Upload
dokhuong
View
281
Download
33
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
TRANSLATING IDIOMATIC ENGLISH
PHRASAL VERBS INTO ARABIC
By
Ali Yunis Aldahesh
A thesis
presented to the
University of Western Sydney
In fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
February, 2008
© A Y Aldahesh February 2008
ii
DEDICATION
To my beloved kids: Jaafar, Ahmad and Ielaf
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I should like to express my sincere indebtedness to all those who, without their
generous assistance, this work would not exist. I should like in particular to thank my
chair supervisor Dr. Raymond Chakhachiro for his expert help, insightful comments,
and supportive encouragement, my co-supervisor Professor Stuart Campbell for his
invaluable feedback and his constructive criticism in various stages of completion of
this thesis, and my co-supervisor Dr Rosemary Suliman for going into a number of
issues of this study with me and bringing some great ideas to my attention.
I am profoundly grateful to my colleagues and my dear students who expressed their
interest and agreed to take part in the empirical part of the study. Their responses were
of optimal benefit and are deeply appreciated.
I also warmly thank my colleague Dr. Paul White for his proofreading of the thesis
and for the professional comments and corrections he made.
I owe special dept of gratitude to my colleague Dr. Abbas Brashi for many hours of
invaluable discussions about my plan and proposal from the very beginning of my
candidature.
Finally, I am particularly indebted to my lovely family for their support,
encouragement and patience throughout my long journey. They imparted me with the
most creative environment. Without them, it is true, I would not make it.
iv
STATEMENT OF AUTHENTICATION
The work presented in this thesis is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, original
except as acknowledged in the text. I herby declare that I have not submitted this
material, either in whole or in part, for a degree at this or any other institution.
………………………………………………..
Ali Yunis Aldahesh
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................... xiiiii
LIST OF FIGURES..................................................................................................xv
KEY TO TRANSLITERATION SYSTEM ............................................................ xvi
KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS................................................................................. xix
ABSTRACT............................................................................................................ xx
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ 1
1.1 Historical background of PVs in English.......................................................... 2
1.2 Justification of the study .................................................................................. 7
1.3 Purpose of the study......................................................................................... 8
1.4 Layout of the study ........................................................................................ 11
1.5 Limitations of the study ................................................................................. 12
CHAPTER TWO:�REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE................................ 14
2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 14
2.2 Idioms and idiomaticity in English and Arabic............................................... 14
2.2.1 Idioms and idiomaticity in English.......................................................... 15
2.2.2 Idioms and idiomaticity in Arabic ........................................................... 19
2.3 Definition of PVs in English .......................................................................... 23
2.4 Syntactic properties of EPVs.......................................................................... 27
2.4.1 Word class of EPVs ................................................................................ 27
2.4.1.1 Verbs ................................................................................................... 28
2.4.1.2 Particles ............................................................................................... 29
vi
2.4.1.2.1 Adverbs............................................................................................. 30
2.4.1.2.2 Prepositions....................................................................................... 33
2.4.2 Syntactic categories of EPVs................................................................... 37
2.4.2.1 Verb + adverb combinations................................................................. 39
2.4.2.1.1 Intransitive PVs................................................................................. 39
2.4.2.1.2 Transitive PVs................................................................................... 40
2.4.2.2 Verb + preposition combinations.......................................................... 41
2.4.2.2.1 Intransitive prepositional verbs.......................................................... 41
2.4.2.2.2 Transitive prepositional verbs............................................................ 41
2.4.2.3 Verb + adverb + preposition combinations ........................................... 42
2.4.2.3.1 Intransitive phrasal-prepositional verbs ............................................. 43
2.4.2.3.2 Transitive phrasal-prepositional verbs ............................................... 43
2.4.3 Word order of EPVs................................................................................ 44
2.5 Semantic properties of EPVs.......................................................................... 49
2.5.1 EPVs' criteria .......................................................................................... 50
2.5.2 Semantic categories of EPVs................................................................... 53
2.5.3 Cohesion of PVs' elements...................................................................... 62
2.5.4 British and American dialects ................................................................. 63
2.5.5 Register variations of EPVs .................................................................... 65
2.6 PVs in Arabic ................................................................................................ 70
2.6.1 Lentzner.................................................................................................. 71
2.6.2 Abboud and McCarus ............................................................................. 78
2.6.3 Heliel ...................................................................................................... 79
2.6.4 Alkhuli.................................................................................................... 82
2.6.5 Najiib...................................................................................................... 82
vii
2.6.6 Siinii, Hussein and Al-ddoush ................................................................. 82
2.6.7 Summary of section 2.6........................................................................... 86
2.7 Derivation of PVs in English and Arabic ....................................................... 90
2.7.1 Derivation in English .............................................................................. 91
2.7.2 Derivation in Arabic................................................................................ 94
2.7.3 Derivation of PVs in English................................................................... 99
2.7.3.1 Deriving PVs from adjectives..............................................................100
2.7.3.2 Deriving PVs from nouns....................................................................100
2.7.3.3 Deriving PVs from Latinate verbs .......................................................101
2.7.3.4 Deriving nouns from PVs....................................................................102
2.7.4 Productivity ...........................................................................................104
2.7.4.1 Productivity in English........................................................................105
2.7.4.2 Productivity in Arabic .........................................................................107
2.8 PVs in English lexicography.........................................................................110
2.8.1 PVs in general English-English dictionaries ...........................................111
2.8.2 PVs in specialized English-English dictionaries .....................................113
2.8.2.1 An Analysis and Dictionary of Two-Word Verbs in English
Illustrated in Sentences ...................................................................................113
2.8.2.2 Dictionary of English Phrasal Verbs and their Idioms..........................115
2.8.2.3 Time-Chambers Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs ......................................119
2.8.2.4 Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs.................................................122
2.8.2.5 The Student's Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs...........................................125
2.8.2.6 Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs..................................127
2.8.2.7 NTC's Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and Other Idiomatic Verbal Phrases
.......................................................................................................................131
viii
2.8.2.8 Oxford Dictionary of phrasal verbs .....................................................133
2.8.2.9 Cambridge International Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs..........................137
2.8.2.10 Oxford Phrasal Verbs Dictionary for Learners of English..................141
2.8.2.11 Summary of section 2.8.2..................................................................143
2.9 PVs in bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries.................................................147
2.9.1 PVs in general English-Arabic dictionaries ............................................148
2.9.1.1 Al-Mawrid ..........................................................................................148
2.9.1.2 Al-Mughni Al-Akbar ..........................................................................149
2.9.1.3 The Oxford English-Arabic Dictionary of Current Usage ....................150
2.9.2 PVs in specialized English-Arabic dictionaries.......................................151
2.9.2.1 English Phrasal Verbs in Arabic..........................................................151
2.9.2.2 York Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and Their Idioms ............................154
2.9.2.3 Summary of section 2.9.......................................................................157
2.10 Teaching IEPVs..........................................................................................158
2.10.1 Teaching IPVs to learners of English ...................................................158
2.10.1.1 Tom McArthur's method ...................................................................159
1.10.1.2 Colin Mortimer's method...................................................................161
2.10.1.3 Alan Cornell's method.......................................................................162
2.10.1.4 Richard Side's method.......................................................................165
1.10.1.5 Peter Dainty's method........................................................................168
2.10.1.6 Martin Shovel's method.....................................................................169
2.10.1.7 Malcolm Goodale's method...............................................................171
2.10.1.8 Berman and Kirstein's method...........................................................172
2.10.1.9 Peter Hannan's method......................................................................173
2.10.1.10 Darwin and Gray's method ..............................................................176
ix
2.10.1.11 Joan Sawyer's method .....................................................................180
2.10.1.12 Ron Sheen's method ........................................................................183
2.10.1.13 Rosemary Sansome's Method ..........................................................185
2.10.1.14 John Flower's method......................................................................186
2.10.1.15 Summary of section 2.10.1 ..............................................................187
2.10.2 Teaching IEPVs to Arab students.........................................................189
2.11 PVs in translation studies............................................................................196
2.11.1 Translating EPVs into other languages .................................................196
2.11.2 Translating English idioms into other languages...................................201
2.12 Conclusion..................................................................................................209
CHAPTER THREE: LINGUISTIC CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS.........................211
3.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................211
3.2 Contrastive analysis ......................................................................................211
3.3 Contrastive analysis and translation ..............................................................212
3.4 Review of contrastive analysis approaches....................................................215
3.4.1 Juliane House.........................................................................................215
3.4.2 Carl James .............................................................................................224
3.4.2.1 Microlinguistics ..................................................................................224
3.4.2.2 Macrolinguistics..................................................................................225
3.4.3 Equivalence ...........................................................................................229
3.4.4 Theory of sense (Interpretive Approach to Translation)..........................233
3.4.5 Theory of speech acts.............................................................................236
