368) into Children of the Alley may be used as
an illustration:
ST:

‫ وﺑﻌﺪﻫﺎ ﻓﺈﻣﺎ ﺗﺮﺿﻰ ﻋﻦ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺑﻚ‬،‫ﺑﺴﺎﻋﺘﻴﻦ‬ «‫ﻗﻤﺤﺔ ﻣﻨﻪ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻓﻨﺠﺎن ﺷﺎي ﻗﺒﻞ » ﻻ ﻣﻮاﺧﺬة‬
‫ أو ﺗﻄﺮده ﻣﻦ اﻟﺤﺎرة ﻣﺸﻔﻮﻋﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻠﻌﻨﺎت‬،‫ ﻋﺮﻓﻪ‬.

TT 1:
A grain of that in a cup of tea two hours before making love, and afterwards
either you’ll be pleased with Arafa or you can chase him away with your
curse.

Philip Stewart (1995: 301) ← 181 | 182 →

TT 2:
 A grain of that in a cup of tea two hours before, well, you know, no offence,
and after that, either you will be happy with your servant Arafa or you can
kick him out of the alley with every curse you know.
Peter Theroux (1996: 368)

Here, in an attempt to inject his text with vividness, the author, in the mouth of
one of the in-text characters, tries his hand at expressing his message implicitly,
thus leaving the addressee along with the text readers to try to complete the
missing part of the message. In the original text, in place of referring to the act of
having sexual intercourse explicitly, the author opts for the phrase ‫ﻻ ﻣ ﻮ ا ﺧ ﺬ ة‬
(pardon me), thereby flouting Grice’s maxim of quality by referring to sexual
intercourse implicitly. As can be noticed, the translators (Stewart and Theroux)
have resorted to different local strategies. While the first translator has opted for
changing an implicit message, expressed by ‫ ﻻ ﻣ ﻮ ا ﺧ ﺬ ة‬to an explicit one,
expressed by making love, the second translator has resorted to maintaining the
conversational implicature by using well, you know, no offence, thus leaving his
readers to reflect on it and complete the missing part of the message by relying
on their encyclopaedic knowledge and socio-cultural experiences.
Perhaps an appropriate way of concluding this chapter is to consider the
following example extracted from Edward Said’s book (1987/2003: 59)
Orientalism, translated by Mohammed Enani (2006: 124):
ST:

After Mohammed’s death in 632, the military and later the cultural and
religious hegemony of Islam grew enormously. First Persia, Syria and Egypt,
then Turkey, then North Africa fell to the Muslim armies; in the eighth and
ninth centuries Spain, Sicily and parts of France were conquered.

TT:

،‫ازدادت ﻫﻴﻤﻨﺔ اﻹﺳﻼم اﻟﻌﺴﻜﺮﻳﺔ‬632

، ‫ﻓﺒﻌﺪ وﻓﺎة ﻣﺤﻤﺪ – ﺻﻠﻰ اﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ وﺳﻠﻢ – ﻓﻲ ﻋﺎم‬
‫ ﻓﻘﺪ ﻓﺘﺤﺖ ﺟﻴﻮش اﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤﻴﻦ أوﻻ ً ﺑﻼد‬.‫وازدادت ﻓﻲ وﻗﺖ ﻻﺣﻖ ﻫﻴﻤﻨﺘﻪ اﻟﺜﻘﺎﻓﻴﺔ واﻟﺪﻳﻨﻴﺔ زﻳﺎدة ﻫﺎﺋﻠﺔ‬
‫ﻘﺮﻧﻴﻦ اﻟﺜﺎﻣﻦ واﻟﺘﺎﺳﻊ‬.‫ ﻛﻤﺎ ﻓﺘﺤﺖ ﻓﻲاﻟ‬،‫ وﻣﺼﺮ ﺛﻢ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺎ ﺛﻢ ﺷﻤﺎل إﻓﺮﻳﻘﻴﺎ‬،‫ وﺳﻮرﻳﺎ‬،‫ﻓﺎرس‬
183 | 182 ← ‫→ إﺳﺒﺎﻧﻴﺎ وﺟﺰﻳﺮة ﺻﻘﻠﻴﺔ وأﺟﺰاء ﻣﻦ ﻓﺮﻧﺴﺎ‬

As can be observed, the translator, being influenced by his accumulated value

system or motivated by his desire to live up to the target readers’ expectations,
has extrinsically managed the text when opting for the verb (‫ ﻓﺘﺤﺖ ا)ﻟﺠﻴﻮش‬as an
equivalent to to fall. The verb to fall, when it is followed by nouns, such as
force, army, and troop, has a negative overtone. Therefore, translating it into
‫ ﻓﺘﺢ‬, which has a positive overtone, has flouted Grice’s (1975) maxim of quality
(i.e., to speak the truth). In a direct link with translation, Chesterman
(1997/2000: 68–69), in his classification of translation norms, states that one of
the norms that places some pressure on the part of the translator, thus shaping,
along with other factors, the target text, is “communication norm”.
Communication norm in the sense that Chesterman uses the term refers to
communicative maxims proposed by Grice (ibid.) in terms of quality, quantity,
relevance, and manner.

Further reading

Al-Rubai’i, A. (2005). Translation Criticism. Durham: Durham Modern

Languages Series.
Grice, H. P. (1975). “Logic and Conversation”. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan
(eds), Syntax and Semantics, 3: Speech Acts, pp. 41–58. New York:
Academic Press.
Hatim, B., and Mason, I. (1990). Discourse and the Translator. London:
Longman.
Huang, Y. (2007). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
Searle, J. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Questions

1. What are the main differences between “semantics” and “pragmatics”?

2. What is the difference between “conditional speech-act verbs” and
“unconditional speech-act verbs”? ← 183 | 184 →
3. How would you define the “cooperative principle” and its supportive
maxims?
4. In the natural practice of communication, writers, for different reasons,
sometimes express just some parts of their messages, leaving the readers to
complete the missing parts. Could you think of some of these reasons?
5. Among many attempts to classify speech acts, J. Searle (1969) has classified
speech acts into several types. What are they? Discuss with illustrative
examples.

Exercises

Exercise 1: Write sentences in which you perform the act of:

1. requesting
2. promising
3. apologizing
4. threatening
5. congratulating
6. advising
7. thanking

Exercise 2: Try to identify the kind of speech acts in the following sentences,
and then translate them into Arabic:

1. I apologize for being late in responding to your e-mails.

2. I declare this meeting adjourned.
3. I hereby acknowledge the safe receipt of your contract.
4. I announce you guilty.
5. I advise you to apply for the post as quickly as you can.
6. Wait here. I’ll be with you within ten minutes. ← 184 | 185 →
7. I promise that I’ll give her the book tomorrow.
8. You must appear in court next Tuesday at 11 a.m.

Exercise 3: The following example is extracted from Edward Said’s (1987/2003:

80) book Orientalism, translated by Mohammed Enani (2006: 153). Comment
on the translation in terms of cooperative principle and its supportive maxims,
paying special attention to the phrase the conquering West and its translation ‫اﻟﻐﺮب‬
‫ﻟﻐﺎزي‬.‫ا‬

ST:

For at the crucial instant when an Orientalist had to decide whether his
loyalties and sympathies lay with the Orient or with the conquering West, he
always chose the latter.

TT:

‫ﻣﻊ اﻟﺸﺮق‬. ‫ﻓﻔﻲ اﻟﻠﺤﻈﺔ اﻟﺤﺎﺳﻤﺔ اﻟﺘﻲ ﻛﺎن ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺸﺮق أن ﻳﻘﺮر إن ﻛﺎن ﻳﻀﻤﺮ اﻟﻮﻻء واﻟﺘﻌﺎﻃﻒ‬
‫ ﻛﺎن ﻳﺨﺘﺎر اﻟﺠﺎﻧﺐ اﻷﺧﻴﺮ‬،‫أم ﻣﻊ اﻟﻐﺮب اﻟﻐﺎزي‬

Exercise 4: Evaluate the two translations produced by two student translators,

paying extra attention to the pragmatic meaning of to go out and to come out.

.‫ﻟﻢ ﻳﺨﺮْج إﻟﻰ اﻟﻤﻈﺎﻫﺮة ﻳﻮم أﻣﺲ ﻻ أﺻﺪﻗﺎﺋﻲ وﻻ أﻗﺎرﺑﻲ‬

TT 1:

Neither my friends nor my relatives went out to demonstrate yesterday.

TT 2:

Neither my friends nor my relatives came out to demonstrate yesterday.

Exercise 5: Translate the following text extracted from ‘Abdul-Sattār Nāsir’s ‫ﺛﻼث‬
‫( ﻗ ﺼ ﺺ ﻟ ﻴ ﺴ ﺖ ﻟ ﻠ ﻨ ﺸ ﺮ‬Three Short Stories not for Publishing), paying particular
attention to speech acts used in the text: ← 185 | 186 →
ST:

،‫ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺗﺄﻛﺪ ﻟﻪ أﻧﻬﺎ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﺑﻤﻔﺮدﻫﺎ‬،‫ وﻣﺎ أن اﻗﺘﺮب ﻣﻨﻬﺎ‬،ً ‫ ﻓﺮآﻫﺎ ﻋﺎرﻳﺔ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﺎ‬،‫دﺧﻞ اﻟﻤﻠﻚ ﻋﻠﻰ زوﺟﺘﻪ‬
… ‫وأن ﺣﺎرﺳﻪ ا»ﻷﻣﻴﻦ« ﻳﻨﺎم ﻫﺎﻧﺌﺎ ً ﻣﻌﻬﺎ‬
«‫ﻚ‬
‫ ﻛﺎن اﻟﺤﺎرس ﻗﺪ‬،‫ وﻋﻨﺪ اﻟﺒﺎب‬،‫ﻲ ﺑﻄﻨﻪ أﻛﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺟﺮح ﻋﺮﻳﺾ ﻋﻤﻴﻖ‬ ‫»ﻟﻤﻠوﻓ‬
‫ﺧﺮج اﻟﺤﺎرس ﻣﻦ ﻏﺮﻓﺔ ا‬
. … ‫ﻣﺎت‬
:‫ ﻗﺎل اﻟﻤﻠﻚ ﻟﻮزﻳﺮ اﻟﻤﺎل‬،‫ﻓﻲ آﺧﺮ اﻟﻠﻴﻞ‬
‫اذﻫ–ﺐ إﻟﻰ زوﺟﺘﻲ‪ ،‬واﻗﺘﻠﻬﺎ … وﺧﺬ ﻟﻚ ﻧﺼﻒ اﻟﺨﺰﻳﻨﺔ …‬
‫أﺟﺎب اﻟﻮزﻳﺮ‪:‬‬
‫– أﻣﺮك ﻳﺎ ﻣﻮﻻي …‬
| 187 →

CHAPTER 12

Annotating Semantic Issues

The previous chapters examined different semantic aspects. This chapter links
these semantic issues discussed throughout the book to the actual act of
translating by consolidating theoretical claims with authentic translational data,
thus helping translation students annotate their own translations from a semantic
perspective. To this end, a text (386 words) is translated and annotated from a
semantic perspective. Before the text is translated, the following introduction
presents this source text along with its author.

12.1 Introduction This text was written by the Syrian

writer and editor, Lubna Mahmūd Yāsīn, who
studied painting and sculpture in Damascus.
Among her writings are (1) ‫(أﻧﺜﻰ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻔﺺ‬A Female
in a Cage), a collection of short stories published
by ‫ دار وﻫﺞ اﻟﺤﻴﺎة‬Dār Wahaj Al-Hayyāt for
Publication and Media, Riyadh, (2) ‫ﺸﺔ‬ ّ ‫ﻃﻘﻮس ﻣﺘﻮﺣ‬
(Wild Traditions), a collection of short stories
published by ‫ دار وﺟﻮه‬Dār Wujūh for Publication
and Media, Riyadh, and (3) ً ‫ت ﺻﻤﺘ ّﺎ‬
ُ ‫(اﻟﻤﻮ‬Dying
Silently), a collection of short stories.

The story ‫ﺑﺼﻤﺔ ﻣﻮاﻃﻦ‬ (A Citizen’s Fingerprint) unfolds in an unnamed Arab

country and the writer does not locate the main character in any particular place
or time. This is to evoke in the mind of the reader a range of memories and
images. This character, who undergoes no change or development throughout
the story, symbolizes the great number of people in the Arab world who suffer
from the injustice, tyranny and oppression of the various regimes. These people
do not have the right to choose, accept or object. When they say “no”, they may
find themselves in prison, just like the main character in the story. When he
uttered a single word reflecting ← 187 | 188 → the difficulty he had in accepting
what had been imposed on him, he found himself surrounded by thousands of
armed personnel in military uniforms, accompanied by menacing police dogs.
They covered his eyes with a handkerchief, tied it so tight that he could not see
anything and took him “there”. This deictic word, used deliberately by the
writer, refers to an assumed location that the memories and imagination of the
reader can picture.
In composing her story, the writer pays particular attention to the message,
the language and stylistic elements. A wide variety of stylistic features are used
in the story, such as rhetorical questions, parallelism, syntactic formality
associated with archaic lexical items, lexical repetition, exaggeration, figurative
language in the form of simile, passive versus active voice and so on. This
resulting poetic flavour requires special treatment from the translator.