3.4.6 Communicative Competence..................................................................241
x
3.5 A linguistic contrastive analysis model for the analysis and translation of IEPVs
into Arabic .........................................................................................................244
3.6 Conclusion....................................................................................................249
CHAPTER FOUR: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.............................................251
4.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................251
4.2 Research design............................................................................................251
4.2.1 Research questions.................................................................................251
4.3 Participants...................................................................................................253
4.3.1 Arabic professional translators ...............................................................253
4.3.2 Arabic translation students .....................................................................255
4. 4 Data collection.............................................................................................256
4.4.1 Instrument..............................................................................................256
4.4.2 Data collection procedures .....................................................................259
4.5 Data analysis ................................................................................................261
CHAPTER FIVE: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS OF THE TRANSLATION
TESTS ...................................................................................................................265
5.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................265
5.2 General overview of the results of the translation tests..................................265
5.2.1 General overview of the results of the Arabic professional translators' group
...........................................................................................................................266
5.2.2 General overview of the results of the Arabic translation students' group ...269
5.2.3 Summary and comparison......................................................................270
5.3 Subjects' performance in light of the research questions................................274
xi
5.3.1 Subjects' performance in light of the first research question....................275
5.3.1.1 Summary and comparison ...................................................................278
5.3.2 Subjects' performance in light of the second research question ...............280
5.3.3 Subjects' performance in light of the third research question ..................283
5.3.4 Subjects' performance in light of the fourth research question ................285
5.3.5 Subjects' performance in light of the fifth research question ...................288
5.3.6 Subjects' performance in light of the sixth research question ..................291
5.3.6.1 Overtly erroneous errors......................................................................292
5.3.6.1.1 Literal translation .............................................................................293
5.3.6.1.2 Mistranslating ..................................................................................296
5.3.6.1.3 Reducing the idioms to sense ...........................................................298
5.3.6.1.3 Breaching of the Arabic language system.........................................300
5.3.6.2 Covertly erroneous errors ....................................................................302
5.3.6.2.1 Wrong Arabic collocation ................................................................302
5.3.6.2.2 Shift of register ................................................................................305
5.3.6.2.3 Incorrect delivery of speech acts.......................................................308
5.3.6.2.4 Usage of paraphrasing......................................................................311
5.3.6.2.5 Usage of Arabic colloquial and regional dialects ..............................313
5.3.7 Subjects' performance in light of the seventh research question..............315
5.4 Conclusion................................................................................................324
CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................325
6.1 Conclusion....................................................................................................325
6.1.1 Summary of the study ............................................................................325
6.1.2 Summary of the findings ........................................................................331
xii
6.2 Recommendations ........................................................................................341
6.2.1 Recommendations for Arabic professional translators ............................341
6.2.2 Recommendations for Arabic lexicographers .........................................343
6.2.3 Recommendations for Arabic pedagogues..............................................346
6.3 Contributions made by this study ..................................................................350
6.4 Directions for further research ......................................................................351
BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................353
APPENDICES .......................................................................................................368
APPENDIX 1:TRANSLATION TESTS ................................................................369
APPENDIX 2: SUGGESTED ARABIC FUNCTIONAL-PRAGMATIC
EQUIVALENTS....................................................................................................393
APPENDIX 3: FULL DETAILS OF THE RESULTS OF THE TRANSLATION
TESTS ...................................................................................................................413
APPENDIX 4: AVERAGE OF THE STANDARD DEVAITION ..........................468
APPENDIX 5: RANKING THE ITEMS ACCORDING TO THEIR PERCENTAGES
OF THE CORRECT IN A DESENDING ORDER.................................................473
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
2.1 Verb + particle combinations ………………………………………..……..……38
2.2 Types and subtypes of verb + particle combinations……….……………………44
2.3 The word order of EPVs ……………………………....……...………………… 46
2.4 Semantic categories of EPVs ………………………..………….……………… 55
4.1 Years of experience of the Arabic professional translators ………...…………. 254
4.2 Text types used in the translation tests and the items representing each type…. 257
4.3 Categories/subcategories covered in the translation tests and the items
representing each category ………...……………………………….……………... 259
4.4 Examples of satisfactory answers ………………………………………….…...262
4.5 Examples of mistakes in the surrounding words …………………………..…...263
5.1 Categories of IEPVs covered in the translation tests ………………………......266
5.2 Average of the correct answers of the Arabic professional translators' group .. 267
5.3 Standard deviation of the Arabic professional translators' group ..……………267
5.4 Ranking the categories and their subcategories-Arabic professional translators'
group ………………………………………………………………….………….…268
5.5 Average of the correct answers of the Arabic translation students' group ...…...269
5.6 Standard deviation of the Arabic translation students' group ………….….……269
5.7 Ranking the categories and their subcategories – Arabic translation students'
group…………………………………………………………..…………….………270
5.8 Differences of the averages of the correct answers ……….……………………271
5.9 Differences of the standard deviation ……………………….…………….……274
5.10 Summary of the performance of the Arabic professional translators' group..…275
xiv
5.11 Summary of results of the Arabic professional translators' group ….……...…276
5.12 Summary of the performance of the Arabic translation students' group .……..277
5.13 Summary of results of the Arabic translation students' group …….……...…..277
5.14 Differences in achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents …….….…….…...278
5.15 Differences of the average of the unanswered items ………...…………….….278
5.16 Differences in achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents of the Complex
idioms category ……….….…………….……….……..……….….………….……281
5.17 Differences in achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents of the Syntactic forms
(s) category ……….………………….………....………………….….……………284
5.18 Differences of achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents of the Derivational
forms category …….………....…….………....……….……….....……….………..287
5.19 Differences in achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents of the Productive PVs
category …….………....……….….………....……….……..………....…………...289
5.20 Examples of literal translations ….………....…….………....….……….....….293
5.21 Examples of mistranslations ….………....…….……….……....…….….…….297
5.22 Examples of idioms reduced to sense .………...………....……..…….....……299
5.23 Examples of breaches to the Arabic language system ……...………………...301
5.24 Examples of wrong Arabic collocations ……...………………...………...…..304
5.25 Examples of register shift ……...…………..……………....……….........……306
5.26 Examples of incorrect delivery of speech acts ……...…...…....……….…...…309
5.27 Examples of Paraphrasing …...…..………...…..………...…..……...…...……311
5.28 Examples of usage of Arabic colloquial and regional dialects ...…......………313
5.29 Performance and years of experience of the Arabic professional translators'
group...….…..…..…..…..…..….…..…..…………………………...…..………...…321
5.30 Performance and stages of study of the Arabic translation students' group ..... 322
xv
LIST OF FIGURES
3.1 A model for the analysis and translation of IEPVs into Arabic ………………….247
xvi
KEY TO TRANSLITERATION SYSTEM
Elements of the transliteration system of Arabic used in this study are eclectically
selected from systems adopted by Lentzner (1977); Beaugrande et al. (1994); Hatim
(1997); Chakhachiro (1997) and Campbell (1998).
Arabic consonants
Arabic letters Arabic letters name Transliteration ? hamza ء alif a? أ baa? b ب taa? t ت thaa? th ث jiim j ج Haa? H ح khaa? kh خ daal d د dhal dh ذ raa? r ر zaay z ز siin s س shiin sh ش Saad S ص Daad D ض
xvii
Taa? T ط Zaa? Z ظ
3ayn 3 ع
ghayn gh غ
faa? f ف
qaaf q ق kaaf k ك laam l ل miim m م nuun n ن � haa? h waaw w و yaa? y ي
Arabic short vowels
fatHa a kasra i , Damma u
Arabic long vowels
aa ا uu و ii ي
xviii
Arabic diphthongs
ay أي
aw أو
Other features
The Arabic definite article with sun letters is not elided. The Arabic geminated consonants (with ... shadda) are doubled.
The coordination particles (و wa and ف fa) are marked.
This system may not conform to some Arabic names occuring in this study, which
have their own previously establiehed transiliterations. For example: ��%&&'()*(+ا�,&-./
Munir Ba'albaki and 0-123)+�4)*+دار�ا� Dar El Ilm Lilmalayin.
� �� �� �� � � �� �
xix
KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS
A.H = After Hijrah (Islamic Calander)
APV = Arabic Phrasal Verb
c = complex idioms
d = derivational forms of idiomatic English phrasal verbs
de = phrasal verbs derived from Adjectives without suffix –en
den = phrasal verbs derived from Adjectives with suffix –en
dnp = nouns derived from phrasal verbs
dpn = phrasal verbs derived from nouns
EFL = English as a foreign language
EPV = English Phrasal Verb
ESL = English as a second language ��
IAPV = Idiomatic Arabic Phrasal Verb
IEPV = Idiomatic English Phrasal Verb
L1 = First Language
L2 =Second Language
p = productive, newly coined idiomatic English phrasal verbs��
PV = Phrasal Verb
s = syntactic forms of idiomatic English phrasal verbs
sva = syntactic form of verb + adverb
svap = syntactic form of verb + adverb + preposition
svp = syntactic form of verb + preposition
xx
ABSTRACT
��
This study concerns itself with a linguistic contrastive analysis of one particular
characteristic of grammar and vocabulary in both English and Arabic languages. That
is, combinations of proper verbs with adverbial and/or prepositional particle(s), which
are commonly known as: phrasal verbs 5(ا89*7ل�ا+3,آ�( ) .
In addition, the thesis attempts to approve the fact that there are fundamental
similarities and dissimilarities between English and Arabic phrasal verbs. Such
similarities and dissimilarities are investigated at length through a theoretical
comparison of these combinations in both languages.
The main hypothesis of the study is that there are wide ranges of difficulties posed to
Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students when translating
idiomatic English phrasal verbs into Arabic.
Exploring such difficulties is the principle aim of the study. The other aim is to
propose a number of recommendations for professional translators, lexicographers
and pedagogues. Such recommendations are based on a range of findings arrived at
from the empirical research carried out in the study.
A linguistic contrastive analysis model for the analysis and translation of idiomatic
English phrasal verbs into Arabic is devised in order to establish a yardstick by which
the translation quality of such idiomatic expressions can be analysed, compared,
evaluated and assessed.
xxi
Translation tests are conducted to identify types of errors and translational pitfalls
made by Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students when
handling the most problematic and challenging idiomatic English phrasal verbs.
The results revealed that there are in fact lots of difficulties encountered by Arabic
professional translators and Arabic translation students when dealing with the
phenomenon of idiomatic English phrasal verbs. The most important aspect of such
difficulties is the failure to achieve functional-pragmatic equivalents of such verbs.
Overtly erroneous errors such as: literal translation, mistranslating, reducing idioms to
sense and breaching of the Arabic language system, along with covertly erroneous
errors, such as wrong Arabic collocation, shift of register, incorrect delivery of speech
acts, usage of paraphrasing and usage of Arabic colloquial and regional dialects, were
the major reasons behind the failure of delivering the appropriate functional-
pragmatic equivalents of the idiomatic English phrasal verbs listed in the translation
tests.