12.2 Translation In order to translate the text into

English, a global strategy, one that stands
somewhere between a semantic translation and a
communicative translation, will be adopted. An
attempt will be made to strike a balance between a
rendering that tries “to render, as closely as the
semantic and syntactic structures of the second
language allow, the exact contextual meaning of
the original”, and a rendering that produces on the
target reader the same effect that the original text
produced on its readers (Newmark 1981: 39).
Target text Source text
A Citizen’s Fingerprint ‫ﺑﺼﻤﺔ ﻣﻮاﻃﻦ‬

The night swallows him so he delves ‫…ﻣﻦ ذا اﻟﺬي‬

ever deeper into the heart of silence.
Who can, then, escape if the pain is
densely settled inside the self and
sadness penetrates the depths of the
heart? … His heart erodes; his limbs
fall off; his voice gets torn away at the
boundaries of time, yet no response
comes.
The ignorance of the twenty-first
‫ﻳﺒﺘﻠﻌﻪ اﻟﻤﺴﺎء …ﻓﻴﻮﻏﻞ ﻓﻲ أﺣﺸﺎء اﻟﺼﻤﺖ و‬
‫ﻳﺴﺘﻄﻴﻊ ﻓﺮارا ً إذا ﻋﺴﻌﺲ اﻷﻟﻢ داﺧﻞ اﻟﻨﻔﺲ …وﺗﻮﻏﻠﺖ‬
‫ﺗﺘﺴﺎﻗﻂ‬ … ‫اﻷﺣﺰان ﻓﻲ ﺣﻨﺎﻳﺎ اﻟﻔﺆاد … ﻳﺘﺂﻛﻞ ﻗﻠﺒﻪ‬
…‫أﺷﻼؤه … ﻳﺘﻤﺰق ﺻﻮﺗﻪ ﻋﻠ‬
‫ﻰ ﺣﺪود اﻟﺰﻣﺎن وﻻ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺠﻴﺐ‬
189 | 188 ← →
‫ﺗﻘﻮم ﺟﺎﻫﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﻘﺮن اﻟﺤﺎدي واﻟﻌﺸﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﻮأد ﻣﺸﺎﻋﺮه وﻛﺮاﻣﺘﻪ‬

century is burying alive his feelings and ‫ﻔﺮﺟﻴﻦ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻃﻘﻮس ﺻﻠﺐ ﺑﻘﺎﻳﺎ‬.‫… ﺑﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻳﺘﺠﻤﺪ اﻟﻘﻮمﻣﺘ‬
‫إﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺘﻪ أﺑﻌﺪ ﻫﺬا اﻟﻤﻮت ﻣﻮت آﺧﺮ؟‬
dignity while people stand frozen,
observing the rituals that crucify the
remains of his humanity. Is there
another death after this?
Where is the refuge? He wants to ‫أﻳﻦ اﻟﻤﻼذ؟؟ ﻳﺮﻳﺪ أن ﻳﻔﺘﺢ ﺟﻨﺎﺣﻴﻪ وﻳﻬﺮب ﻣﻦ ﻇﻤﺌﻪ …وﻣﻦ‬
spread his wings and escape from his ‫…ﻦ ﻋﺮي أوﺟﺎﻋﻪ … ﻳﺮﻳﺪ أن ﻳﺤﻠﻖ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻻ‬
‫ﺣﺪود ﻣﺸﺎﻋﺮه ﻣ‬
thirst, from the boundaries of his ‫ﻻ أﺣﺪ أﺑﺪا‬ … ‫أﺣﺪ‬.
feelings, from the rawness of his pains.
He wants to soar where nobody is,
nobody at all.
In the midst of the disorder that had ‫ﻟﻢ ﻳﺸﻌﺮ ﺑﻨﻔﺴﻪ‬ … ‫ووﺳﻂ ﻛﻞ ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﺒﻌﺜﺮة اﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻨﺘﺎﺑﻪ‬
come over him, he had not felt himself ‫ﻓﺈذا ﺑﻪ‬ … ‫إﻻ وﻗﻀﻴﺐ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻨﺎر اﻟﻤﻠﺘﻬﺒﺔ ﻳﻨﺪﻓﻊ ﻣﻦ ﺟﻮﻓﻪ‬
until a red-hot fire burst forth out of his » ‫ﻳﻔﺘﺢ ﻓﺎه ﺣﺪ اﻟﺘﻤﺰق وﻳﺼﺮخ ﻣﻞء ﺻﻮﺗﻪ ﻣﺘﻘﻴ ّﺎ ً ﺑﻜﻠﻤﺔ‬
belly. All of a sudden, he opened his ‫ » ﻻ‬:‫… واﺣﺪة‬
mouth so wide that it got torn, shouting
at the top of his mouth, vomiting out
the single word: “NO”.
No sooner had he closed his mouth and ‫وﻣﺎ ﻛﺎد ﻳﻐﻠﻖ ﻓﻤﻪ وﻳﺒﺘﻠﻊ اﻟﻔﻀﺎء ﺻﻮﺗﻪ …ﺣﺘﻰ وﺟﺪ‬
the void swallowed his voice than he ‫ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻣﺤﺎﻃﺎ ً ﺑﺂﻻف اﻟﻤﺴﻠﺤﻴﻦ … ﺑﺒﺪﻻﺗﻬﻢ اﻟﻌﺴﻜﺮﻳﺔ‬
found himself surrounded by thousands ‫ﺗﺮاﻓﻘﻬﻢ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬا‬ … ‫وﻣﻼﻣﺤﻬﻢ اﻟﺠﺎﻓﺔ ﺟﻔﺎف اﻟﺼﺤﺎرى‬
of armed personnel in military uniforms ‫ﺗﻤﻬﻴﺪا ﻻﻗﺘﻴﺎده إﻟﻰ‬ … ‫اﻟﻀﺨﻤﺔ‬. ‫اﻟﺤﺼﺎر اﻟﻜﻼب اﻟﺒﻮﻟﻴﺴﻴﺔ‬
whose features were as arid as those of ‫))ﻫﻨﺎك‬
the desert. In this siege, they were
accompanied by menacing police dogs
leading the way to take him “there”.
They covered his eyes with a … ‫وﺿﻌﻮا ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ ﻣﻨﺪﻳﻼ ً اﺣﻜﻤﻮه ﺟﻴﺪا ﻟﻜﻲ ﻻ ﻳﺮى‬
‫وﻗُﻴ ّﺪ‬
handkerchief –they tied it so tight that ‫ﺼﻖ ﺷﺮﻳﻂ ﻋﺮﻳﺾ ﻓﻮق ﻓﻤﻪ … وﻣﻀﻮا‬ ِ ‫ﻣﻌﺼﻤﺎه … وا ُﻟ‬
he couldn’t see anything. His wrists ‫ﻟﻰ )ﻫﻨﺎك‬.‫) ﺑﻪ إ‬
were shackled, and his mouth was
covered with a wide piece of tape – and
then they took him “there”.
And “there” one of them removed the … ‫و)ﻫﻨﺎك(ﻗﺎم أﺣﺪﻫﻢ ﺑﻨﺰع اﻟﻘﻴﻮد اﻟﺘﻲ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺣﻮاﺳﻪ‬
restraints which had covered his senses. … ‫ﻓﺘﺢ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ ﻟﻴﺠﺪ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ ﻓﺎﺧﺮ ﻳﺸﻐﻠﻪ ﺿﺎﺑﻂ‬
He opened his eyes to find himself in a … ‫ﺗﺘﺸﺎﺟﺮ اﻟﺸﺮاﺋﻂ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻛﺘﻔﻪ ﻟﺘﺠﺪ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎ ﻛﺎﻓﻴﺎ ﻟﻬﺎ‬
luxurious office occupied by an officer ‫وﻫﻨﺎﻟﻚ ﻣﻦ ﻫﻮ ﻣﺜﻠﻪ اﻧﺘﺰﻋﺖ ﻗﻴﻮده ﻗﺒﻞ … ﺻﺎﺣﺒﻨﺎ ﺑﺪﻗﺎﺋﻖ‬
whose stripes were fighting to find a 190 | 189 ← ‫→ ﻓﻘﻂ‬
place for themselves on his shoulder.
And “there” was someone else like him
whose restraints had been removed just
minutes before our friend’s.
One of them dipped our friend’s thumb ‫ﻗﺎم أﺣﺪﻫﻢ ﺑﻄﻠﻲ إﺑﻬﺎﻣﻪ ﺑﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻗﺎﺗﻢ ﻟﺰج ﺛﻢ ﻧﺰع ﻳﺪه‬
ً ‫وأﻟﺼﻘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ورﻗﺔ ﺑﻴﻀﺎء وأﺧﺬ ﻳﻀﻐﻂ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ وﻳﺤﺮﻛﻬﺎ ﻳﻤﻴﻨﺎ‬
in a dark sticky liquid, then took out his
‫ﺣﺼﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺻﻮرة ﻛﺎﻣﻠﺔ ﻟﺒﺼﻤﺘﻪ‬ … ‫وﻳﺴﺎرا ً ﺣﺘﻰ‬
hand and stuck it on a blank piece of
paper. He started pressing on it moving
it to the right and left until he got a
complete image of his fingerprint.
Meanwhile, the officer with a multitude ‫ﻳﻄﺎﺑﻖ‬ … ‫ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬه اﻷﺛﻨﺎء ﻛﺎن اﻟﻀﺎﺑﻂ ذو اﻟﺸﺮاﺋﻂ اﻟﻜﺜﻴﺮة‬
of stripes was comparing the fingerprint ‫ﺑﺼﻤﺔ اﻟﻤﻮاﻃﻦ اﻟﺬي ﺳﺒﻖ ﺻﺎﺣﺒﻨﺎ إﻟﻰ )ﻫﻨﺎك( ﻣﻊ ﺑﺼﻤﺔ‬
of the citizen, who had preceded our … ‫ﻛﺒﻴﺮة ﺗﺤﺘ ّﻞ وﺣﺪﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻮرق اﻟﻤﻘﻮّى وﻗﺪ ﻛ ُﺒ ّﺮت‬
friend “there”, to a huge fingerprint ‫ﺻﺎح اﻟﻀﺎﺑﻂ‬ … ‫ﺣﺘﻰ أﺿﺤﺖ واﺿﺤﺔ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﺎ ﺑﻜﻞ ﺗﻀﺎرﻳﺴﻬﺎ‬
that, by itself, took up an entire piece of ‫» اﻧﻪ ﻫﻮ اﻟﻤﺘﻤﺮد‬. ‫…ﻌﺴﺎﻛﺮ ﻣﺸﻴﺮا إﻟﻰ اﻟﻤﻮاﻃﻦ‬
‫… ﺑﺄﺣﺪ اﻟ‬
cardboard. It had been magnified until ‫» … ﺧﺬوه‬
all of its features had been rendered
completely clear. The officer shouted at
one of the enlisted men, pointing to the
citizen “It’s him, it’s the insubordinate,
take him away”.
Then, the officer turned to our friend ‫ﺛﻢ اﻟﺘﻔﺖ إﻟﻰ ﺻﺎﺣﺒﻨﺎ …وﺳﺤﺐ رﺳﻢ ﺑﺼﻤﺘﻪ اﻟﺬي ﻛﺎن ﻗﺪ‬
and pulled up the depiction of his » ‫ﻧﻔﺲ اﻟﺒﺼﻤﺔ اﻟُﻤﻜﺒ ّﺮة … وﻋﺎد ﻳﻘﻮل‬: ‫ﺟﻒ … وﻃﺎﺑﻘﻪ ﻣﻊ‬
fingerprint which had dried and ‫» … إﻧﻪ ﻫﻮ … اﻟﻤﺘﻤﺮد … ﺧﺬوه‬
compared it to the magnified
fingerprint. Once again, he stated: “It’s
him, it’s the insubordinate, take him
away”.
Suddenly, the soldier rushed headlong ‫ﻛﻤﺎ ﻟﻮ أن ﺻﺎﺣﺒﻨﺎ‬… ً ‫ﻀﺎ‬
ّ ‫وإذا ﺑﺎﻟﻌﺴﻜﺮي ﻳﻨﺪﻓﻊ إﻟﻴﻪ ﻣﻨﻘ‬
upon him as if our friend had just ‫…ﻟﺪﻫﺸﺔ واﻟﺤﻴﺮة ﻓﻲ آن واﺣﺪ‬‫ﺳﺒﻖ وﺻﻔﻌﻪ … اﻧﺘﺎﺑﺘﻪ ا‬
slapped him. Our friend’s feelings were ‫ﻣﻌﺎ‬

a mixture of amazement and confusion

all at once.
He said to the officer with forced ‫أﻟﻢ ﺗﺘﻄﺎﺑﻖ‬ … ‫ ﻋﻔﻮا ً ﻳﺎ ﺳﻴﺪي‬:‫ﻗﺎل ﻟﻠﻀﺎﺑﻂ ﺑﺘﺄدب ﻣﻔﺘﻌﻞ‬
politeness: “Pardon me sir. Isn’t that ‫…ﻟﺬي ﺳﺒﻘﻨﻲ‬ ‫ذات اﻟﺒﺼﻤﺔ ﻣﻊ اﻟﻤﻮاﻃﻦ ا‬
the same fingerprint that matched the
citizen who went in front of me?”
The officer answered, wearing a smile ‫أﺟﺎب اﻟﻀﺎﺑﻂ وﻫﻮ ﻳﺮﺗﺪي اﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﺠﻤﻊ ﺑﻴﻦ …اﻟﺘﻌﺎﻟﻲ‬
with a trace of both arrogance and … ‫ وﻣﺎذا‬... ‫ ﻧﻌﻢ‬:‫واﻟﺴﺨﺮﻳﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ذﻟﻚ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺗﻄﺎﺑﻘﺖ ﻣﻊ‬
sarcasm: “Yes, what about it? It exactly 191 | 190 ← ‫ ﻓﻬﻮ اﻵﺧﺮ ﻣﺘﻤﺮد‬. ‫→ ﺑﺼﻤﺘﻪ‬
matched his fingerprint, as he too is
insubordinate”.