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Owing to their syntactic structures, idiomatic and non-idiomatic use and their complex
idioms, phrasal verbs (henceforth PVs) constitute one of the most difficult problems for
learners of the English language (Cowie & Mackin, 1993; Courtney, 1983; Taha, 1972;
Azzaro, 1992). They are, to use McArthur's (1975) words "a foreign learner's biggest
headache" (p. 6). At first glance they look deceptively easy to the non-native speaker,
but their significations can be fundamentally different from what one might expect
(Khalaili, 1979). English grammarians and linguists point out that to be fluent in
English you have to master using PVs ably. The type of PVs posing the learners with
particular difficulty are idiomatic English phrasal verbs (henceforth IEPVs) (Turton &
Manser, 1985).
In their Dictionary of English Phrasal Verbs and their Idioms, McArthur and Atkins
(1974) attempt to confine the problem of IEPVs in four points as follows:
a) A verb of this type may have a meaning which is simply the sum of its parts, but may also have a meaning which bears little apparent relation to those parts.
b) The particle may indicate some kind of direction but may just as easily have a meaning little related to direction.
c) The same particle can serve as a preposition or adverb and a student can easily confuse these functions.
d) There are so many phrasal verbs in modern English (and the number is constantly growing), they are so important in the spoken language, and they have so many shades of meanings that the student may despair of ever mastering this area of language. This situation has been aggravated by the lack of a good description of the phrasal verb, and by a shortage of useful teaching material (p. 5).
2
Yet, when it comes to translating IEPVs into Arabic, the problem far exceeds the four
points mentioned above due to the fact that there are tremendous dissimilarities in terms
of syntactic, semantic and pragmatic peculiarities of such combinations in English and
Arabic.
The present study is an investigation of the difficulties Arabic professional translators
and Arabic translation students encounter when translating IEPVs into Arabic.
1.1 Historical background of PVs in English�
The difficulties of English PVs (henceforth EPVs) were first noted by Samuel Johnson in
1755 in the preface to his Dictionary of English Language (McArthur, 1989) in which he
wrote:
There is another kind of composition more frequent in our language than perhaps in any other, from which arises to foreigners the greatest difficulty […] We modify the signification of many words by a particle subjoined; as to come off, to escape by a fetch; to fall on, to attack; to fall off, to apostatize […] with innumerable expressions of the same kind, of which some appear widely irregular, being so far distant from the sense of the simple words, that no sagacity will be able to trace the steps by which they arrived at the present use (as cited in McArthur, 1989, p. 38).
What Johnson said about EPVs, McArthur (1989) indicates, "is still true, except that
nowadays they stand out more because there are even more of them about in the 20th than
in the 18th century" (p. 38), but Johnson had no name for the phenomenon, McArthur
elaborates, as there was no agreed academic name for it. Furthermore, McArthur (1989)
makes the point that by the 'composition' Johnson meant 'compound' which is widely used
nowadays in describing the co-occurrence of verbs with particles. Such a co-occurrence,
3
however, has been given many names by grammarians, linguists, pedagogues and
lexicographers.
In his essay English Idioms, Logan Pearsall Smith has first used the name of ‘Phrasal
verbs’ in print in 1925, following a suggestion from Henry Bradley (Dixon, 1982; Sroka,
1972). The same term has been employed by Jowett (1951), Mitchell (1958), Fairclough
(1965, as cited in Lindner, 1983), Heaton (1965), Bolinger (1971), Quirk and Greenbaum
(1973), Palmer (1974), Khalaila (1976), Turton and Manster (1985), Cornell (1985),
Thomas and Martinet (1986), McArthur (1989), Side (1990), Constant (1991), Azzaro
(1992), Dixon (1982), Cowie (1993), Heleil (1994), Holes (1994), Jacob (1995), Berman
and Kirstein (1996) Lindstormberg (1998), Sinclair et al. (1998), Darwin and Gray
(1999), Sawyer (2000), Sansome (2000) and Trush (2001) among others (cf. Lindner,
1983; McArthur, 1989).
Other names given to label the co-occurrence of verb with particle are 'Particle verbs'
(Crutchley, 2007), 'Verb particle constructions' (Morgan, 1997; Zughoul, 1979;
Lindner, 1983), 'Verb-adverb combination' (Kennedy, 1967; Fraser, 1976), 'Two-word
verbs' (Taha, 1960), 'Discontinuous verbs' (Live, 1965), 'Verb-preposition constructions'
(Aarts, 1989) and 'compound verbs' (Palmer, 1974) (cf. Dixon, 1982). But, Spears
(1993) considers the term 'phrasal verb' as a generic term and indicates that "verb +
particle collocation is more accurate" (p. vii).
Yet, the winning term is said to be the first one, that is, 'phrasal verb' which recently
quite commonly appears in English literature and linguistics works (McArthur, 1989;
Sroka, 1972).
4
Therefore, the term 'phrasal verb' being adopted in this study to refer to combinations of
verbs and particles owing to the fact that it has been widely used by the majority of
scholars in such domains as grammar, linguistics, lexicography, bibliography and
pedagogy.
Interestingly, 1965 was, according to Fraser (1974), a big year for EPVs, as four major
studies were published in that particular year by Fairclough, Fraser, Live, and Sroka.
The previous scholarly research into EPVs has been categorized by Azzaro (1992) into
three types depending upon the ways in which researchers approached the topic, being:
1. Some authors produced verb studies in which PVs were viewed as part of the general English verbal system, without being given particular attention (cf. for example Allen 1966; Kiparsky 1968: 30-37; Leech 1971; and Nehls 1978; 45-62; etc.).
2. Others concentrated on the constituents of PVs without studying their contextual behaviour: cf. for instance: Hills 1968 on the definition of EPVs' constituent particles; Heaton 1969 and Wood 1975 on prepositions and their idioms; Greenbaum 1970 on adjuncts; Bennet 1975 on spatial and temporal uses of prepositions; and finally Fraser 1970 on idioms in a T-GG framework.
3. Other authors, on the other hand, tackled the study of EPVs proper. Kennedy (1920) listed 900 verbal combinations, indicating their most productive elements; Mitchell (1958) produced one of the cornerstones of all modern studies on PVs […], together with Bolinger (1971); Fraser (1976) offers ample details on the semantic and syntactic aspects of EPVs […]. The syntax of EPVs is exhaustively discussed in Sroka (1972), Vestergaard (1977), De Armond (1977), Dixon (1982) and also in Mathews (1984) and Radford (1988) (pp. 40-41).
It is useful to mention here that in a paper entitled Phrasal verbs in English grammar
books before 1800, Hiltunen (1983) investigates "the treatment of combinations
involving a verb and adverbial or prepositional element in a selection of 16th, 17th, and
18th century grammars" (p. 376). He primarily concentrates on "finding out how the
idea of taking phrasal verbs as single units developed in the early treatises, rather than
5
on attempting to analyse the contents of adverbial and prepositional categories in detail,
or to evaluate the issues in terms of what we today know about phrasal verbs" (p. 377).
Hiltunen (1983) indicates that the "terms 'phrasal verb' and 'prepositional verb' are
comparatively recent and were not used by the early grammarians, but the history of these
constructions in English may be traced to the earliest periods of the language" (p. 376).
He elaborates that "Old English was still fairly close to its Germanic ancestors with its
'separable prefixes', words that appeared joined to the verb or detached from it, depending
primarily on various syntactic factors" (p. 376). He goes on to say that "[…] even in the
Old English period a tendency towards the establishment of the structural variant where
the phrasal element follows the verb, may be clearly discerned. In the early Middle
English period this pattern is already the predominant one" (p. 376). And by "the
beginning of the nineteenth century […] English grammarians had a fair conception of
many of the properties of the phrasal verbs, as well as of problems confronting them in a
structural description of these constructions" (p. 377).
Furthermore, Hiltunen surveys the grammar of New English starting from Bullokar
(1586) who "distinguished adverbs and prepositions, recognizing the fact that some
prepositions may be used adverbially" (p. 377), through Wallis (1652) and Poole (1655)
who accidentally noted "some such constructions in translating Latin prefixed verbs into
English" (p. 378), to Maittaire (1712) who surprisingly commented "on the
morphological, semantic, and also syntactic properties of the various constructions
involving prepositions and adverbs in greater detail than any of the other writers" (p.
382). Hiltunen concludes that
[…] in spite of the emphasis of traditional grammar on a word-for-word analysis, grammarians gradually become aware of the possibility of looking
6
upon phrasal verbs as single units. This process begins subconsciously, phrasal verbs creeping into the texts as translations of Latin examples or as descriptive characterizations of the meaning of various 'prepositions'. Some of the semantically more striking combinations prompt a comment (often in a footnote) from the writer, and in this way the phrasal verb gradually finds its way into English grammar (p. 384).
In addition, Hiltunen provides a number of reasons "why the grammatical recognition of
the phrasal verb was slow in coming", claiming that the grammar itself was the main
reason "because seeing the combination of a verb and a 'particle' as a unit involved
transcending the traditional boundaries between the parts of speech, and realizing that
words from different categories may melt into one another and form a new unit together"
(p. 384).
The other reason, according to him, was the effect of "Latin grammar, together with a
normative attitude towards language [...] All that did not directly fit into the Latin model
was often felt to be inferior or incorrect, something that ought to be resisted both in
theory and practice" (p. 384). "But indirectly" Hiltunen elaborates "the Latin background
also facilitated the acceptance of phrasal verbs as units by providing a point of
comparison for the English grammarians, and constantly reminding them how their own
language differed from Latin in this respect" (p. 385).
Along these lines, McArthur (1989) maintains that EPVs "have been widespread since at
least the Middle Ages" (p. 39). He provides the following two "typical antique usages
with go":
(1) in Wyclif's Bible of 1388, 'Thei that gon down in to the see in schippes', and (2) in Shakespeare's Measure for Measure of 1603, 'So long, that nineteene Zodiacks have gone round' (p. 39).
Moving on to our modern time, the phenomenon of PVs has been the focus of many
scholarly studies. Works in the last decade or so include: Flower (2000); Sansome
7
(2000); Sawyer (2000); Heliel (2000); Kaminska (2001); Zeller (2001); Jackendoff
(2002); Campoy (2002); Heine (2002); Villavicencio & Copestake (2003); Armstrong
(2004); Dehe (2005), Rottet (2005), Crutchley (2007) and Gardner & Davies (2007).
1.2 Justification of the study
In her article Plain English? A study of plain English vocabulary and international
audiences, Thrush (2001) narrates that "[i]n 1989, a China Airline flight, flying in zero
visibility, crashed into the side of a mountain shortly after takeoff. On the voice recorder,
the last words of the Chinese pilot to the co-pilot were "What does pull up mean?" (p.
289). This tragedy highlights the fact that the lack of a comprehension of IEPVs may lead
to catastrophes. Likewise, Palmer (1968) reports "the famous story of the foreigner in the
train who was told to look out. Instead of realizing that LOOK OUT was a phrasal verb
meaning TAKE CARE, he took it as a literal combination of LOOK+OUT and put his
head further out of the window with disastrous consequences" (p. 185) [Emphasis in
original].
The significance of IEPVs and the difficulty they pose to learners of English, translation
students, professional translators, professional interpreters and others have been
underlined by a great deal of researchers. Despite their important role in understanding
spoken and written English, they have not received enough attention from Arab
researchers. There has been no comprehensive research to date shedding light on how
IEPVs can be translated into Arabic or what sort of difficulties are encountered by Arabic
translators when handling them. Therefore, this study attempts to fill this gap by
investigating IEPVs, analyzing them, contrasting them with their Arabic counterparts,
8
highlighting the difficulties they constitute when translating them into Arabic and
suggesting a number of recommendations to be taken into account by professional
translators, lexicographers and translation teachers.
1.3 Purpose of the study
The principal aim of this study is to explore the difficulties encountered by Arabic
professional translators and Arabic translation students when translating IEPVs into
Arabic. The other objective is to propose a number of recommendations for Arabic
translators, Arabic lexicographers and Arabic pedagogues based on a range of findings
arrived at from the empirical research conducted in the study. More specifically, this
piece of research is trying to achieve the following purposes:
1. To explore the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic properties of the phenomenon of
PVs in both English and Arabic languages.
2. To investigate the similarities and dissimilarities of such a phenomenon between
both languages in the framework of linguistic contrastive analysis.
3. To device a workable eclectic linguistic model as a disciplined approach for the
analysis and translation of IEPVs into Arabic.
4. To look into difficulties of translating IEPVs into Arabic by investigating the
translational pitfalls made by Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation
students when translating IEPVs into Arabic. Such an investigation will be
9
conducted on the empirical data collected from both groups of the subjects by the
means of translation tests.
5. To suggest a number of practical, constructive and theoretically based
recommendations for Arabic translators, Arabic lexicographers and Arabic
pedagogues.
The main hypothesis of the study, however, is that there is a wide range of difficulties
posed to Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students when
translating IEPVs into Arabic.
In order to achieve the set up goals of the study and to examine the established
hypothesis, two sets of research questions has been put forward. The first set was
intended to address the theoretical part of the thesis. The second set of research questions,
however, was meant to analyse the empirical data from pragmatic, semantic, syntactic
and stylistic perspectives. The research questions of the theoretical part of the study
being:
1) What is the notion of idioms and idiomaticity in both English and Arabic?
2) What are the syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic criteria of IEPVs?
3) Are there structures in Arabic similar to that of the IEPVs?
4) What are the similarities and dissimilarities between idiomatic PVs in English
and Arabic?
5) What are the difficulties of learning IEPVs by non-native speakers of English in
general and by Arab learners of English in particular?
10
6) To what extent have English and Arabic lexicographers been successful in
covering, explaining and providing the appropriate equivalents for IEPVs in
their general and specialized dictionaries? And what are the gaps that need to be
closed in this respect?
7) To what extent the methods and materials employed by English and Arabic
pedagogues can help in solving the learning, teaching and translating difficulties
of IEPVs? And what are the gaps that need to be bridged in this difficult area of
pedagogy?
8) How has the phenomenon of IEPVs been dealt with in translation studies?
The research questions of the empirical part of the study being:
1) To what extent Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students
were successful in providing the Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents of
IEPVs?
2) To what extent the issue of complex idioms poses a difficulty for Arabic
professional translators and Arabic translation students when translating
IEPVs into Arabic?
3) Do syntactic forms of IEPVs pose difficulty to Arabic professional translators
and Arabic translation students when dealing with IEPVs?
4) To what extent the derivational forms of IEPVs affect the process of
translating them into Arabic?
5) It is well known that English is very productive in coining IEPVs. Many of
them pop up on a regular basis. Such newly coined PVs are occasionally
emerging in both written and spoken modes of the English language where there
11
are no readily Arabic equivalents for them. Hence, how did the Arabic subjects
deal with such a phenomenon?
6) What are the types of translational errors made by Arabic professional
translators and Arabic translation students?
7) Is there any difference as to translation communicative competence between
the two groups of Arabic subjects: The professional Arabic translators and
Arabic translation students? If so, what are the major areas in which their
competence varies?
1.4 Layout of the study
The framework of this thesis comprises six Chapters as follows:
In Chapter One a brief historical background of the notion of EPVs in previous studies is
provided. Then the study's justification, purpose, layout, and limitations are outlined.
Chapter Two comprehensively reviews the relevant literature of the concept of PVs and
its peculiarities. It begins with exploring the vital notion of idioms and idiomaticity in
both English and Arabic languages. It goes on to address the key issues of the study,
they are: the definition of PVs in English, the syntactic and semantic properties of PVs
in English, PVs in Arabic, derivation of PVs, PVs in English lexicography, PVs in
bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries, teaching PVs, and PVs in translation studies.
Chapter Three constitutes a link between the theoretical part of the study (the literature
review) and the practical part of it (the experimental research). It establishes a theoretical
12
rationale for the empirical research by reviewing main and influential approaches of
contrastive analysis to see their appropriateness/inappropriateness to the topic at hand in
an attempt to formulate a practical and scientific model for the analysis and translation of
IEPVs into Arabic.
Chapter Four presents the methodology utilized in this study to conduct the
experimental research. It elaborates on the issues of research design, participants, data
collection and data analysis.
Chapter Five comprises two distinct sections. The first section outlines a general
overview of the results of the translation tests conducted by the two groups involved in
the present study (Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students). The
second section concerns itself with analysing and discussing the subjects' performance in
light of the second set of research questions.
Chapter Six concludes by summarizing the findings of the study and proposing
recommendations for Arabic translators, Arabic lexicographers and Arabic pedagogues. It
also draws on the contributions made in the present study and indicates a number of
directions for further research.
1.5 Limitations of the study
This study will only concentrate on idiomatic EPVs and the difficulties they pose to
Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students as a result of their
complex idiomatic meanings and complicated functional-pragmatic use. It will not,
13
however, cover non-idiomatic type of EPVs, owing to the fact that they have
straightforward meanings, and do not cause Arabic professional translators and Arabic
translation students any difficulty in rendering them into Arabic. More regarding the
differentiating between idiomatic and non-idiomatic types of PVs is given in detail in
the forthcoming Chapter, but for the purpose of immediate clarification the following
examples illustrate the excluded non-idiomatic type of PVs where both components of
the construction (verb and particle) keep their individual lexical meanings:
Agree with, alert to, arrange for, arrive in, and assist with.
In addition, despite the fact that PVs are generally used in spoken English more than in
written English, the study will exclude the employment of colloquial Arabic as
functional-pragmatic equivalents since it concerns itself with translation not interpreting
of IEPVs. However, the study will have a considerable impact on interpreting for the
reason that translation and interpreting are two sides of one coin. I also assume that it will
be of benefit to translation teachers, learners of English language and Arabic-English
lexicographers.
Lastly, given that the study is devoted to investigate the difficulties encountered by
Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students when translating IEPVs, it
will not cover the issue of recognition of such idiomatic expressions. It is assumed that
professional translators and translation students, the subjects of this study, must have the
required English proficiency level that allows them to recognize IEPVs.
��
14
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction
In this Chapter the relevant literature will be comprehensively reviewed in an attempt
to address the first set of research questions. The crucial notion of idioms and
idiomaticity in both English and Arabic languages will be taken up as a point of
departure from which I will move on to address the key issues of the study, namely:
the definition of PVs in English, the syntactic and semantic properties of PVs in
English, PVs in Arabic, the derivation of PVs, PVs in English lexicography, PVs in
bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries, teaching PVs, and PVs in translation studies.
The primary purpose of this Chapter is to cast light on the main features of the
phenomenon of PVs in both English and Arabic, and to bring together what has been
already explored by linguists, lexicographers and pedagogues in order to set up a solid
theoretical ground upon which the following Chapters of the study can be established.
2.2 Idioms and idiomaticity in English and Arabic
Before proceeding to the definition of PVs and elaborating on their syntactic,
semantic and pragmatic properties, it is quite essential to consider, in a brief account,
the notion of idioms and idiomaticity in both the English and the Arabic languages.
The aim here is to shed light on such a critical notion and to take it as a platform from
15
which one can move on to explore the characteristics of the idiomatic nature of PVs in
both languages.