12.3 Annotation In this section, to make the task of

analysis easier and enable the reader to follow the
thread of argumentation more easily, the source
text along with its translation is divided into
smaller parts containing a sentence, or a group of
related sentences, reflecting a complete idea. Then,
each part will be annotated from different semantic
aspects.

Exercise 1

ST:

‫ﻳﺒﺘﻠﻌﻪ اﻟﻤﺴﺎء …ﻓﻴﻮﻏﻞ ﻓﻲ أﺣﺸﺎء اﻟﺼﻤﺖ …وﻣﻦ ذا اﻟﺬي ﻳﺴﺘﻄﻴﻊ ﻓﺮارا ً إذا ﻋﺴﻌﺲ اﻷﻟﻢ‬
‫ﻳﺘﻤﺰق‬ … ‫…ﻮﻏﻠﺖ اﻷﺣﺰان ﻓﻲ ﺣﻨﺎﻳﺎ اﻟﻔﺆاد … ﻳﺘﺂﻛﻞ ﻗﻠﺒﻪ … ﺗﺘﺴﺎﻗﻂ أﺷﻼؤه‬
‫داﺧﻞ اﻟﻨﻔﺲ وﺗ‬
‫…ﻮﺗﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺣﺪود اﻟﺰﻣﺎن وﻻ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺠﻴﺐ‬‫ﺻ‬

TT:
 The night swallows him so he delves ever deeper into the heart of silence.
Who can, then, escape if the pain is densely settled inside the self and sadness
penetrates the depths of the heart? … His heart erodes; his limbs fall off; his
voice gets torn away at the boundaries of time, yet no response comes.

Annotation:

i. Here, attention is paid to verb tenses and aspects. In the source text, a series
of verbs in the simple present form is used, expressed by‫ ﺗﻮﻏّﻞ‬, ‫ ﻳﺘﺂﻛﻞ‬, ‫ﺗﺘﺴﺎﻗﻂ‬
‫ ﻳﺒﺘﻠﻊ‬, ‫ﻳﻮﻏﻞ‬, and ‫ ﻳﺘﻤّﺰق‬. Although they are in the present form, the emphasis is
on the completion of the described actions in a specific period of time in the
past. However, in such a literary genre “where the world is created
autonomously through imaginative texts sharing certain characteristics, such
as containing features of expression, ← 191 | 192 → and having to a certain
degree a weak relationship with the real world”, the simple present tense is
frequently used (Almanna 2016: 43).
ii. An attempt is made here to resist the temptation of opting for an unmarked
collocation, viz. wall of silence or a vow of silence, and so on in the
translation of the marked collocation in ‫(ﺣﺸﺎء اﻟﺼﻤﺖ‬the ‫أ‬ intestines of silence).
Actually, translating between two different languages and cultures requires
the translator to give full consideration to “invariance in the markedness of
collocates, rather than replacing abnormal usage in an original with normal
usage in translation” (Trotter 2000: 351).
iii. Here, there is an example of parallelism in

… ‫ﻳﺘﺂﻛﻞ ﻗﻠﺒﻪ‬
… ‫ﺗﺘﺴﺎﻗﻂ أﺷﻼؤه‬
… ‫ﻳﺘﻤّﺰق ﺻﻮﺗﻪ‬

Parallelism, according to Al-Jabr (1987: 173), “involves the use of particular

syntactic and semantic configuration more than once, in rapid succession”.
Placing these parallel structures in juxtaposition is not determined arbitrarily, but
rather it is a result of choice. This accords well with Shen’s (1987: 213)
comments:
In fictional translation, that is to say, one needs to bear in mind that deviant
syntactic sequence, particularly in a well-formed text, may be associated with
desirable literary effects. And if such is the case, the deviation should be
 preserved rather than “normalized”.
Here, the writer deliberately produces her above parallel structures without
connectors, thereby creating an example of “asyndeton”. Asyndeton, according
to Corbett (1971: 469) is the “deliberate omission of connective particles
between series of related clauses”. Al-Rubai’i (1996: 111) distinguishes between
schemes of construction which depend upon similarity of sound, viz. alliteration
and assonance and other schemes of construction that do not rely on sound, such
as asyndeton and climax. She adds that the former “are very frequently
untranslatable”, while the latter “can sometimes be retained through translation”.
Thus, to maintain parallelism as well as asyndeton in the target text, parallel
structures like his heart erodes; his limbs fall off; his voice gets torn away may
be used. ← 192 | 193 →

iv. Further, undivided attention is paid to the formal structure in ‫ﻣﻦ ذا اﻟﺬي‬which
‫و‬
is supported by an archaic lexical item ‫ﻋﺴﻌﺲ‬that has a religious connotation.
Here, the writer resorts to building an intertextual relation with a Quranic
verse, namely verse 17 from ‫( ﺳﻮرة اﻟﺘﻜﻮﻳﺮ‬Sūrāt Al-Takwīr):

َ ‫وَاﻟﺼﺒ ِْﺢ إ ِذ َا ﺗ ّﻨ ّﻔ‬

‫ﺲ‬ –‫ﺲ‬ ْ َ ‫ﻞ إ ِذ َا ﻋ‬
َ َ ‫ﺴﻌ‬ ِ ْ ‫وَاﻟﻴ‬

As such, the lexical item ‫ﻋﺴﻌﺲ‬acquires an allusive meaning in addition to its

denotative meaning by virtue of intertextuality, thus invoking in the mind of the
text reader or hearer an associated verse in such a way that the meaning of that
verse becomes part of the meaning of the lexical item ‫ﻋﺴﻌﺲ‬.

Exercise 2

ST:

‫ﻣﺘﻔﺮﺟﻴﻦ‬. ‫ﺑﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻳﺘﺠﻤﺪ اﻟﻘﻮم‬ … ‫ﺗﻘﻮم ﺟﺎﻫﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﻘﺮن اﻟﺤﺎدي واﻟﻌﺸﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﻮأد ﻣﺸﺎﻋﺮه وﻛﺮاﻣﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻃﻘﻮس ﺻﻠﺐ ﺑﻘﺎﻳﺎ إﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺘﻪ‬
‫أﺑﻌﺪ ﻫﺬا اﻟﻤﻮت ﻣﻮت آﺧﺮ؟‬

TT:

The ignorance of the twenty-first century is burying alive his feelings and
dignity while people stand frozen, observing the rituals that crucify the
remains of his humanity.
 Is there another death after this?

Annotation:

i. In the original text, a present continuous tense, expressed by ‫ ﺗﻘﻮم ﺑﻮأد‬is

used, thereby emphasizing the continuity of the action rather than its
frequency and/or duration. As such paying no attention to verb aspect will
definitely produce a change in time reference, thus affecting the pragmatic
communicative effect.
ii. Further, the denotative meaning of the word ‫ وأد‬means to bury somebody or
something alive. In addition to its denotative meaning, the ← 193 | 194 →
word ‫ وأد‬invokes in the mind of the reader the practice of infanticide
committed in the pre-Islamic era. In the pre-Islamic era, when a female baby
was born, she was considered a disgrace to the family, and, thus, female
infanticide was a common response, i.e., she was buried alive. To convey
the intertextuality in the original author’s motivated use of the word ‫ﺟﺎﻫﻠﻴﺔ‬, to
bury alive may be used. Burying alive is a more dramatic image or concept
than burying a deceased body.
iii. The striking feature in the above example is that the original writer steers a
middle course between personalization and impersonalization.
Personalization can be detected in the above example via the use of the
rhetorical question ‫ﻌ ﺪ ﻫ ﺬ ا ا ﻟ ﻤ ﻮ ت ﻣ ﻮ ت آ ﺧ ﺮ‬. ‫أ ﺑ‬However, the original writer
impersonalizes her rhetorical question when she does not use any reference
to the writer/reader’s presence. This has been taken into account. The
rhetorical question ‫ﻌﺪ ﻫﺬا اﻟﻤﻮت ﻣﻮت آﺧﺮ‬therefore
‫أﺑ‬ lends itself to Is there another
death after this?

Exercise 3

ST:

… ‫ﻋﺮي أوﺟﺎﻋﻪ‬. ‫أﻳﻦ اﻟﻤﻼذ؟؟ ﻳﺮﻳﺪ أن ﻳﻔﺘﺢ ﺟﻨﺎﺣﻴﻪ وﻳﻬﺮب ﻣﻦ ﻇﻤﺌﻪ …وﻣﻦ ﺣﺪود ﻣﺸﺎﻋﺮه …ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﻳﺮﻳﺪ أن ﻳﺤﻠﻖ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻻ أﺣﺪ … ﻻ أﺣﺪ أﺑﺪا‬

TT:

Where is the refuge? He wants to spread his wings and escape from his thirst,
 from the boundaries of his feelings, from the rawness of his pains. He wants
to soar where nobody is, nobody at all.

Annotation:
i. Special attention is paid to the parallel structures in ‫ﻣﻦ ﻇﻤﺌﻪ‬, ‫ﻣﻦ ﺣﺪود ﻣﺸﺎﻋﺮه‬
and ‫ﻦ ﻋ ﺮ ي أ و ﺟ ﺎ ﻋ ﻪ‬. ‫ﻣ‬Such parallelism lends itself to from his thirst, from the
boundaries of his feelings, from the rawness of his pains. ← 194 | 195 →
ii. In the original text, the lexical item ‫( أراد‬to want) is repeated in spite of the
variety of verbs available, hence the importance of reflecting such a
characteristic in the target text.
iii. In the original text, a circumstantial element of location in space in the form
of an adverbial clause ‫ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻻ أﺣﺪ‬is used. It refers to an assumed location that
invokes different memories and/or imaginations in the mind of the reader.
To reflect such an invitation achieved by the adverbial clause, something
like where nobody is may be used.

Exercise 4

ST:

… ‫ووﺳﻂ ﻛﻞ ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﺒﻌﺜﺮة اﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻨﺘﺎﺑﻪ … ﻟﻢ ﻳﺸﻌﺮ ﺑﻨﻔﺴﻪ إﻻ وﻗﻀﻴﺐ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻨﺎر اﻟﻤﻠﺘﻬﺒﺔ ﻳﻨﺪﻓﻊ‬
‫ ﻻ‬:‫ﻓﺈذا ﺑﻪ ﻳﻔﺘﺢ ﻓﺎه ﺣﺪ اﻟﺘﻤﺰق وﻳﺼﺮخ ﻣﻞء ﺻﻮﺗﻪ ﻣﺘﻘﻴ ّﺎ ً ﺑﻜﻠﻤﺔ واﺣﺪة‬ … ‫ﻣﻦ ﺟﻮﻓﻪ‬

TT:

In the midst of the disorder that had come over him, he had not felt himself
until a red-hot fire burst forth out of his belly. All of a sudden, he opened his
mouth so wide that it got torn, shouting at the top of his mouth, vomiting one
word: “NO”.

Annotation:

i. Full consideration is given here to verb aspects. In the original text, perfect
aspects, expressed by ‫ ﺗﻨﺘﺎﺑﻪ‬and ‫ ﻟ ﻢ ﻳ ﺸ ﻌ ﺮ‬, are used. To begin with ‫ﺗﻨﺘﺎب‬,
although it is used in the present, the emphasis is placed on (1) the
continuity of the described state of affairs in a specific period of time in the
past as there is an implicit ‫( ﻛﺎن‬was/were), and (2) the duration of the
 described state of affairs. To reflect this, the past perfect continuous tense,
that is, had been + verb + ing may be used. Or alternatively, the phrasal verb
to come over, which is iterative in this context, can be employed here to
emphasize the repetition of the described action or state of affairs. The
emphasis in ‫ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺸﻌﺮ‬is put on the duration of the described state of affairs
that began in the past and ← 195 | 196 → is seen relevant to another act,
that is, a red-hot fire burst forth out of his belly. As such, it lends itself to
being rendered by a past perfect tense, that is, he hadn’t felt …, in place of a
simple past tense, that is, he did not feel ….