2.2.1 Idioms and idiomaticity in English
Idioms have been defined in rather various ways by linguists, grammarians,
lexicographers and pedagogues. To take just a few of such definitions, an idiom is
broadly defined as "[a] fixed expression whose meaning is not guessable from the
meaning of its parts" (Trask, 2000, p. 67), or it is "[a]n expression which functions as
a single unit [where its] meaning cannot be derived from the meaning of the
individual elements" (Daud, Dollah, & Zubir, 2003, p. 100). Fraser (1976) considers
an idiom as "a single constituent or series of constituents, whose semantic
interpretation is independent of the formatives which compose it" (p. v). Idioms,
according to Bolinger (1975), are "groups of words with set meanings that cannot be
calculated by adding up the separate meanings of the parts" (as cited in Lattey, 1986,
p. 219). Further, Baker (1992) rightly points out that idioms "are frozen patterns of
language which allow little or no variation in form and […] often carry meanings
which cannot be deduced from their individual components" (p. 63). Thus, with
idioms a user cannot normally change the order of the words in them, delete a word
from them, replace a word with another, or change their grammatical structure unless
he or she is intentionally making a joke or trying a play on words (Baker, 1992).
Therefore, Lattey (1986) points out that "as far as the form of idioms is concerned, we
have groups of words, and in terms of meanings, we can say that we are dealing with
new, not readily apparent meanings when we confront idioms" (p. 219).
16
Some of the fairly common examples include: let the cat out of the bag (meaning:
reveal a secret), buy a pig in a poke (meaning: commit oneself to a course of action
without investigating), a fish out of water (meaning: a person struggling in an
unfamiliar environment) and kick the bucket (meaning: die) (Trask, 2000).
In his attempt to coin a comprehensive definision, Ghazala (2003) defines idioms as
"special, metaphorical, fixed phrases whose meanings and forms are not negotiable"
(p. 204).
Additionally, he sums up the main features of idioms in five points as follows:
1. Idioms are all in all metaphorical and cannot be understood directly. 2. They should not be taken literally; in the sense that their meanings are not
the outcome of the individual meanings of their constituent words taken collectively.
3. Their syntactic form is usually fixed and cannot be changed or described as ungrammatical […].
4. Their meanings are also invariable. 5. […] They are mainly cultural and informal (p. 204).
Idioms, though, are considered as "vivid, verbal images which add life and verve to
speech and writing. Without them language would be very bland and unexciting"
(John & Smithback, 1991, preface). Hence, their importance in any language "cannot
be doubted [in view of the fact that their] ubiquity makes them anything but a
marginal phenomenon" (Wallace, 1968, p. 112).
Further, idiomaticity is, as Ghazala (2003) puts it, the idioms' "most special
component [which constitutes] their metaphorical aspect" (p. 204), or "the heart of the
matter of any idiomatic expression" (p. 208), and "the gist of any idiomatic phrase"
(p. 209). Idiomaticity, in the words of Weinreich (1969), is "important for this reason,
17
if for no other, that there is so much of it in every language" (as cited in Fernando,
1996, p. 1). Lastly, it is, according to Palmer (1974) "a lexical feature [i.e.],
something to be dealt with in the lexicon or dictionary rather than the grammar" (p.
213).
Yet, understanding idioms and using them properly entails a degree of proficiency
which is hard for the non-native speaker of a given language to acquire (Turton &
Manser, 1985). Therefore, Wallace (1981) makes the point that "[w]hen it comes to
understanding English it is these expressions which cause most difficulty to the
foreign learner" (p. 5).
Great deals of attempts have been made by English scholars to classify idiomatic
expressions. As a result, they have been categorized in many different ways, being: 1)
according to their 'grammatical type' such as verb-adverb idioms, or idioms that
function like a particular part of speech; 2) according to the 'concept or emotion
portrayed' for instance, the idiom tell someone a tall tale would be categorized under
LIE; and 3) according to the 'image', that is, the picture drawn by the idiom, for
example, a category BODY PARTS would include she lost her head (Lattey, 1986).
It must be stressed here that idioms involve many aspects of English language. They
may occur in such forms as: slang, proverbs, allusions, similes, dead metaphors,
social formulate, and collocations (Fernando, 1996).
Further, Ghazala (2003) puts idioms into five main types, being:
1. Full / pure idioms; 2. Semi-idioms;
18
3. Proverbs, popular sayings and semi-proverbial expressions; 4. Phrasal verbs; 5. Metaphorical catchphrases and popular expressions (p. 208).
What has to be confirmed at this stage is that PVs constitute an integral part of
English idiomatic expressions. They have been classified as one category of English
idiomatic expressions by many researchers other than the abovementioned Lattey
(1986) and Ghazala (2003) (e.g., Spears, 1987; Alexander, 1984: Urdang, 1979 as
cited in Bataineh & Bataineh, 2002, p. 40).
In his book The Verb-Particle Combination in English, Fraser (1976) emphasizes that
"[p]ractically every grammarian of English has noted and commented about idioms in
general. More specifically, almost all have noted the regularity with which certain
adverbials (particles) co-occur with certain verbs" (p. 63).
PVs' elements sacrifice their individual meanings and by the act of combination
assume a new meaning, as, for example, bear out (meaning: corroborate), come by
(meaning: acquire), get at (meaning: reach), make out (meaning: understand), own up
(meaning: confess), and put out (meaning: extinguish) (Kennedy, 1967). It is quite
evident that in such idiomatic PVs, the meanings of the separate parts tell us little or
nothing about the meaning of the whole. For instance, one may be quite familiar with
the meanings of the items pick and up as individual words, but such familiarity does
not help in understanding the idiomatic meaning of the PV pick up in such sentence
as: Business is picking up (Turton & Manser, 1985). The idiomaticity of EPVs will be
explored in detail in the forthcoming sections of this Chapter.
19
2.2.2 Idioms and idiomaticity in Arabic
The phenomenon of idiomatic expressions in the Arabic language has been
exclusively tackled in the Arabic rhetoric ((&�4ا+)-&7ن��E) by many ancient and modern
Arabic writers such as Al-jaaHiZ (died 255 A.H.) in his book 0--(F+ا+)-7ن�وا (rhetoric and
clarification) [my translation], Al-jurjaanii (died 471 A.H.) in his books ��5&G2(+ار�ا,&Hأ
(secrets of rhetoric) [my translation] and 7ز��&IEJا�K&LMد (Indications of the Miraculous)
[my translation], and Al-zamakhsharii (died 538 A.H.) in his books 5&&G2(+7س�ا&&Hأ
(Foundation of Rhetoric) [my translation] and 7ف�N&'+ا (The Explorer) [my translation]
among others.
Bearing in mind that rhetoric ((�4ا+)-7نE) being defined by Arabic linguists as "a science
by which the stating of a single meaning in different ways, with a clear indication to it
[the meaning] being known" [my translation] (Shakkour, 1992, p. 64). Yet, this
science falls into four rhetorical styles being: 1) ا�����ز� (figurative expression), which
means: Using a word in a meaning which is not its original one owing to a relation
(other than the similarity relation) between the two meanings with a presumption that
the original meaning is not intended (Sayyd Ahmad, 1993) [my translation]. To take
one example:
In this .[my translation] (Shakkour, 1992) (The winter [sic] poured down) ا3OP&,�ا+&7FNء��
example the original meaning of winter (7ء�FN&+ا) is not intended. What is meant by
winter here is the rain due to the fact that the rain pours down only in winter in the
Arab land; 2) ���� (simile), which is, following Shakkour (1992, p. 65), "An ا�
indication of sharing of one meaning by two things" [my translation]. For instance:
20
In this .[my translation] (Lebanon is like a paradise in beauty) +).&7ن�آI+7.&8�5&%�ا+3I&7ل����
sentence Lebanon and paradise share one meaning, that is, the beauty (p. 65); 3)
which means: Using a word in a meaning which is not its original ,(metaphor) أ�� ��رة
one owing to a similarity relation between the two meanings with a presumption that
the original meaning is not intended (Sayyd Ahmad, 1993) [my translation]. For
example: �Q&R�S��7ح�/.-&,ا(U&3+ا�. (The light smiled shining) (p. 125) [my translation]. In
this example the original meaning of light is not intended, it is rather borrowed here to
refer to a handsome person due to the similarity relation between the light and the
handsome person, i.e. shining; and 4) ا�������� (antonomasia), which means: Any word
that expresses a meaning which can be perceived literally and metaphorically at the
same time (Shakkour, 1992) [my translation]. For example:����5WXY&(/�0Y&Z�[&1�(Hassan's
hand is outstretched) (Sayyd Ahmad, 1993) [my translation]. In this example it is
possible to perceive the meaning of outstretched literally, i.e. it is not grasped, or
metaphorically, i.e. he is a generous person.
People in the Arab world use idiomatic expressions for two reasons, according to Abu
Sa'ad (1987 as cited in Bataineh & Bataineh, 2002), they are:
1) to beautify their language and distinguish it through such a stylistic phenomenon […and] 2) to avoid mentioning a word that may cause embarrassment or annoyance (p. 47).
Interestingly, Abu Sa'ad (1987 as cited in Bataineh & Bataineh, 2002) outlines the
structural and semantic characteristics of Arabic idioms as follows:
1. Idioms come in the following structural patterns: a. The sentence which consists of two or more words;
Example: to put the cart before the horse [ �ا+7UQن1^[�ا+*,\�5أ/7م ] b. Genitive constructions whose individual meanings are familiar,
while the result of their combination is unfamiliar; Example: Noah's ark [حX&&P�5.-_&&H] 'something that gathers many objects or species'
21
the patience of Job [بX1أ�,(`] 'real patience and tolerance' c. Individual idiomatic words;
Example: He is an ear [أذن��X&ه] 'He tells of what he hears without thinking'
2. They are influenced by certain linguistic phenomena such as: a. synonymy [ادف�,&F+ا], where different structures express the same
meaning; b. homonymy [017&&&(F+ا], where one structure expresses different
meanings; and c. antonymy [7د^&&&F+ا], where one structure expresses opposite
meanings. 3. Idioms are related to proverbs and, thus, the more common the proverb the
greater its chance of being an idiom. 4. Idioms derive their figures from the environment, Arabic, like English, is
full of idiomatic expressions. Yet, there are more of them in Arabic dialects than in Modern Standard Arabic. […] Many of the Arabic idioms are easy to understand because their meanings are not that far from the sum total of their respective components. But others, just as in English, are difficult to understand, especially for non-native speakers of Arabic, simply because their meanings are far from the sum of their components (pp. 47-48).