Exercise 5

ST:

… ‫وﻣﺎ ﻛﺎد ﻳﻐﻠﻖ ﻓﻤﻪ وﻳﺒﺘﻠﻊ اﻟﻔﻀﺎء ﺻﻮﺗﻪ …ﺣﺘﻰ وﺟﺪ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻣﺤﺎﻃﺎ ً ﺑﺂﻻف اﻟﻤﺴﻠﺤﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺑﺒﺪﻻﺗﻬﻢ اﻟﻌﺴﻜﺮﻳﺔ وﻣﻼﻣﺤﻬﻢ اﻟﺠﺎﻓﺔ ﺟﻔﺎف اﻟﺼﺤﺎرى … ﺗﺮاﻓﻘﻬﻢ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬا اﻟﺤﺼﺎر اﻟﻜﻼب‬
‫اﻟﺒﻮﻟﻴﺴﻴﺔ اﻟﻀﺨﻤﺔ … ﺗﻤﻬﻴﺪا ﻻﻗﺘﻴﺎده إﻟﻰ )ﻫﻨﺎك‬.)

TT:

No sooner had he closed his mouth and the void swallowed his voice than he
found himself surrounded by thousands of armed personnel in military
uniforms whose features were as arid as those of the desert. In this siege, they
were accompanied by menacing police dogs leading the way to take him
“there”.

Annotation:

i. In the original text, the author uses a correlative conjunction, i.e., … ‫ﻣﺎ ﻛﺎد‬
‫ …ﺣﺘﻰ‬to lay emphasis on finding himself surrounded by thousands of armed
personnel in military uniforms. This suggests that there is no time span
between the two acts or events. Such a correlative conjunction can be
translated into no sooner … than …, hardly … when …, scarcely … when
…, rarely … when …, and so forth. Further, extra attention needs to be paid
to tenses and aspects used. The act of closing his mouth occurred shortly
before the act of being surrounded by thousands of armed personnel in
military uniforms, thus lending themselves to a past perfect tense had closed
 and a simple past tense found respectively.
ii. Here, it is worth noting that the simile in the above example is an
emphasizing simile tashbīh mū’akkad which is presented without a
comparison marker (i.e., the article used to draw a comparison between the
topic and vehicle). In English, however, apart from the “compressed simile”
(i.e., a simile in which the information is condensed into a two-word ← 196
| 197 → lexeme, such as U-shaped movement), the simile should have a
comparison marker, such as like, as, etc. Taking into account the target
language’s stylistic preferences when dealing with the simile in the original
text ‫(ﻼﻣﺤﻬﻢ اﻟﺠﺎﻓﺔ ﺟﻔﺎف اﻟﺼﺤﺎرى‬lit.
‫ﻣ‬ their dry features [are like] the dryness of
the desert), a professional translator can opt for a translation like this: whose
features were as arid as those of the desert or any idiomatic expression that
would reflect the same mental image on the one hand, and would be
stylistically accepted by the target language readers on the other.
iii. Further, the word (‫ ـﺔ(ﺟﺎف‬lends itself to arid as it collocates well with the
word features on the one hand, and it is a stronger, more expressive word,
literally and figuratively, than the word dry on the other.

Exercise 6

ST:

ِ ‫وﻗُﻴ ّﺪ ﻣﻌﺼﻤﺎه …وا ُﻟ‬

‫ﺷﺮﻳﻂ ﻋﺮﻳﺾ‬. ‫ﺼﻖ‬ … ‫وﺿﻌﻮا ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ ﻣﻨﺪﻳﻼ ً اﺣﻜﻤﻮه ﺟﻴﺪا ﻟﻜﻲ ﻻ ﻳﺮى‬
‫) ﻓﻮق ﻓﻤﻪ … وﻣﻀﻮا ﺑﻪ إﻟﻰ )ﻫﻨﺎك‬

TT:

They covered his eyes with a handkerchief – they tied it so tight that he
couldn’t see anything. His wrists were shackled, and his mouth was covered
with a wide piece of tape – they took him “there”.

Annotation:

i. In the above example, the original writer, in an attempt to invoke different

imaginations in the mind of the reader on the one hand, and to adopt a
neutral tone, on the other, opts for a circular pattern of active and passive,
which is supported by parallel structures as well as the deictic word ‫ﻫﻨﺎك‬
 (there). As a deictic word, there refers to an assumed location in the mind of
the speaker/writer, which is different from there in the mind of the
hearer/reader on the one hand, and invokes different memories and/or
imaginations on the other. So, it is “an open ← 197 | 198 → invitation to
every reader in every location on the earth to enliven this moment of [there-
ness]” (Ghazala 2011: 59).
ii. Further, the actors of the material processes in the third clause and fourth
clause, viz. ‫ ﻗُﻴﺪ ﻣﻌﺼﻤﺎه‬and ‫ا ُﻟ ﺼ ﻖ ﺷ ﺮ ﻳ ﻂ ﻋ ﺮ ﻳ ﺾ ﻋ ﻠ ﻰ ﻓ ﻤ ﻪ‬can be anyone, so it is
another invitation sent out by the original writer to invoke different images
and memories in the mind of the hearer/reader.

Exercise 7

ST:

‫ﻓﺘﺢ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ ﻟﻴﺠﺪ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ‬ … ‫و)ﻫﻨﺎك(ﻗﺎم أﺣﺪﻫﻢ ﺑﻨﺰع اﻟﻘﻴﻮد اﻟﺘﻲ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺣﻮاﺳﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﻫﻮ‬. ‫ﺗﺘﺸﺎﺟﺮ اﻟﺸﺮاﺋﻂ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻛﺘﻔﻪ ﻟﺘﺠﺪ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎ ﻛﺎﻓﻴﺎ ﻟﻬﺎ …وﻫﻨﺎﻟﻚ‬ … ‫ﻓﺎﺧﺮ ﻳﺸﻐﻠﻪ ﺿﺎﺑﻂ‬
‫ﻣﺜﻠﻪ اﻧﺘﺰﻋﺖ ﻗﻴﻮده ﻗﺒﻞ ﺻﺎﺣﺒﻨﺎ ﺑﺪﻗﺎﺋﻖ ﻓﻘﻂ‬

TT:

And “there” one of them removed the restraints which had covered his
senses. He opened his eyes to find himself in a luxurious office occupied by an
officer whose stripes were fighting to find a place for themselves on his
shoulder. And “there” was someone else like him whose restraints had been
removed just minutes before our friend’s.

Annotation:

i. Here, the original writer, in an attempt to express the mental image that she
has of the world around her, decides to opt for certain processes and
participants, and has determined in advance which participant will act and
which one will be acted on. As can be noticed, a number of processes are
• used, as in: a material process ‫( و)ﻫﻨﺎك( ﻗﺎم أﺣﺪﻫﻢ ﺑﻨﺰع اﻟﻘﻴﻮد‬and “there” one of
them removed the restraints): the actor is unknown, ‫ ﻗﺎم ﺑﻨﺰع‬, which simply
means ‫( ﻧﺰع‬lit. to take off), is the process of doing, ‫ اﻟﻘﻴﻮد‬is the goal of the
process, and ‫(وﻫﻨﺎك‬and “there”) is an adverb of place.
 • a material process ‫( ﻓﺘﺢ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ‬he opened his eyes): the implicit pronoun ‫ﻫﻮ‬
(he) is the actor of the process, ‫( ﻓﺘﺢ‬to open) is the process of doing, and
‫( ﻋﻴﻨﻴﻪ‬his eyes) is the goal of the process. ← 198 | 199 →
• a material process ‫( وﺟﺪ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ ﻓﺎﺧﺮ‬he found himself in a luxurious
office): the implicit pronoun ‫( ﻫﻮ‬he) is the actor of the process, ‫( وﺟﺪ‬to
find) is the process of doing, and ‫( ﻓﻲ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ ﻓﺎﺧﺮ‬in a a luxurious office) is
an adverb of place. However, this material process functions as an
existential process to indicate that in no time he was in a luxurious
office.
• a material process ‫( ﺗﺘﺸﺎﺟﺮ اﻟﺸﺮاﺋﻂ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻛﺘﻔﻪ‬lit. the stripes are fighting on
his shoulder): ‫( اﻟﺸﺮاﺋﻂ‬the stripes) is the actor of the process, ‫( ﺗﺘﺸﺎﺟﺮ‬to
fight) is the process of doing, and the implicit expression ‫ﺑﻌﻀﻬﺎ اﻟﺒﻌﺾ‬
(each other) is the goal of the process. It is used metaphorically to mean
there are a lot of stripes on his shoulders. So, it functions as an
existential process: an existent ‫( اﻟﺸﺮاﺋﻂ‬the stripes), a process of existing
‫( ﺗﻮﺟﺪ‬there are), and an adverb of place ‫( ﻋﻠﻰ ﻛﺘﻔﻪ‬on his shoulder).
• a material process … ‫( وﻫﻨﺎﻟﻚ ﻣﻦ ﻫﻮ ﻣﺜﻠﻪ اﻧﺘﺰﻋﺖ ﻗﻴﻮده ﻗﺒﻞ ﺻﺎﺣﺒﻨﺎ ﺑﺪﻗﺎﺋﻖ ﻓﻘﻂ‬and
there was someone else like him whose restraints had been removed just
minutes before our friend’s): the actor is unknown referring to anybody,
thus evoking different memories and imaginations in the mind of the
reader, ‫ اﻧﺘﺰع‬derived from the verb ‫( ﻧﺰع‬lit. to take off) is the process of
doing, ‫( اﻟﻘﻴﻮد‬the restraints) is the goal of the process, ‫(وﻫﻨﺎك‬and there) is
an adverb of place, and ‫( ﻗﺒﻞ … ﺑﺪﻗﺎﺋﻖ ﻓﻘﻂ‬just minutes before …) is an
adverb of time.
ii. Further, through the nexus of translation, extra attention is paid to verb
tenses. The relative clause … ‫ﻲ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺣﻮاﺳﻪ‬indicates
‫اﻟﺘ‬ that first the restraints
had covered his senses, and then one of them removed the restraints.
Similarly, … ‫اﻧﺘﺰﻋﺖ ﻗﻴﻮده‬indicates that first the restraints of someone else had
been removed, and then the restraints of the main character were removed.
iii. Here ‫ ﻟﻴﺠﺪ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ ﻓﺎﺧﺮ ﻳﺸﻐﻠﻪ ﺿﺎﺑﻂ‬, which is in the active form, lends
itself to passive to find himself in a luxurious office occupied by an officer.
The main reason behind this is to make the text read smoothly and cogently.
This is an example of a structure shift, to borrow Catford’s (1965) term.
Structure shift occurs when there is a grammatical change between the
structure of the source text and that of the target text. ← 199 | 200 →

Exercise 8
ST:

… ‫ﻗﺎم أﺣﺪﻫﻢ ﺑﻄﻠﻲ إﺑﻬﺎﻣﻪ ﺑﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻗﺎﺗﻢ ﻟﺰج ﺛﻢ ﻧﺰع ﻳﺪه وأﻟﺼﻘﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ورﻗﺔ ﺑﻴﻀﺎء وأﺧﺬ‬
‫ﻳﻀﻐﻂ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ وﻳﺤﺮﻛﻬﺎ ﻳﻤﻴﻨﺎ ً وﻳﺴﺎرا ً ﺣﺘﻰ ﺣﺼﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺻﻮرة ﻛﺎﻣﻠﺔ ﻟﺒﺼﻤﺘﻪ‬

TT:

One of them dipped our friend’s thumb in a dark sticky liquid, then took out
his hand and stuck it on a blank piece of paper. He started pressing on it
moving it to the right and left until he got a complete image of his fingerprint.

Annotation:

i. The verb ‫( ﻗﺎم‬to stand) when it is followed by a prepositional phrase, such

as ‫ ﺑﻄﻠﻲ‬simply means ‫ﻃﻠﻰ‬, that is, to paint. However, the verb ‫ﻃﻠﻰ‬in such a
context lends itself to to dip as this is what is meant by the original writer.
ii. What is meant by the verb ‫( ﻧﺰع‬to take off) here is that one of the soldiers,
having dipped the defendant’s thumb into a dark sticky liquid, took it out of
the liquid to stick it on a piece of paper. As such, rendering it literally will
produce an inaccurate and misleading mental image.
iii. To reflect singularity/plurality of the noncountable noun, viz. paper, words
like piece, item, article, etc. can be employed.
iv. The denotative meaning of ‫( أﺧﺬ‬to take) is to carry somebody or something,
or to go with somebody from one place to another. However, when it is
followed by a verb in the present tense, such as ‫( ﻳﻀﻐﻂ‬to press), the
emphasis is placed on the continuity of the act of pressing in a specific
period of time in the past, and thus it is best rendered as to begin or to start
in the past.

Exercise 9

ST:

‫ﻓﻲ ﻫﺬه اﻷﺛﻨﺎء ﻛﺎن اﻟﻀﺎﺑﻂ ذو اﻟﺸﺮاﺋﻂ اﻟﻜﺜﻴﺮة … ﻳﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺑﺼﻤﺔ اﻟﻤﻮاﻃﻦ اﻟﺬي ﺳﺒﻖ ﺻﺎﺣﺒﻨﺎ إﻟﻰ‬
‫…ﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻮرق اﻟﻤﻘﻮّى وﻗﺪ ﻛ ُﺒ ّﺮت ﺣﺘﻰ أﺿﺤﺖ واﺿﺤﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻊ ﺑﺼﻤﺔ ﻛﺒﻴﺮة ﺗﺤﺘ ّﻞ وﺣﺪﻫﺎﺻﻔﺤ‬ (‫)ﻫﻨﺎك‬
… ‫» اﻧﻪ ﻫﻮ‬. ‫ﺗﻤﺎﻣﺎ ﺑﻜﻞ ﺗﻀﺎرﻳﺴﻬﺎ …ﺻﺎح اﻟﻀﺎﺑﻂ ﺑﺄﺣﺪ اﻟﻌﺴﺎﻛﺮ ﻣﺸﻴﺮا إﻟﻰ اﻟﻤﻮاﻃﻦ‬
201 | 200 ← … « ‫→ اﻟﻤﺘﻤﺮد … ﺧﺬوه‬
TT:

Meanwhile, the officer with a multitude of stripes was comparing the

fingerprint of the citizen, who had preceded our friend “there”, to a huge
fingerprint that, by itself, took up an entire piece of cardboard. It had been
magnified until all of its features had been rendered completely clear. The
officer shouted at one of the enlisted men, pointing to the citizen “It’s him,
it’s the insubordinate, take him away”.

Annotation:

i. As can be observed, in the original text, a combination of both past

(expressed by ‫ ﻛﺎن‬and ‫ت‬ ْ ‫ )ﻛ ُﺒﺮ‬and present (expressed by ‫ ) ﺗﺤﺘﻞ‬is used. To begin
with the first instance ‫ ﻛﺎن ﻳﻄﺎﺑﻖ‬, the emphasis is placed on the continuity of
the described action in a specific period of time in the past. Semantically
speaking, the act of comparing the two fingerprints is durative (occupying
time), dynamic (not static) and atelic (having no natural finishing point, but
the actor has to decide to stop comparing the two fingerprints for a
particular reason). It therefore lends itself to a simple continuous tense in
English, that is, was comparing. However, the emphasis in the second
example ‫ت‬ ْ ‫ ﻛ ُﺒﺮ‬is placed on the duration of the described action that began in
the past and is seen relevant to the act of comparing the two fingerprints,
thereby suggesting a past perfect tense, that is, had been magnified. With
respect to the verb ‫ ﺗﺤﺘﻞ‬, there is an implicit ‫ﻛﺎن‬. However, the emphasis is
put on the completion of the described state of affairs, thus lending itself
well to the translation took up.
ii. Here, it is worth noting that there is a difference in meaning between ‫ﺻﺎح‬
‫ ﺑـ‬, i.e., with a view to scolding somebody, and ‫ ﺻﺎح ﻟـ‬, i.e., with a view to
drawing somebody’s attention. As such, shouted at is used in place of
shouted to.

Exercise 10

ST:

» … ‫…ﺳﺤﺐ رﺳﻢ ﺑﺼﻤﺘﻪ اﻟﺬي ﻛﺎن ﻗﺪ ﺟﻒ … وﻃﺎﺑﻘﻪ ﻣﻊ ﻧﻔﺲ‬ ‫ﺛﻢ اﻟﺘﻔﺖ إﻟﻰ ﺻﺎﺣﺒﻨﺎ و‬
202 | 201 ← ‫ » إﻧﻪ ﻫﻮ … اﻟﻤﺘﻤﺮد … ﺧﺬوه‬:‫→ اﻟﺒﺼﻤﺔ اﻟُﻤﻜﺒ ّﺮة … وﻋﺎد ﻳﻘﻮل‬
TT:

Then, the officer turned to our friend and pulled up the depiction of his
fingerprint which had dried and compared it to the magnified fingerprint.
Once again, he stated: “It’s him, it’s the insubordinate, take him away”.

Annotation:

i. In the original text, there are four processes, namely process of doing ‫ا ِﻟﺘﻔﺖ إﻟﻰ‬
‫ ﺻﺎﺣﺒﻨﺎ‬, process of doing ‫ﻒ‬ ّ ‫ﺳﺤﺐ رﺳﻢ ﺑﺼﻤﺘﻪ اﻟﺬي ﻛﺎن ﻗﺪ ﺟ‬ , process of doing ‫ﻃﺎﺑﻘﻪ‬
‫ ﻣﻊ ﻧﻔﺲ اﻟﺼﻮرة اﻟﻤﻜﺒ ّﺮة‬and process of saying ‫ وﻋﺎد ﻳﻘﻮل‬. It is worth noting that the
second and third processes are conjoined by the additive connector ‫( و‬and),
thus indicating that there is no time span between the two processes ‫ﺳﺤﺐ رﺳﻢ‬
‫( ﺑﺼﻤﺘﻪ … وﻃﺎﺑﻘﻪ‬he pulled up the depiction of his fingerprint … and
compared it). As such, an attempt is made here to avoid translating it into
something like to or in order to. Resorting to connectors, such as to or in
order to, for instance, will safeguard acceptability, readability and
naturalness. However, it will create a time gap that slows down the the
psychological speed of events.
ii. Further, the emphasis in the original relative clause ‫ﻒ‬ ّ ‫ﻟﺬي ﻛﺎن ﻗﺪ ﺟ‬is
‫ ا‬placed on
the duration of the action that began in the past and is seen as relevant to the
act of pulling up the depiction of his fingerprint. It therefore lends itself to a
past perfect tense had dried. The change in aspect from perfect aspect to
simple aspect will definitely produce a change in time reference, thereby
affecting the pragmatic communicative effect.

Exercise 11

ST:

… ‫ﻀﺎ ً … ﻛﻤﺎ ﻟﻮ أن ﺻﺎﺣﺒﻨﺎ ﺳﺒﻖ وﺻﻔﻌﻪ … اﻧﺘﺎﺑﺘﻪ اﻟﺪﻫﺸﺔ‬

ّ ‫وإذا ﺑﺎﻟﻌﺴﻜﺮي ﻳﻨﺪﻓﻊ إﻟﻴﻪ ﻣﻨﻘ‬
‫واﻟﺤﻴﺮة ﻓﻲ آن واﺣﺪ ﻣﻌﺎ‬

TT:

Suddenly, the soldier rushed headlong into him as if our friend had just
slapped him. Our friend’s feelings were a mixture of amazement and
confusion all at once. ← 202 | 203 →
Annotation:

i. Here, although the verb ‫( ﻳﻨﺪﻓﻊ‬to rush) is used in the present, the emphasis
is on the completion of the described act, thus lending itself to a simple past
tense rushed. This is an example of “intra-system shift” to use Catford’s
(1965) terminology. Intra-system shifts occur when a noncorresponding
term, expression or structure in the target language is opted for. To round it
off, intra-system shifts occur when the formal equivalent, that is, a term,
expression or structure that formally corresponds to that of the original text
is ignored (p. 80).
ii. Further, the author, in an attempt to create a clear mental image in the mind
of her readers regarding the soldier’s way of rushing to him, opts to use the
adverb of manner ً ‫ﻀﺎ‬
ّ ‫ ﻣﻨﻘ‬. To reflect the same mental image conjured up in the
mind of the source-language reader, a professional translator may well use
headlong upon/at/down/into as they collocate well with the verb to rush.
Alternatively, the following could be used: He suddenly bore down on him
… as to bear down on someone means to move towards them quickly and
threateningly.
iii. In the source text, two semantically related words, viz. ‫ دﻫﺸﺔ‬and ‫ﺣﻴﺮة‬, are
used. To render such semantically related words, the translators may opt for
merging the two words used in the source text into one word in the target
text. Or, they may resort to changing the part of speech of one of the words
used in the source text. Alternatively, they may well maintain them, in
particular when there is a slight difference between their meanings. As there
is a semantic difference between the two words ‫( دﻫﺸﺔ‬referring to the state
of being surprised) and ‫( ﺣﻴﺮة‬referring to the state of not being able to think
clearly or to know what to do), an attempt has been made to maintain the
distinction between them in the target text.

Exercise 12

ST:

‫ ﻋﻔﻮا ً ﻳﺎ ﺳﻴﺪي أ‬:‫ﻗﺎل ﻟﻠﻀﺎﺑﻂ ﺑﺘﺄدب ﻣﻔﺘﻌﻞ‬

‫…ﻟﻢ ﺗﺘﻄﺎﺑﻖ ذات اﻟﺒﺼﻤﺔ ﻣﻊ اﻟﻤﻮاﻃﻦ …اﻟﺬي‬
204 | 203 ← ‫→ ﺳﺒﻘﻨﻲ‬

TT:
 He said to the officer with forced politeness: “Pardon me sir. Isn’t that the
same fingerprint that matched the citizen who went in front of me?”

Annotation:

i. The emphasis in the process of saying ‫ ﻗﺎل ﻟﻠﻀﺎﺑﻂ ﺑﺘﺄدب ﻣﻔﺘﻌﻞ‬is placed on the
completion of the act of saying, thus lending itself to a simple past tense,
that is, he said….
ii. Here, the original writer, in an attempt to indicate the main character’s way
of speaking with the officer in her written mode of discourse, resorts to the
use of an adverb of manner, that is, ‫ﺑﺘﺄدب ﻣﻔﺘﻌﻞ‬. To reflect this mode of
discourse that indicates the main character’s way of speaking with the
officer on the one hand, and produce an accurate mental image in the mind
of the target reader on the other, the translators may well resort to
expressions, such as with forced politeness.

Exercise 13

ST:

‫ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺄﻛﻴﺪ‬ . ‫ ﻧﻌﻢ … وﻣﺎذا ﻓﻲ ذﻟﻚ‬:‫أﺟﺎب اﻟﻀﺎﺑﻂ وﻫﻮ ﻳﺮﺗﺪي اﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﺠﻤﻊ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﺎﻟﻲ واﻟﺴﺨﺮﻳﺔ‬
‫… ﺗﻄﺎﺑﻘﺖ ﻣﻊ ﺑﺼﻤﺘﻪ … ﻓﻬﻮ اﻵﺧﺮ ﻣﺘﻤﺮد‬

TT:

The officer answered, wearing a smile with a trace of both arrogance and
sarcasm: “Yes, what about it? It exactly matched his fingerprint, as he too is
insubordinate”.

Annotation:

i. The emphasis in the source text is placed on the completion of the actions,
namely ‫(أﺟﺎب‬to answer or to reply) and ‫( ﺗﻄﺎﺑﻘﺖ‬to match). To reflect the
emphasis, a simple past tense may be used. ← 204 | 205 →
ii. In discussing the semantic roles of the arguments in the above example, the
source text can be divided into three main parts:
 …‫ ﻧﻌﻢ … وﻣﺎذا ﻓﻲ ذﻟﻚ‬:‫• أﺟﺎب اﻟﻀﺎﺑﻂ وﻫﻮ ﻳﺮﺗﺪي اﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﺠﻤﻊ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﺎﻟﻲ واﻟﺴﺨﺮﻳﺔ‬
…‫ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺗﻄﺎﺑﻘﺖ ﻣﻊ ﺑﺼﻤﺘﻪ‬ •
.‫ﻓﻬﻮ اﻵﺧﺮ ﻣﺘﻤﺮد‬ •

To begin with the first part, there are four arguments, namely ‫( اﻟﻀﺎﺑﻂ‬the officer)
filling the role of actor, the clause ‫( وﻫﻮ ﻳﺮﺗﺪي اﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﺠﻤﻊ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﺎﻟﻲ واﻟﺴﺨﺮﻳﺔ‬while he
was wearing a smile with a trace of both arrogance and sarcasm) filling the role
of manner, and two themes ‫( ﻧﻌﻢ‬yes) and ‫( و ﻣ ﺎ ذ ا ﻓ ﻲ ذ ﻟ ﻚ‬and what about that).
Further, the clause of manner ‫( وﻫﻮ ﻳﺮﺗﺪي اﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﺠﻤﻊ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﺎﻟﻲ واﻟﺴﺨﺮﻳﺔ‬while he was
wearing a smile with a trace of both arrogance and sarcasm) can be further
broken down into two main arguments (i.e., ‫( ﻫﻮ‬he) filling the role of actor and
‫( اﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ‬a smile) filling the role of theme) that have an underlying relation with
the verb ‫( ﻳﺮﺗﺪي‬to wear).
As for the second part ‫ﺑ ﺎ ﻟ ﺘ ﺄ ﻛ ﻴ ﺪ ﺗ ﻄ ﺎ ﺑ ﻘ ﺖ ﻣ ﻊ ﺑ ﺼ ﻤ ﺘ ﻪ‬ (Surely, it matched his
fingerprint), there are two referents, viz. ‫( ﺑﺼﻤﺘﻚ‬your fingerprint) expressed by
the letter ‫ ت‬attached to the verb ‫( ﺗﻄﺎﺑﻖ‬to match) filling the role of actor and
‫( ﺑﺼﻤﺘﻪ‬his fingerprint) filling the role of theme.
In the third part ‫( ﻫﻮ اﻵﺧﺮ ﻣﺘﻤﺮد‬he too is insubordinate), there are three referring
expressions, viz. ‫( ﻫﻮ‬he), ‫( اﻵﺧﺮ‬the other), and ‫( ﻣﺘﻤﺮد‬insubordinate), which refer to
the same referent. It is a nominal sentence that lacks the copula verb be. As such,
the argument ‫( ﻫﻮ‬he) fills the role of theme and ‫( ﻣﺘﻤﺮد‬insubordinate) fills the role
of associate or predicate as it tells the status of the first argument.
Full consideration has been given here to the verbs used along with their
arguments to produce an accurate mental image.