Along these lines, Awwad (1990) indicates that what is said about English idioms
regarding their semantic and syntactic restrictions also applies to Arabic idioms. He
gives the �following�example� :����0-&.Z�%&_n\7د�&E�(he returned empty-handed) (literally: he
returned with the slippers of Hunain) where we cannot substitute �K&`و (he arrived) or
.E (he returned) and keep the idiomaticity of the expression (p&7د� H (he walked) for&7ر�
58).
Moreover, in his attempt to further compare English idioms with their Arabic
counterparts, Awwad (1990) makes the point that English idioms can be lexemic as in
(hammer and tong), phraseological as in (to fly off the handle) and proverbial as in
(don't wash your dirty linen in public). The lexemic idioms, however, can be verbal
(verb + particle) as in (break in), nominal as in (hot dog), adjectival as in (pepper and
salt), and adverbial as in (hammer and tong). By the same token, Arabic idioms can be
lexemic as in 7ر&&P�4وQ&&o (literally: fat and fire, meaning: completely opposites),
22
phraseological as in ���%&.-E�p&)E�/�%&Hرا (literally: on my eye / head, meaning: with
pleasure), and proverbial as in �����K&`ا+&]رب�و�p&)E7ر�&H�0&/ (literally: he who walks on the
road will get there, meaning: he who takes the first step will eventually achieve his
aims). Like�English, Arabic lexemic idioms can be verbal, nominal, adjectival, and
adverbial (p. 58). Yet, "Arabic verbal lexemic idioms do not occur with particles" (p.
58). Therefore, the Arabic equivalent for (he broke into the house) is 4اQFwx-(+ا� or ��K&yد
Hence "Arabic verbal .(p. 58) (meaning: he entered the house by force) ا+)-&X&.E�xة��
lexemic idioms are made up of either the verb alone or the verb followed by an
adverbial nominal" (p. 58).
In their monolingual Arabic-Arabic dictionary ����5ا-Z2{&`Mات�ا,&-(*F)+�%w7-Y&+�4ا&I*3+ (The
Contextual Dictionary of Idiomatic Expressions) [My translation] Siinii, Hussain and
Al-ddoush (1996) put together more than 2000 Arabic idiomatic expressions collected
from a wide range of ancient and modern Arabic literature, representing all the
aspects of such a phenomenon in the Arabic language. This book will be reviewed in
more detail in section six of this Chapter when the issue of PVs in Arabic will be
attended to.
To sum up so far, five fruitful insights can be arrived at as to the notion of idioms and
idiomaticity in both Arabic and English languages, they are: 1) generally speaking,
both languages rely on idiomatic expressions in all aspects of their spoken and written
modes; 2) idiomatic expressions in both languages are of a special nature and subject
to syntactic and semantic restrictions; 3) they are, in both languages, rather culture-
specific and their meanings are far from the sum of the meanings of their individual
components; 4) their semantic and syntactic complexities require a high proficiency
23
level on the part of non-native speakers to be able to understand and produce them
properly; and 5) unlike English which gives a clear prominence to IEPVs as one of
the most important types of idiomatic expressions, Arabic does not categorize them as
such. This is basically because they do not represent such a category in the Arabic
language. Therefore, since this study is devoted to translating IEPVs into Arabic,
more light will be shed, in the forthcoming sections, on this particular area in an
attempt to explore the gap that exists between the two languages which causes a great
deal of difficulties to Arabic translators, lexicographers, pedagogues and learners of
English.
2.3 Definition of PVs in English
In the previous section the notion of idioms and idiomaticity in general was described.
The present section, however, focuses particularly on the ways by which English
scholars have defined the phenomenon of PVs.
There is no doubt that defining EPVs is a fairly difficult task as the phenomenon is
still being debated among researchers in such domains as grammar, linguistics,
pedagogy and lexicography. Bolinger (1971) admittedly considers that "I do not
believe that a linguistic entity such as the phrasal verb can be confined within clear
bounds […] being or not being a phrasal verb is a matter of degree" (p. 6).
To start with, a variety of definitions produced by linguists, grammarians,
lexicographers and pedagogues will be outlined below. The aim is to highlight the
24
points they have in common, and to come up with a rather comprehensive definition
for the phenomenon of EPVs.
PVs are, following Live (1965), "a considerable group of basic verbs, each of which,
in certain of its occurrences, [is] closely linked with a particle-adverbial or
prepositional- in such a manner as to justify considering the two elements as
constituting one discontinuous verb" (p. 428). They are, in Heaton's words, "an
adverbial particle combines with a verb to form a collocation possessing a new
meaning. [Each] phrasal verb must be considered as a unit" (1965, preface).
PV, according to Bolinger (1971), is "a lexical unit in the strict sense of a nonadditive
compound or derivative, one that has a set of meaning which is not the sum of the
meaning of its parts" (p. xxi). Sroka (1972) maintains that "[…] the verb and particle,
or the verb and a group of particles, are said to constitute in this case a kind of integral
functional unit" (p. 14). Furthermore, the phenomenon has been defined in the
Dictionary of English Phrasal Verbs and their Idioms, by McArthur and Atkins
(1974) as "[…] combinations of simple, monosyllabic verbs (put, take, get, etc.) and
members of a set of particles (on, up, out, etc.)" (p. 5). Along these lines, McArthur
(1975) points out that "[a] phrasal verb is formed by combining a simple verb and one
of a number of particles. The result is called 'phrasal' because it looks like a phrase
rather than a single word. Although it looks like a phrase, it functions as a single
word. It is a unit" (p. 9). Similarly, in The Student's Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs,
Turton and Manser (1985) define PV as a "verb which consists of two or three
separate parts: come in, run away, look forward to, etc. With an idiomatic phrasal
verb, the meanings of the separate parts tell us little or nothing about the meaning of
25
the whole" (p. iv). By the same token, Dixon (1991) defines PVs as "a combination of
verb plus preposition(s) that has a meaning not inferable from the individual meanings
of verb and preposition(s), so that it must be regarded as an independent lexical item,
and accorded a dictionary entry of its own" (p. 274).
What is more, in Making Sense of Phrasal Verbs, Shovel (1992) defines PV as:
[…] a compound verb formed by one of the following combinations: (1) verb and adverb; or (2) verb and preposition; or (3) verb with both adverb and preposition […] Simple combinations like sit down and stand up cause the learner fewer problems. The difficulties being when the combination is 'Idiomatic': that is, when the meaning of combination as a whole (i.e. the phrasal verb) is different from the meanings of its separate parts (p. 5).
Likewise, Close (1992) makes the point that such "constructions are formed by the
verb be or a simple verb expressing physical action – come, go; put, take; give, get;
do, make; let, keep; bring, send; stand, fall, sit; turn; break, […] - followed by a
preposition or particle indicating direction or position" (p. 149).
Further, Cowie and Mackin (1993) indicate that "[t]he combination has to be
understood as one unit, meaning 'start suddenly or violently'. When a verb + particle
(or a verb + preposition) is a unit of meaning like this it is a PHRASAL VERB"
(p. xi) [Emphasis in original].
Crowley, Lynch, Siegel and Piau (1995), similarly observe that a PV is "a verb which
is made up of more than one element, usually including a verb and a PARTICLE, […]
The meaning of a phrasal verb is quite different from that of the sum of its parts"
(p. 334) [Emphasis in original].
26
In addition, Lindstormberg (1998) lists three criteria to define PVs, claiming that
"[n]on-literality, idiomaticity and paraphrasability-in-one-word are rather rough and
ready definition criteria for phrasal verbs" (p. 23). However, in The Grammar
Dictionary, Stern (2000) defines PV as "a word cluster that consists of a verb + one or
two adverbial particles" (p. 142). Likewise, in Collins Cobuild Dictionary of Phrasal
Verbs, Sinclair et al. (1998) define PVs as "[…] combinations of verbs with adverbial
or prepositional particles" (p. iv).
Another definition is given by Thrush (2001). He notes that a PV is "a verb and a
preposition (or two). The meaning is often idiomatic; that is, the meaning of the
phrasal verb cannot be derived by looking up the verb and the preposition separately
in a dictionary" (p. 292).
In a nutshell, the array of definitions outlined above have six points in common,
being: 1) an EPV is basically formed of two words: a simple, monosyllabic verb and
one of a number of particles; 2) the particle could be an adverbial or a prepositional;
3) some PVs are formed of three words: a verb and both an adverb and a preposition;
4) semantically speaking, there are two types of PVs: literal (non-idiomatic) and
metaphorical (idiomatic). The meaning of PV, in the former, can be easily deduced
from the individual meanings of verb and particle. In the latter, however, the meaning
is not inferable and utterly different from the total sum of the meanings of the separate
parts; 5) a PV constitutes one lexical unit and functions as a single word of one unit of
meaning; and 6) a PV can be paraphrased by one single word.
27
All in all, an IEPV is a combination of two or three items (a verb + a preposition, a
verb + an adverb, or a verb + an adverb + a preposition) which functions as a single
unit of meaning in the sense that its meaning cannot be deduced from the total sum of
the meanings of its separate elements. IEPVs are exemplified in what follows:
To carry out, to carry on, to turn up, to turn on, to turn off, to come across, to come
over, to come out, to write up, to slow down, to speed up, to throw out, to throw up,
to help out, to knock off, to knock down, to sort out, to give up, to give in, to give
away, to get away with, to black out, to tip off, to account for, to point out, to water
down, to take off, to take in, to look for, to put up with, etc.
2.4 Syntactic properties of EPVs
In this section I will closely look at the phenomenon of EPVs from the syntactic
standpoint, elaborating on such grammatical features as: word class, syntactic
categories, and word order. The key aim here is to draw a clear picture for such a
phenomenon that enables me, later on, to compare it with its Arabic counterpart so as
to pinpoint the underlying contrasts that present Arabic professional translators and
Arabic translation students with a great deal of challenge when handling IEPVs.