iii. The denotative meaning of the verb ‫( ﻳﺮﺗﺪي‬to wear) is narrower and more
specific than its counterpart in the target text as the verb to wear in English
collocates well with a number of nouns, as in to wear shoes, to wear one’s
hair up, to wear one’s beard, to wear perfume, to wear a smile, etc. As
such, translating the verb ‫ ﻳﺮﺗﺪي‬into to wear is an example of generalizing
translation. ← 205 | 206 →
iv. Attention is paid to the particle ‫ ﻓــ‬in Arabic as a wide range of functions
can be performed by it. It can be used (1) to show immediate succession, (2)
to connect two clauses having a cause-effect relationship, (3) to demarcate
the sentence borders, (4) in a conditional clause in certain cases, and (5)
with some articles, such as ... ‫ ﻓ ـ‬، ... ‫… أﻣﺎ‬,‫ ﻓ ـ‬، ... ‫ﻰ ا ﻟ ﺮ ﻏ ﻢ ﻣ ﻦ‬,‫ﻋ ﻠ‬and so forth.
Here, it is used to connect two clauses having a cause-effect relationship,
 thus lending itself to connectors, such as so, as, and the like.
v. Translating the word ‫ ﻣﺘﻤّﺮد‬into insubordinate is an example of modulation,
to use Vinay and Darbelnet’s (1958/1995: 89) term. According to them,
modulation refers to “a variation of the form of the message, obtained by
changing point of view”. Here, the addition of the prefix in- (meaning not)
changes the meaning of the word subordinate (referring to a person who is
of lower rank or position, that is, ‫ ُﻣﻨﺼﺎع‬/‫ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ‬/‫ )ﻣﺮؤوس‬to refer to a person who
does not want to be considered of lower rank or position, that is, ‫ﻣﺘﻤّﺮد‬.
| 207 →

Bibliography

Abdel-Fattah, M. M. (2005). “On the Translation of Modals from English into

Arabic and Vice Versa: The Case of Deontic Modality”, Babel, Vol. 51 (1),
pp. 31–48.
‘Abid, K. (2010). ‫( ﻟﻴﺎﻟﻲ اﻟﺴﻴﺪ ﺳﻠﻤﺎن‬Nights of Mr Salman). London: Sayyab Books
Ltd.
Aitchison, J. (1999). Linguistics (5th edn). London: Teach Yourself Series.
Akmajian, A., Demers, R. A., Farmer, A. K., and Harnish, A. K. (2010).
Linguistics: An Introduction to Language and Communication (6th edn).
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Al-Hinai, M. A. S. (2015). A Translation of “Mr Twiddle in Trouble Again”
Story and Commenting on Semantic Problems. BA Translation Project.
Oman: University of Nizwa.
Ali, A. Y. (1934/2006). The Meaning of the Glorious Quran. Vol. 1. Beirut and
Cairo: Dār Al-Kitāb al-Lubnāni wa Dār Al-Kitāb Al-Masrī.
Ali, M. (2013). Women’s Liberation through Islam. Accessed on 24 June 2015:
<http://www.islamreligion.com>.
Al-Jabr, A. M. (1987). Cohesion in Text Differentiation: A Study of English and
Arabic, unpublished PhD thesis: University of Aston.
Al-Khanjarī, M. S. M. (2014). A Translation of an Excerpt from the Fairy Tale
“The King of the Golden River” with a Focus on Semantic and Textual
Aspects. BA Translation Project. Oman: University of Nizwa.
Al-Māni‘, S. (1997). ‫(اﻟﻘﺎﻣﻌﻮن‬The Oppressors). London: al-Ightirāb al-Adabī.
Almanna, A. (2014). Translation Theories Exemplified from Cicero to Pierre
Bourdieu. Germany: Lincom Europa.
——. (2016). The Routledge Course in Translation Annotation: Arabic-English-
Arabic. London/New York: Routledge.
Almanna, A., and Almanna, F. (2008). Translation: History, Theory and
 Practice (in Arabic). London: Sayyab Books Ltd.
Almanna, F. (2010). Dictionary of English Phrasal Verbs. London: Sayyab
Books Ltd.
Al-Nāsir, S. A. (trans.; 2006). Mahmūd Al-Braikān: Selected Poems (1954–
1993; bilingual edn). Baghdad: Dār Al-Mā’mūn.
Al-Qinai, J. (2008). “Translating Modals between English and Arabic”,
Translation and Interpreting Studies, Vol. 3.1/3.2, pp. 30–67.
Al-Ramlī, M. (2009). ‫ﻲ‬ ّ ‫ﺤﺚ ﻋﻦ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺣ‬(Search
‫اﻟﺒ‬ for a Live Heart). London: Sayyab
Books Ltd. ← 207 | 208 →
Al-Rubai’i, A. (1996). Translation Criticism: A Model for Assessing the
Translation of Narrative Fictional Texts, unpublished PhD. Iraq: Al-
Mustansiriya University.
——. (2005). Translation Criticism. Durham: Durham Modern Languages
Series.
Al-Sa‘dī, S. (2015). Life in Japan. MA Translation Project. Oman: University of
Nizwa.
Al-Shehari, K. (2001). The Semiotics and Translation Advertising Texts:
Conventions, Constraints and Translation Strategies with Particular
Reference to English and Arabic, unpublished PhD thesis: University of
Manchester.
Al-Shuraīqī, M. (2016). Translating Part of Hans Küng’s Book Islam: Past,
Present and Future. BA Translation Project. Oman: University of Nizwa.
Al-Takarlī, F. (2009). ‫(اﻟﺘﺒﺎس‬Confusion). London: Sayyab Books Ltd.
Arberry, A. J. (1955/1996). The Koran Interpreted. London: George Allen and
Unwin.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Aziz, Y. (1989). A Contrastive Grammar of English and Arabic. Iraq: Mosul
University Press.
Baker, E. A., and Hengeveld, K. (eds; 2012). Linguistics. Oxford: Wiley-
Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Baker, M. (1992). In Other Words. London/New York: Routledge.
Bell, R. T. (1991). Translation and Translating: Theory and Practice.
London/New York: Longman.
Berns, M., and Matsuda, P. K. (2006). Applied Linguistics: Overview and
History. In K. Brown (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics
(2nd edn), pp. 394–405. Oxford: Elsevier.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., and Leech, G. (2002). Longman Student Grammar of
Spoken and Written English. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Bybee, J., and Fleischman, S. (1995). “Modality in Grammar and Discourse: An
Introductory Essay”. In J. Bybee and S. Fleischman (eds), Modality in
Grammar and Discourse, pp. 1–14. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA:
Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Carter, R. (1998). Vocabulary: Applied Linguistic Perspectives. London/New
York: Routledge.
Catford, J. C. (1965). A Linguistic Theory of Translation. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Celce-Murcia, M., and Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The Grammar Book: An
ESL/EFL Teacher’s Course (2nd edn). Boston: Heinle and Heinle
Publishers Inc.
Chesterman, A. (1997/2000). Memes of Translation: The Spread of Ideas in
Translation Theory. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton.
——. (1968). Language and Mind. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Cook, G. (2003). Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Corbett, E. P. (1971). Classical Rhetoric for Modern Student. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. ← 208 | 209 →
Cowie, A. P. (2009). Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cowie, A. P., and Mackin, R. (1993). Oxford Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs (2nd
edn). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Crystal, D. (1980). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Cambridge: Basil
Blackwell.
——. (1997). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language (2nd edn). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Denham, K., and Lobeck, A. (eds; 2010). Linguistics at School: Language
Awareness in Primary and Secondary Education. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Dickins, J., Hervey, S., and Higgins, I. (2002). Thinking Arabic Translation.
 London/New York: Routledge.
Downing, A., and Locke, P. (1992). A University Course in English Grammar.
Hemel Hempstead: Phoenix ELT.
Elgin, S. H. (1979). What Is Linguistics? (2nd edn). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Elyas, A. E. (trans.; 1987). The Thief and the Dogs. Jeddah: Dār Al-Shurūq.
Enani, M. (trans.) (2006). ‫( اﻻﺳﺘﺸﺮاق‬Orientalism). Cairo: Rū’iya for Publishing
and Distribution.
Erman, B., and Warren, B. (2000). “The idiom principle and the open choice
principle”, Text, Vol. 20 (1), pp. 29–62.
Faiq, S., and Sabry, R. (2013). “Altered Semiotics through Translation”, STJ:
Sayyab Translation Journal, Vol. 5, pp. 45–56.
Farghal, M. (2008). “Extrinsic Managing: An Epitaph to Translational
Ideological Move”, STJ: Sayyab Translation Journal, Vol. 1, pp. 1–26.
——. (2012). Advanced Issues in Arabic-English Translation Studies. Kuwait:
Kuwait University Press.
Farghal, M., and Almanna, A. (2015). Contextualizing Translation Theories:
Aspects of Arabic-English Interlingual Communication. Newcastle upon
Tyne: Cambridge Scholars publishing.
Farghal, M., and Bloushi, N. (2012). “Shifts of Coherence in Quran
Translation”, STJ: Sayyab Translation Journal, Vol. 4, pp. 1–18.
Farghal, M., and Shunnaq, A. (1999). Translation with Reference to English and
Arabic: A Practical Guide (1st edn). Jordan: Dār al-Hilāl for Translation.
Fillmore, C. (1977). “Scenes-and-frames Semantics”. In A. Zampolli (ed.),
Linguistic Structures Processing. Amsterdam: North Holland, pp. 55–82.
——. (1982). “Frame Semantics”. In Linguistics Society of Korea (ed.),
Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing, pp. 111–137.
Fiske, J. (1990). Introduction to Communication Studies. London: Routledge.
Francis, G. (1993). “A Corpus-Driven Approach to Grammar: Principles,
Methods and Examples”. In M. Baker, G. Francis and E. Tognini-Bonelli
(eds), Text and ← 209 | 210 → Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair,
pp. 137–156. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Fromkin, V., and Rodman, R. (1978). An Introduction to Language (2nd edn).
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., and Hyams, N. (2003). An Introduction to Language
(7th edn). USA: Heinle, a Part of Thomson Corporation.
Ghazala. H. (2011). Cognitive Stylistics and the Translator. London: Sayyab
Books Ltd.
Goddard, C. (1998/2011). Semantic Analysis: A Practical Introduction. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Grice, H. P. (1975). “Logic and Conversation”. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan
(eds), Syntax and Semantics, 3: Speech Acts, pp. 41–58. New York:
Academic Press.
Griffiths, P. (2006). An Introduction to English Semantics and Pragmatics.
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Grutman, R. (2009). “Multilingualism”. In M. Baker and G. Saldanha (eds),
Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies (2nd edn), pp. 182–185.
London/New York: Routledge.
Hall, C. J., Smith, P. H., and Wicaksono, R. (2011). Mapping Applied
Linguistics. A Guide for Students and Practitioners. London/New York:
Routledge.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1970). “Functional Diversity in Language as Seen from a
Consideration of Modality and Mood in English”, Foundations of
Language: International Journal of Language and Philosophy, Vol. 6, pp.
322–361.
——. (1976). “Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English. Part 2”,
International Journal of Language and Philosophy, Vol. 3 (1), pp. 199–
244.
Hatim, B., and Mason, I. (1990). Discourse and the Translator. London:
Longman.
Hoye, L. (1997). Adverbs and Modality in English. London: Longman.
Huang, Y. (2007). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Husni, R., and Newman, D. (trans; 2008). Modern Arabic Short Stories: A
Bilingual Reader. London: Saqi Books.
Jarjour, M. (2006). A Relevance-Theoretic Account of the Translation of
Ideological Assumptions in the Language of the News with Specific
Reference to Translation from English into Arabic, unpublished PhD thesis:
University of Salford.
Kearns, K. (2000/2011). Semantics. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave
 Macmillan.
Keith, A. (2001). Natural Language Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers
Ltd.
Kreidler, C. W. (1998). Introducing English Semantics. London/New York.
Routledge.
Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
Lehrer, A. (1974). Semantic Fields and Lexical Structure. Amsterdam: North
Holland.
Lenneberg, E. (1967). The Biological Foundations of Language. New York:
John Wiley and Sons.
Liardet, F. (trans.; 1993). Adrift on the Nile. Nobel Laureates In Search of
Identity and Integrity: Voices of Different Cultures. New York: Doubleday.
← 210 | 211 →
López, A. M. R. (2002). “Applying Frame Semantics to Translation: A Practical
Example”, Meta: Translators’ Journal, Vol. 47 (3), pp. 312–350.
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McArthur, T., and Atkins, B. (1974). Dictionary of English Phrasal Verbs and
their Idioms. London/Glasgow: Collins.
Mahfouz, N. (1959/2006): ‫( أ و ﻻ د ﺣ ﺎ ر ﺗ ﻨ ﺎ‬Children of the Alley/Children of
Gebelaawi). Cairo: Dār Al-Shurūq.
——. (1961/1973). ‫(ﻠﺺ واﻟﻜﻼب‬The ‫اﻟ‬ Thief and the Dogs). Cairo: Maktabat Misr.
——. (1966). ‫( ﺛﺮﺛﺮة ﻓﻮق اﻟﻨﻴﻞ‬Adrift on the Nile). Cairo: Dār Misr liltibā‘a.
——. (1971/1977). ‫( ﺑﺪاﻳﺔ وﻧﻬﺎﻳﺔ‬The Beginning and the End). Beirut: Dār Al-
Qalam.
Mutī‘, Z. D. (n.d.). ‫(اﻟﺬي أﺿﺎع أﻣﻪ‬He Who Lost His Mother). No publisher.
Nāsir, ‘A. (2009). ‫( ﺛ ﻼ ث ﻗ ﺼ ﺺ ﻟ ﻴ ﺴ ﺖ ﻟ ﻠ ﻨ ﺸ ﺮ‬Three Stories not for Publishing).
London: Sayyab Books Ltd.
Neubert, A., and Shreve, G. M. (1992). Translation as Text. Kent, OH: The Kent
State University Press.
Newmark, P. (1981). Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pegamon.
——. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. New
York/London/Toronto/Sydney/Tokyo: Prentice Hall.
Nida, E. A. (1975). Componential Analysis of Meaning. The Hague: Mouton.
Nöth, W. (1990). Handbook of Semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University
 Press.
Oxford Wordpower. (2010). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Palmer, F. R. (1976). Semantics: A New Outline. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Parker, F., and Riley, K. (1994–2010). Linguistics for Non-Linguists. Boston:
Pearson.
Peirce, C. S. (1931–1958). Collected Papers. Hartshorne, C. and Weiss, P. (eds),
Vols 1–6; Burks, A. W. (ed.), Vols 7–8. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press,
Harvard University Press. (In-text references are to CP, followed by
volume and paragraph numbers).
Perkins, M. R. (1983). Modal Expressions in English. London: Frances Pinter.
Pertilli, S. (1992). “Translation, Semiotics and Ideology”, TTR: Traduction,
Terminologie, Redaction, Vol. 5 (1), pp. 233–264.
Pickthall, M. (1930/2006). The Glorious Koran. London: George Allen and
Unwin.
Pragnell, F. (trans.; 2013). ‫( داﻧﺎ واﻟﻔﺌﺮان‬Dana and the Mice). London: Sayyab
Books Ltd.
Riemer. N. (2010). Introducing Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Rowe, B. M., and Levine, D. P. (2006/2009). A Concise Introduction to
Linguistics. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
Sabra, M. M. A. (2003). Translation of Contracts (in Arabic). Cairo: Dār Al-
Kutub Al-Qānūniyya.
Sadkhan, R., and Pragnell, F. (trans.; 2012). ‫( اﻟﺸﺒﺎك واﻟﺴﺎﺣﺔ‬The Window and the
Courtyard). London: Sayyab Books Ltd. ← 211 | 212 →
Saeed, J. I. (2009). Semantics (3rd edn). United Kingdom: Wiley Blackwell.
Said, E. (1978/2003). Orientalism. London: Penguin.
Saussure, F. de (1916/1983). Cours de linguistique générale. Paris: Editions
Payot. Translated (1983) by Harris, R. as Course in General Linguistics.
London: Duckworth.
Schank, R. C., and Abelson R. P. (1977). Scripts, Plans, Goals and
Understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Searle, J. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shen, D. (1987). Literary Translation and Translation: with Particular
Reference to English Translations of Chinese Prose Fiction, unpublished
PhD thesis: University of Edinburgh.
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, Concordance and Collocation. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
——. (1998). “The lexical Item”. In E. Weigand (ed.), Contrastive Lexical
Semantics, pp. 1–24. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
——. (2008). “The Phrase, the Whole Phrase and Nothing but the Phrase”. In S.
Granger and F. Meunier (eds), Phraseology: An Interdisciplinary
Perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. pp. 407–410.
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., and Martinez, R. (2014). “The Idiom Principle
Revisited”. Applied Linguistics, pp. 1–22. doi: 10.1093/applin/amto54.
Slobin, D. I. (1971). Psycholinguistics. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
Stam, R., Burgoyne, R., and Flitterman-Lewis, S. (1992). New Vocabularies in
Film Semiotics: Structuralism, Post-Structuralism and Beyond. London:
Routledge.
Starkey, P. (trans.; 2008). The Oppressors. No publisher.
Steenbergen, G. van (2002). “Componential analysis of meaning and cognitive
linguistics”, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages, Vol. 28 (1), pp. 19–
38.
Stewart, P. (trans.; 1995). Children of Gebelaawi (3rd edn). Colorado Springs:
Three Continents Press Ltd.
Thakur, D. (1999). Linguistics Simplified: Semantics. New Delhi: Bharati
Bhawan.
Theroux, P. (trans.; 1996). Children of the Alley (1st edn). New York: Anchor
Books.
Trier, J. (1931). Der deutsche Wortschatz im Sinnbezirk des Verstandes. Die
Geschichte eines sprachlichen Feldes. Heidelberg: Winter.
Trotter, W. (2000). Translation Salience: A Model of Equivalence in Translation
(Arabic/English), unpublished PhD thesis: University of Sydney.
Trudgill, P. (1983). Sociolinguistics: An Introduction to Language and Society.
Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Turton, N., and Manser, M. (1985). The Student’s Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs.
London and Basingstoke: Macmillan. ← 212 | 213 →
Vinay, J. P., and Darbelnet, J. (1958/1995). Stylistique comparée du français et
de l’anglais. Méthode de traduction, Paris: Didier. J. C. Sager and M. J.
Hamel (trans and eds; 1995) Comparative Stylistics of French and English:
A Methodology for Translation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John
Benjamins.
Winkel, E. (trans.; 2010). Nights of Mr Salman. London: Sayyab Books Ltd.
Yāsīn, L. M. (n.d.). ‫( ﺑﺼﻤﺔ ﻣﻮاﻃﻦ‬A Citizen’s Fingerprint), unpublished short
story.
Yule. G. (1985/1996). The Study of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
——. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zangana, H. (2009). ‫(ﻣﺜﻮى‬Dwelling). London: Sayyab Books Ltd.
Zarāfa, Y. bin (2013). ‫(داﻧﺎ واﻟﻔﺌﺮان‬Dana and the Mice). London: Sayyab Books
Ltd.
| 215 →

Index

Abelson, R. P. 27
ability 8, 21, 81, 82, 86, 91–92, 175, 179
accent 6
acoustic phonetics 4
actor 44, 46, 47, 113, 122–126, 130, 131, 132, 138, 149, 167, 198, 199, 201, 205
advisability 82, 88–89, 94
affected participant 124, 125, 126, 132
affecting participant 126, 127
affective meaning 153, 157, 158, 172
affix(ation) 40, 49–63
agent 122–128, 129, 130, 3132, 133, 134
alliteration 193
allusive meaning 153, 157, 158–159, 193
analytic causative(s) 40
anthropology 7
antonym(s) 19, 20, 99, 101, 103, 105–107, 115, 117
antonymy 19, 20, 99, 105, 106, 117
applied linguistics vii, viii, 9, 11
approach
cognitive 12, 85
general 11
generative 3
synchronic 6
traditional 3
transformational 3
argument(s) 54, 113, 122–132, 133, 134, 205
articulatory phonetics 4
aspect 43, 65–80, 131, 136, 138, 147, 163, 191, 193, 195, 196, 202
perfect 65, 66, 71–72, 195, 202
perfect progressive 65, 71, 72
progressive 65, 66, 69, 70, 72
simple 65, 66–69, 73, 163, 202
zero see simple aspect
aspectual phrasal verbs 136, 147–148
assertive verbs 174, 178
associate 124, 126, 128, 205
associative meaning 153, 157, 158
assonance 192
asyndeton 192
atelic 67, 68, 69, 71, 78, 201
atelicity see atelic
attitudinal meaning 153, 157
attribute 24, 25, 32
auditory phonetics 4
Austin, J. L. 173, 174
benefactive see benefactor
benefactor 124, 125, 126, 128, 129
bilingual 2, 10
bound morpheme(s) 37
Catford, J. C. 43, 59, 68, 71, 74, 160, 199, 203
causativity 35, 36, 40–43, 48, 49, 81
causer 124, 125, 128, 133, 134
chameleon prefix(es) 57–58, 61, 62
Chomsky, N. 3, 4
cognitive approach 12, 85
cognitive school 8
coherence 7
cohesion 7
collocation(al) 103, 113, 141, 142–144, 150, 152, 159, 160, 192, 197, 203, 205
collocative meaning 153, 157, 159–160 ← 215 | 216 →
commissive verb(s) 175
componential analysis vii, 12, 14–19, 31
compositionality 138, 147, 150
conditional speech-act verb(s) 179, 183
connotation vii, 154–162, 168, 169, 193
context(ual) 7, 17, 26, 27, 28, 68, 84, 101, 102, 103, 105, 114, 142, 154, 157,
160, 162, 165, 167, 172, 180, 181, 188, 195, 200
contrastive linguistics 9
conversation analysis 9
converse 19, 106
converseness 106
cooperative principle, the vii, 171, 172, 179–183, 184, 185
correlative conjunction 196
Crystal, D. 3, 172
Darbelnet, J. 107, 206
declarative verb(s) 175–176
decomposition(al) 14, 19
deep structure 3
deictic 137, 188, 197
denotation vii, 154–157, 165, 168
deontic modality 84
derivational morpheme(s) 37
diagnostic component 15, 16, 17, 18
diagnostic features see diagnostic component
dialect 4, 5, 6, 102, 112, 133, 154, 155, 161
direct speech act(s) 174, 178, 179
directive verb(s) 174–175
discourse analysis 6, 7, 9
distinctive component see diagnostic component
effect (as a semantic role) 124, 125, 128
epistemic modality 84, 86
ethnography of communication 6
expectation(s) 82, 84, 88–89
experiencer 113, 123–124, 126, 127
expressive verb(s) 176
feature analysis see componential analysis
field of discourse 7
Fillmore, C. 22, 23, 29, 30
Fiske, J. 162, 163
forensic linguistics 9
formal linguistics 2–6, 10
frame vii, 14, 22, 23, 24–26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32
frame semantics 12, 22–24, 29, 30, 31, 32
free morpheme(s) 37
futurity 92–93, 95, 177
general approach 11
generative approach 3
goal (as a semantic role) 44, 45, 46, 47, 124, 125, 126, 127, 129, 133, 167, 198,
199
gradable antonym(s) 105–106, 117
grammar 2, 3, 4, 8, 22, 37–38, 43, 68, 71, 146
grammatical morpheme(s) 38
Grice, H. P. 180, 181, 182, 183
Halliday, M. A. K. 43, 44, 47, 84, 167
homonym(y) 61, 99, 197, 108, 110–111, 117
homonymous affixes 57
homophone(s) 111–112, 118
homophony 99, 106
hyperonymy 12, 99, 101
hyponym(y) 12, 16, 18, 19, 20, 31, 99, 101, 102, 103, 114, 115
idiolect 6
idiom(atic) 136, 140, 141, 145, 146, 147, 148, 150, 151, 152, 197
idiom principle, the vii, 135, 136, 139–141, 142, 150
idiomatic phrasal verb(s) 136, 148
illocutionary act(s) 173, 174
imitation hypothesis 8
impersonalization 193
implicature vii, 171, 172, 179, 181, 182 ← 216 | 217 →
incompatibility 16
indirect speech act(s) 174
infix(es) 49, 50, 61
inflectional morpheme(s) 37
innateness hypothesis 8
instrument(s) 50, 122, 124, 127, 133
interpretant 154, 165, 167
interpretive semiotics 162
intertextuality 158, 193, 194
intransitive (verb(s)) 42, 43, 61
intra-system shift 74, 160, 203
lack of ability see ability
lack of necessity see necessity
language variation 6
Leech, G. 178, 179
level shift 68, 71
lexeme 15, 25, 101, 107, 108, 197
lexical causative(s) 40
lexical decomposition see componential analysis
lexical morpheme(s) 37
lexical semantics 99–119
lexicography 9
lexicon 3
likelihood 90
linguist 2
linguistics 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 14
literal phrasal verb(s) 136, 147
location (as a semantic role) 123, 124, 127, 130, 131, 133
locutionary act 173
lost opportunities 83, 89, 95
maxim(s)
of manner 180, 181
of quality 180, 181, 182, 183
of quantity 180, 181
of relevance 180, 181
meaning
affective 153, 157, 158, 172
allusive 153, 157, 158–159, 193
associative 153, 157, 158
attitudinal 153, 157
collocative 153, 157, 159–160
reflected 153, 157, 160
stylistic 153, 161
meaning postulates see postulates
modal verb(s) 83, 84, 95, 96
modality 81–97
mode of discourse 7
morpheme(s) 5, 36, 37, 47, 48, 51, 138
bound 37
derivational 37
free 37
grammatical 38
inflectional 37
lexical 37
morphological causatives 40, 41
morphology vii, 3, 5, 10, 35, 36–39, 47, 48, 51, 138
Morris, C. 162
multilingual 2, 10, 63
naming theory 100, 117
necessity 82, 84, 85, 88, 87, 88
Newmark, P. 14, 15, 188
Nida, E. A. 15, 31
nongradable antonym(s) 20, 105, 106, 117
obligation 82, 84, 85, 87, 88
open choice principle, the vii, 135, 136–139, 142, 150
paradigmatic axis vii, 13, 154, 162, 163–167, 168
paradigmatic relation(s) see paradigmatic axis
parallel structure(s) see parallelism
parallelism 115, 188, 192, 194, 197
particularizing translation 18, 114, 115, 156
patient (as a semantic role) 121, 124, 125, 126, 133
Peirce, C. S. 154, 162, 167 ← 217 | 218 →
perfect aspect 65, 66, 71–72, 195, 202
perfect progressive aspect 65, 71, 72
perlocutionary act 173
permission 82, 84, 91
personalization 194
phone(s) 4
phonetics 4, 5, 10
phonology 3, 4, 5, 10, 52
phrasal verb(s) 3, 136, 146–149, 150
phraseological feature(s) 135, 136
phraseological tendency 135, 136
polite request 28, 93
polysemous affix(es) 56
polysemous phrasal verb(s) 148
polysemy 56, 61, 99, 107–109, 110, 117
positioner 131
possibility see likelihood
postulates, meaning vii, 12, 19–22, 31
pragmatics vii, 6, 7, 9, 10, 171–186
predicate 70, 71, 124, 126, 128, 205
preference 83, 93, 94, 95
prefix(ation) 37, 49, 50, 51, 52–53, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 206
primitive 16
principle
cooperative, the vii, 171, 172, 179–183, 184, 185
idiom, the vii, 135, 136, 139–141, 142, 150
open choice, the vii, 135, 136–139, 142, 150
slot-and-filler, the 140
progressive aspect 65, 66, 69, 70, 72
prohibition 82, 87, 88
prototype 25, 29–30
psycholinguistics 8, 10
recipient 124, 125, 126, 127, 129, 133
reference vii, 14, 75, 77, 100–102, 117, 131, 193, 194, 202
referent 17, 18, 19, 100, 122, 154, 160, 161, 165, 205
referring expression 100, 158, 159, 160, 161, 205
reflected meaning 153, 157, 160
register 7, 74, 103
relational antonym(s) 20, 105, 106
resultant 124, 125, 126, 128, 133
Saussure, F. de 3, 162, 163
Schank, R. C. 27
schema 7
script vii, 27–28
Searle, J. 174, 184
semantic case see semantic role
semantic domain see semantic field
semantic features 106, 114
semantic field vii, 11, 12–14, 15, 140
semantic role vii, 113, 121–134, 205
semiotics vii, 162–167, 168
sense vii, 14, 16, 21, 100–102, 107, 117, 142, 155, 174
shift 4, 43, 59, 60, 68, 71, 74, 133, 160, 199, 203
sign 5, 154, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168
signified 5, 165, 167
signifier 5, 154, 165, 167
simile 188, 196, 197
simple aspect 65, 66–69, 73, 163, 202
slot-and-filler principle, the 140
social interaction 6, 7, 174
sociolinguistics 6, 9, 10
source (as a semantic role) 124, 125, 126, 127, 129, 133
speech acts 171, 172, 174, 175, 176, 179, 184, 185
stimulus 124, 126, 127, 133
structural linguistics 3
structural semiotics 162
structuralism 3
stylistic meaning 153, 161 ← 218 | 219 →
suffix(ation) 3, 38, 39, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53–55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 69,
106
supplementary component 15, 16, 18
supplementary feature see supplementary component
surface structure 3
synchronic approach 6
synonym(s) 12, 19, 20, 99, 101, 102–104, 115, 117, 142, 143
synonymy 12, 19, 20, 99, 102–104
syntactic structure 3, 36, 188
syntagmatic axis vii, 13, 154, 162, 163, 164, 168
syntagmatic relation(s) see syntagmatic axis
syntax vii, 3, 5, 10, 35, 36, 48, 52, 136, 138
telic 67, 70, 71, 78
telicity see telic
tenor of discourse 7
tense(s) 37, 42, 44, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 92,
129, 131, 137, 138, 167, 177, 191, 192, 193, 195, 196, 199, 200, 201, 202,
203, 204
terminological tendency 135, 136
thematic role see semantic role
theme 113, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 129, 130, 131, 132, 132, 205
theta role see semantic role
traditional approach 3
transformational approach 3
transitive (verb(s)) 41, 42, 43, 61, 129
transitivity 35, 36, 40, 41, 42, 43–47, 48
translating by a hyponym see particularizing translation
Trier, J. 12
unconditional speech-act verb(s) 179, 183
universal grammar 4
verb(s)
assertive 174, 178
commissive 175
conditional speech-act 179, 183
declarative 175–176
directive 174–175
expressive 176
intransitive 42, 43, 61
modal 83, 84, 95, 96
phrasal 3, 136, 146–149, 150
aspectual 136, 147–148
idiomatic 136, 148
literal 136, 147
polysemous 148
transitive 41, 42, 43, 61, 129
verbal processing 8, 9
Vinay, J. P. 107, 206
word field see semantic field
Yule, G. 5, 6, 180, 123, 174, 179
zero aspect see simple aspect
CONTEMPORARY STUDIES IN
DESCRIPTIVE LINGUISTICS
Edited by