2.4.1 Word class of EPVs
There are two points that need to be noted here; the first one is the types of verb that
can be phrasalised, and the second is the types of particle that may co-occur with
these verbs:
28
2.4.1.1 Verbs
McArthur and Atkins (1974) maintain that there are at least six types of verb that can
be phrasalised. They list them as follows:
a) verbs of movement (usually monosyllabic and of Anglo-Saxon origin): go, come, run, walk, hope, skip etc.
b) verbs of invitation and ordering etc.: invite, order, summon, let etc. c) the so-called 'empty verbs' or verbs of indefinite meaning: get, put,
take, make, do etc. d) verbs formed with or without the suffix –en, from simple monosyllabic
adjective: brighten, slacken, flatten, dry, cool etc. e) verbs formed unchanged from simple, usually monosyllabic nouns
with such paraphrase patterns as: chalk up= mark up with chalk brick up= seal up with brick
f) a random scattering of two-syllable verbs of Latin origin, with which some kind of direction or emphasis is required: contract (out), measure (up), level (off) etc. (p. 6) [Emphasis in original].
However, some grammarians, for instance Dixon (1991), list these types of verb
under different names, such as: "MOTION (e.g., bring, carry), REST (e.g., sit, stand),
AFFECT (e.g., cut, kick, scrape), GIVE (e.g., give, get, have), MAKING (e.g., make,
let), or the grammatical verbs be and do" (p. 275) [Emphasis in original].
It is quite important to mention here that Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech, and Svartvik
(1985) make the point that there are "words which occur as verbs only when
combined with particles, [for example:] beaver in beaver away, egg in egg on, and
eke in eke out: she egged him on. *She egged (him)" (p. 1151 footnote) [Emphasis in
original].
Live (1965), also, indicates that there are some verbs "which never occur
independently, always being associated with some particles [e.g.,]: put, lay, set, step,
29
and others" (p. 432). Likewise, there are some "wedded pairs" where " the verb never
(or hardly ever) appears without its particular particle", such as: auction off, jot down,
tide over, cave in, dole out, balk at, cope with, trifle with, cater to, delve into, dote on
(p. 432).
Fraser (1976), on the other hand, emphasizes that "[s]tative verbs such as know, want,
see, hear, hop, resemble, etc. practically never combine with a particle. Hear out
appears to be an exception to this generalization" (p. 11) [Emphasis in original].
He also points out that although there are some verbs that can form a PV "with almost
every particle" such as Get, there are "some verbs that may co-occur with only one
particle and no others [e.g.,] book up, chicken out, fizzle out, fog up, jack up, shack up,
sober up, pan out, [and] jot down" (p. 9) [My emphasis].
2.4.1.2 Particles
Particles in EPVs are of two kinds, namely: prepositional and adverbial indicating
direction or position/location (Close, 1992).
It is interesting to note, in this respect, that most of the scholars who dealt with the
notion of PVs, start their studies by accounting for the distinction between the verb-
adverb combination and the verb-preposition combination (cf. Palmer, 1968;
Bolinger, 1971; Fraser, 1976; Dixon, 1982; Kaluza, 1984; Close, 1992; Beate Hampe,
1997 to cite only a few). Cowie (1993) points out that "[t]he distinction between verb
+ preposition and verb + adverb is central to any systematic treatment of phrasal
30
verbs" (p. 38). Along these lines Sroka (1972) observes that "[t]he problem of the
distinction between the adverb and the preposition in English […] constitutes one of
the central problems connected with the 'phrasal verbs'" (p. 15).
Thus, let us first have a close look at the differences between the two types of
particles, i.e. adverbs and prepositions; to be able to perceive the role they play when
combining with simple verbs to form PVs.
2.4.1.2.1 Adverbs
Adverbs in general, as defined by Aarts (1997), are modifiers of verbs, adjectives or
other adverbs as in:
a) Our colleague from Paris merrily marks student essays in his path. b) The teachers are extremely unimpressed by his efforts. c) Our new professor works very hard (p. 42) [Emphasis in original].
They are, on the other hand, of three types: place, time and manner as illustrated in
these examples given by (Azzaro, 1992):
(a) Let's stay here (place) (b) We're going now (time) (c) She speaks well (manner) (p.41) [My emphasis]
However, the majority of adverbs used in EPVs, as indicated by Azzaro (1992), are
locative (place) adverbs as in:
a) The furious farmer came after us. b) He has quite a bit of money laid by. c) He acted as a go-between. (p. 42) [My emphasis].
Moreover, Azzaro (1992) asserts that the only important exception to this rule being
on, as in:
He carried on telling the same old story (p. 42) [My emphasis].
31
Interestingly, McArthur (1989) lists the following 31 adverbial particles which are
typically occurred in EPVs:
Aback, about, ahead, along, apart, aside, around, away, back, backward(s), beyond, by, down, downward(s), forth, forward(s), in, inward(s), off, on, onward(s), out, outward(s), over, past, round, sideways, through, to and fro, up, upward(s) (p. 40) [Emphasis in original].
Further, he nominates six particles of them as the commonest: "down, in, off, on, out,
up" (p. 40) [Emphasis in original].
Yet, Cowie and Mackin (1993) add to what is mentioned above the following 32
adverbial particles:
Aboard, above, abreast, abroad, across, adrift, after, aground, ahead, aloft, alongside, aside, astray, before, behind, below, between, counter, downhill, downstairs, home, indoors, in front, inside, near, on top, outside, overboard, together, under, underground, upstairs, without (p. vii) [My emphasis].
In addition, McArthur (1989) makes the point that there are some words that may
function as adverbial particles such as: home, open and shut as in the following
examples given by him:
He forced the door open/forced open the door. She hammered the nail home/hammered home the nail (p. 40) [Emphasis in original].
By the same token, Bolinger (1971) gives the following two examples in which he
considers home as a particle:
He brought home the groceries. He brought home the point in a convincing manner (p.16) [My emphasis].
However, unlike other adverbs, adverbial particles, as Heaton (1965) sketches them,
are "best regarded as helping to form a new verb, for they change, or add to, the
meaning of the verb, however slightly. [Therefore] the particle is really an integral
32
part of the phrasal verb, separable often in word order but nevertheless constituting a
single unit" (p. 45). Moreover, Heaton (1965) limits the function of most adverbial
particles to the following five ways:
(1) Many cause a verb to assume a new or subsidiary meaning. The widow carried on as if nothing had happened. (continued) [...].
(2) Some particles assume a new or special meaning, with a verb but do not change the normal meaning of that verb. […] Speak out. (Speak loudly or candidly) As the verb retains its usual meaning in such cases, it is often possible to deduce the meaning of the whole collocation: e.g. look over = inspect; switch on = connect.
(3) Other particles provide stress emphasis, or a sense of completion. Let me finish this off before I leave […].
(4) Others function in a similar way to ordinary adverbs, helping to form a collocation which maintains a literal meaning. She got in her car and drove away (or off) without speaking […].
(5) A number are similar in function to prepositions. Although they are linked to the verb and conform to the same rules of word order, etc. as other adverbial particles, a noun equivalent following them is often understood (through not expressed). Take your hat off (your head). She came down (the stair) (pp. 45-46) [Emphasis in original].
Further, Fraser (1976) indicates that "there are numerous verb-particle combinations
[PVs] in which the verb, when occurring alone, has a radically different
interpretation" (p. 8). He gives the following sentence pairs to exemplify such verbs:
They usually box his ears as punishment Please box up my gift. They cracked the case with the hammer. She really cracked up at my jokes (p. 8) [My emphasis].
Furthermore, Kennedy (1967) makes the point that in some cases "the object of the
[verb-adverb] combination is, or may be, of a very different character from that of the
simple verb". He provides the following illustrative instances:
argue a case but argue down an opponent, burn a paper " burn off a field, buy a house " buy off or out a person, clean a room " clean out its contents, dig a hole " dig out or up a plant
(pp. 26-27) [Emphasis in original].
33
What is more, there are some intransitive verbs which become transitive when
combining with particles (Fraser, 1976; Kennedy, 1967), as in:
He slept off the effects of the drinking. She looked up the information. (Fraser, 1976, p. 8) [Emphasis in original].
By contrast, there are a larger number of verbs which are ordinarily transitive become
intransitive when a particle is added (Fraser, 1976; Kennedy, 1967), for example:
They dug in and sustained the attack without loss of life. She begged off at the last minute. He caught on quickly. The distraught couple split up (Fraser, 1976, p. 8) [Emphasis in original].
Likewise, Heaton (1965) maintains that PVs "offer a convenient means of making
intransitive use of transitive verbs by the addition of a particle" (p. 46).
In his elaborating on this point, Kennedy (1967) maintains that "[i]n many of these,
no doubt, a reflexive object is understood so that, strictly speaking, they are
intransitive in form only. So, for instance, black up and clean up imply "to black up or
to clean up oneself'" (p. 26).
2.4.1.2.2 Prepositions
A preposition, according to Quirk et al. (1985), "expresses a relation between two
entities, one being that represented by prepositional complement, the other by another
part of the sentence. The prepositional complement is characteristically a noun phrase,
a nominal wh- clause, or a nominal ing clause" (p 657). They are of five types, as
34
classified by Collins (1998) according to their (circumstantial) meaning: time, place,
manner, agency and recipience, as exemplified in what follows:
1 time after our match; during the exam. 2 place in the kitchen; against the wall. 3 manner with ease. 4 agency by the mechanic. 5 recipience to a friend (p. 32) [Emphasis in original].