PROFESSOR GRAEME DAVIS, School of Humanities, University of

Buckingham.

KARL A. BERNHARDT, Research Fellow in the Department of English,

University of Buckingham, UK, and English Language Consultant with Trinity
College, London.

This series provides an outlet for academic monographs which offer a recent and
original contribution to linguistics and which are within the descriptive tradition.

While the monographs demonstrate their debt to contemporary linguistic

thought, the series does not impose limitations in terms of methodology or genre,
and does not support a particular linguistic school. Rather the series welcomes
new and innovative research that contributes to furthering the understanding of
the description of language.

The topics of the monographs are scholarly and represent the cutting edge for
their particular fields, but are also accessible to researchers outside the specific
disciplines.

Contemporary Studies in Descriptive Linguistics is based at the Department of

English, University of Buckingham.

Vol. 1 M ark Garner: Language: An Ecological View.

260 pages, 2004.
ISBN 3-03910-054-8 / US-ISBN 0-8204-6295-0

Vol. 2 T. Nyan: Meanings at the Text Level: A Co-Evolutionary

Approach.
194 pages, 2004.
 ISBN 3-03910-250-8 / US-ISBN 0-8204-7179-8

Vol. 3 Breffni O’Rourke and Lorna Carson (eds): Language Learner

Autonomy:
Policy, Curriculum, Classroom.
439 pages, 2010.
ISBN 978-3-03911-980-6

Vol. 4 D imitra Koutsantoni: Developing Academic Literacies:

Understanding D isciplinary Communities’ Culture and Rhetoric.
302 pages, 2007.
ISBN?978-3-03910-575-5

Vol. 5 E mmanuelle Labeau: Beyond the Aspect Hypothesis: Tense-

Aspect Development in Advanced L2 French.
259 pages, 2005.
ISBN 3-03910-281-8 / US-ISBN 0-8204-7208-5

Vol. 6 M aria Stambolieva: Building Up Aspect. A Study of Aspect and

Related Categories in Bulgarian, with Parallels in English and
French.
243 pages, 2008.
ISBN 978-3-03910-558-8

Vol. 7 Stavroula Varella: Language Contact and the Lexicon in the

History of Cypriot Greek.
283 pages, 2006.
ISBN 3-03910-526-4 / US-ISBN 0-8204-7531-9

Vol. 8 A lan J. E. Wolf: Subjectivity in a Second Language: C onveying

the Expression of Self.
246 pages. 2006.
ISBN 3-03910-518-3 / US-ISBN 0-8204-7524-6

Vol. 9 Bettina Braun: Production and Perception of Thematic Contrast in

German.
280 pages, 2005.
 ISBN 3-03910-566-3 / US-ISBN 0-8204-7593-9

Vol. 10 Jean-Paul Kouega: A Dictionary of Cameroon English Usage.

202 pages, 2007.
ISBN 978-3-03911-027-8

Vol. 11 Sebastian M. Rasinger: Bengali-English in East London. A Study

in U rban Multilingualism. 270 pages, 2007.
ISBN 978-3-03911-036-0

Vol. 12 Emmanuelle Labeau and Flo rence Myles (eds): The Adv anced
Learner V ariety: The Case of French.
298 pages, 2009.
ISBN 978-3-03911-072-8

Vol. 13 M iyoko Kobayashi: Hitting the Mark: How Can Text

Organisation and R esponse Format Affect Reading Test
Performance?
322 pages, 2009.
ISBN 978-3-03911-083-4

Vol. 14 D ingfang Shu and Ken Turner (eds): Contrasting Meaning in L

anguages of the East and West.
634 pages, 2010.
ISBN 978-3-03911-886-1

Vol. 15 A na Rojo: Step by Step: A Course in Contrastive Linguistics and

Translation.
418 pages, 2009.
ISBN 978-3-03911-133-6

Vol. 16 Jinan Fedhil Al-Hajaj and Graeme Davis (eds): University of

Basrah Studies in English.
304 pages, 2008.
ISBN 978-3-03911-325-5

Vol. 17 P aolo Coluzzi: Minority Language Planning and

 Micronationalism in Italy.
348 pages, 2007.
ISBN 978-3-03911-041-4

Vol. 18 I wan Wmffre: Breton Orthographies and Dialects: The T

wentieth-Century Orthography War in Brittany. Vol 1.
499 pages, 2007.
ISBN?978-3-03911-364-4

Vol. 19 I wan Wmffre: Breton Orthographies and Dialects: The

Twentieth-Century Orthography War in Brittany. Vol 2. 281
pages, 2007.
ISBN?978-3-03911-365-1

Vol. 20 Fanny Forsberg: Le langage préfabriqué: Formes, fonctions et

fréquences en français parlé L2 et L1.
293 pages, 2008.
ISBN 978-3-03911-369-9

Vol. 21 Kathy Pitt: Sourcing the Self: Debating the Relations between L
anguage and Consciousness.
220 pages, 2008.
ISBN 978-3-03911-398-9

Vol. 22 Peiling Xing: Chinese Learners and the Lexis Learning Rainbow.
273 pages, 2009.
ISBN 978-3-03911-407-8

Vol. 23 Yufang Qian: Discursive Constructions around Terrorism in the

People’s Daily (China) and The Sun (UK) Before and After 9.11:
A Corpus-based C ontrastive Critical Discourse Analysis.
284 pages, 2010.
ISBN 978-3-0343-0186-2

Vol. 24 Ian Walkinshaw: Learning Politeness: Disagreement in a Second

Language.
297 pages, 2009.
 ISBN 978-3-03911-527-3

Vol. 25 Stephen Bax: Researching Intertextual Reading.

371 pages, 2013.
ISBN 978-3-0343-0769-7

Vol. 26 Shahela Hamid: Langua ge Use and Identity: The Sy lheti

Bangladeshis in Leeds.
225 pages, 2011.
ISBN 978-3-03911-559-4

Vol. 27 Magdalena Karolak: The Past Tense in Polish and French: A

Semantic A pproach to Translation.
217 pages, 2013.
ISBN 978-3-0343-0968-4

Vol. 28 Iwan Wmffre: Dynamic Linguistics: Labov, Martinet, Jakobson

and Other P recursors of the Dynamic Approach to Language
Description.
615 pages, 2013.
ISBN 978-3-0343-1705-4

Vol. 29 Razaul Karim Faquire: Modality and Its Learner Variety in

Japanese.
237 pages, 2012.
ISBN 978-3-0343-0103-9

Vol. 30 Francisca Suau-Jiménez and Barry Pennock-Speck (eds):

Interdisciplinarity and Languages: Current Issues in Research,
Teaching, Professional Applications and ICT.
234 pages, 2011.
ISBN 978-3-0343-0283-8

Vol. 31 Ahmad Al-Issa and Laila S. Dahan (eds): Global English and
Arabic:
Issues of Language, Culture, and Identity.
379 pages, 2011.
 ISBN 978-3-0343-0293-7

Vol. 32 Xosé Rosales Sequeiros: Linguistic Meaning and Non-Truth-

Conditionality.
266 pages, 2012.
ISBN 978-3-0343-0705-5

Vol. 33 Yu Hou: A Corpus-Based Study of Nominalization in

Translations of Chinese Literary Prose: Three Versions of Dream
of the Red Chamber.
230 pages. 2014.
ISBN 978-3-0343-1815-0

Vol. 34 Christopher Beedham, Warwick Danks and Ether Soselia (eds):

Rules and Exceptions: Using Exceptions for Empirical Research
in Theoretical Linguistics.
289 pages, 2014.
ISBN 978-3-0343-0782-6

Vol. 35 Bettina Beinhoff: Perceiving Identity through Accent: Attitudes

towards Non-Native Speakers and their Accents in English.
292 pages, 2013.
ISBN 978-3-0343-0819-9

Vol. 36 Tahir Wood: Elements of Hermeneutic Pragmatics: Agency and

Interpretation.
219 pages, 2015.
ISBN 978-3-0343-1883-9

Vol. 37 Stephen Pax Leonard: Some Ethnolinguistic Notes on Polar

Eskimo.
292 pages, 2015.
ISBN 978-3-0343-1947-8

Vol. 38 Chiara Semplicini: One Word, Two Genders: Categorization and

A greement in Dutch Double Gender Nouns.
409 pages, 2016.
 ISBN 978-3-0343-0927-1

Vol. 39 F orthcoming.

Vol. 40 Ali Almanna: Semantics for Translation Students:

Arabic–English–Arabic.
226 pages, 2016.
ISBN 978-1-906165-58-1

Vol. 41 Pablo Kirtchuk: A Unified and Integrative Theory of Language.

262 pages, 2016.
ISBN 978-3-0343-2250-8