Cowie and Mackin (1993) list the following 52 prepositions that are used to form
EPVs:
Aboard, about, above, across, after, against, ahead of, along, alongside, among, around, as, as far as, astride, at, before, behind, below, beneath, beside, between, beyond, by, down, for, from, in, in front of, inside, into, like, near, of, off, on, onto, on top of, out of, outside, over, past, round, through, to, toward(s), under, underneath, up, upon, with, within, without (p. vii) [My emphasis].
However, despite the fact that adverbs and prepositions often share the same form,
they differ in that each of them has a different relationship to the rest of the sentence.
Adverbs are related only to the words that they modify, while prepositions connect
their objects with other words (Corless, 1979). For example:
I came across my classmate yesterday. (Adverb)
He came across the street to say hello. (Preposition)
Fraser (1976), however, indicates that prepositions "are syntactically more closely
associated with the noun phrase which follows them than with the verb which
precedes" (p. 2).
Similarly, Sroka (1972) makes the point that "the adverb is more closely connected
with the verb than the preposition is, and that the preposition is closely connected
with a noun or noun-equivalent" (p. 22).
35
Yet, there are many words used as either adverbs or prepositions. By comparing the
list of prepositional particles with the above list of adverbial particles one can come
up with the following list of particles of dual functions:
Aboard, about, above, across, after, along, alongside, around, before, behind, below,
between, beyond, by, down, in inside, near, off, on outside, over, past, through, to,
under, up, without.
It is worth mentioning that Bolinger (1971) introduces the term "Adpreps" to describe
such particles with dual functions, which "form the most typical phrasal verbs […
and] function now as adverbs, now as prepositions" (p. 23).
Such dual functions are illustrated in the following examples provided by Thomson
and Martinet (1986):
Peter is behind us. (preposition) He is along behind. (adverb) He runs up the stairs. (preposition) He went up in the lift. (adverb) (p. 104) [Emphasis and bracketing in original].
Nevertheless, Jackendoff (2002) maintains that unlike most English particles back and
together "do not double as prepositions" (p. 70).
Such a matching in form prompts Palmer (1974) to argue that "the term 'particle' has
been used in order not to distinguish […] between preposition and adverb [as] a
striking characteristic of many [of them] is that they can function as either" (p. 214).
He goes beyond that to say "[i]t might be plausible to argue that English does not, in
fact, have two words classes adverb and preposition, but a single class 'particle' or,
perhaps, 'prepositional-adverb'. For there is considerable similarity in their function"
36
(p. 215). But, Azzaro (1992) declares that traditional grammarians "do distinguish
between adverb and preposition" (p. 43). Palmer (1968) indicates that "[w]hen there is
no noun at all following the verb we must, of course, have verb plus adverb, since by
definition a preposition will always be followed by a noun phrase" (p. 182). Thus, the
particles in the following examples are adverbs:
The tree blew down. The injured man came to (p. 182) [Emphasis in original].
Morphologically speaking, Quirk et al. (1985) indicate that "[t]he words follow the
lexical verb in expressions like drink up, dispose of, and get away with are
morphologically invariable [they are] belong to two distinct but overlapping
categories, that of prepositions and that of spatial adverbs". Further they give them the
label "PARTICALES" as a "neutral designation" one (p. 1150) [Emphasis in original].
The fact that particles in EPVs are morphologically invariable has been ably
explained by Darwin and Gray (1999). They observe that:
This fact carries two major implications, the first being that all inflections are of the verb proper. Thus, you're pulling me on and he makes up lies are expected whereas *you're put me oning and * he make ups lies are reserved for children, ESL learners, and slips of tongue. The second implication is that morphologically variable words do not serve as particles (p. 69).
Last but not least, Azzaro (1992) limits the differences between these two classes of
lexemes (i.e. adverbs and prepositions) to one main difference which "lies in the
intransitiveness of the former and transitiveness of the latter" (p. 41). Further, he
introduces the term "adverbial prepositions", claiming that "even though modern
grammarians believe that some prepositions can be transitive and intransitive, so that
we may have cases of adverbial prepositions" (p. 41).
37
2.4.2 Syntactic categories of EPVs
Having known the difference between the classes of adverb and preposition, it is quite
essential here to cast a light on the major categories of verb + particle combinations.
There are three types of combinations:
1. Verb + adverb combination.
2. Verb + preposition combination.
3. Verb + adverb + preposition combination.
Basically, verb + adverb combination consists of a simple verb and an adverbial
particle as in:
1) Sorry, Australia, I've let you down
(The Sun-Herald, August 8, 2004, pp. 10-11) [My emphasis].
2) A post mortem has been carried out
(The Daily Telegraph, August 12, 2004, p. 9) [My emphasis].
3) We can't back down
(The Sunday Telegraph, April 11, 2004, p. 1) [My emphasis].
Whereas, verb + preposition combination consists of a simple verb and prepositional
particle followed by a prepositional object as in:
4) Prime Minister John Howard stepped into the furore
(The Daily Telegraph, August 12, 2004, p.1) [My emphasis].
5) The crossing was closed because militants were planning to tunnel under it
(The Sun-Herald, August 8, 2004, p. 51) [My emphasis].
6) Miss Universe win puts Jennifer over the moon
(The Sydney Morning Herald, June 3, 2004, p. 2) [My emphasis].
38
Finally, verb + adverb + preposition combination consists of a simple verb, adverbial
particle, and prepositional particle followed by a prepositional object. These
combinations are illustrated by Jacobs (1995) in what follows:
Cut down on "reduce" Drop in on "visit casually" Get away with "violate a rule without punishment" Go back on "violate an agreement" Go through with "finish, complete" Keep up with "stay level with" Look down on "despise" Make up for "compensate" Put up with "tolerate" Run out of "have no more" Run up against "meet as an obstacle" Stand up for "defend" (p. 250) [Emphasis and bracketing in original]
The three categories of verb + particle combinations are summarized in Table 2.1
below:
Type Combination Example 1 Verb + adverb I will never give in. 2 Verb + preposition He looked at the mirror. 3 Verb + adverb + preposition She cannot get away with it. Table 2.1 Verb + particle combinations
It is important to state here that scholars vary in which type of the above is a PV.
Some of them, like Quirk et al. (1985), consider the first type only as a PV, whereas
others, like Courtney (1983), consider the three types as PVs as far as they are
idiomatic. Such a question will be investigated in more details in the next section
when semantic properties of EPVs are accounted for.
Having generally known that, let us consider these three types of verb + particle
combinations one by one more carefully.
39
2.4.2.1 Verb + adverb combinations
Quirk et al. (1985) recognize this type only as "phrasal verbs" (pp. 1150-1161). It is,
according to them, of two types, namely: Intransitive PVs and transitive PVs.
2.4.2.1.1 Intransitive PVs
Intransitive PVs consist of a verb plus an adverbial particle. They do not require any
object. Quirk et al. (1985) cite the following illustrative examples:
The plane has just touched upon. The plane has now taken off. The prisoner finally broke down. She turned up unexpectedly. When will they give in? The tank blew up (p. 1152) [Emphasis in original].
The adverbial particles in these PVs function like predication adjuncts, and usually
cannot be separated from their lexical verbs (Quirk et al., 1985). Registerwise, these
PVs are typically used informally (Quirk et al., 1985).
Moreover, Quirk et al. (1985) differentiate between this type of combinations and
what they call "FREE COMBINATIONS", saying that in the former "the meaning of
the combination manifestly cannot be predicted from the meanings of verb and
particle in isolation [but in the latter] the verb acts as a normal intransitive verb, and
the adverb has its own meaning" (p. 1152). They exemplified the former in: Give in
'surrender' and Catch on 'understand'. And they exemplified the latter in:
He walked past. [='past the object/place'] I waded across ['across the river/water/etc'] (p. 1152) [Emphasis and bracketing in original]
40
2.4.2.1.2 Transitive PVs
Transitive PVs consist of a verb plus an adverb particle plus a direct object. They
require a direct object to complete their meaning. This type of PVs exemplified by
Quirk et al. (1985) as follows:
We still set up a new unit. Shall I put away the dishes? She's bringing up two children. Someone turned on the light. They have called off the strike (p. 1153) [Emphasis in original]
The adverb particle in such PVs "can either precede or follow the direct object: They
turned on the light. They turned the light on" (Quirk et al., 1985, pp. 1153-1154)
[Emphasis in original].
Like any transitive verb, this type of PVs "can normally be turned into passive
without stylistic awkwardness [as in]: Aunt Ada brought up Roy. Roy was brought up
by Aunt Ada" (Quirk et al., 1985, p. 1154) [Emphasis in original].
Additionally, Palmer (1968) indicates that "[v]erbs of this type [transitive PVs] are, of
course, very common especially with certain verbs like TAKE and PUT" [Emphasis
in original] (p. 187). He cites the following ilustrative example:
Put about a rumour. Put back the clocks. Put down a rebellion. Put in an application. Put out a pamphlet. Put over an idea. Put off a meeting (p. 187) [Emphasis in original].
41
2.4.2.2 Verb + preposition combinations
This type of a combination is called a 'prepositional verb'. Like the last one, it is of
two types as well, being: intransitive prepositional verbs, and transitive prepositional
verbs.
2.4.2.2.1 Intransitive prepositional verbs
This subtype of prepositional verbs "consists of a lexical verb followed by a
preposition with which it is semantically and/or syntactically associated. The
preposition […] precedes its complement" (Quirk et al., 1985, p. 1155). For example:
Look at these pictures. I don't care for Jane's parties. We must go into the problem.
Can you cope with the work? (Quirk et al., 1985, p. 1155) [Emphasis in original].
Quirk et al. (1985) indicate that "[t]he noun phrase following the preposition in such
constructions is termed a PREPOSITIONAL OBJECT [that is, not a direct object]"
(p. 1156) [Emphasis in original]. And the passive is commonly possible as in:
The picture was looked at by many people (Quirk et al., 1985, p. 1156) [Emphasis in
original].
2.4.2.2.2 Transitive prepositional verbs
This subtype of prepositional verbs is made up of a lexical verb plus a preposition
"followed by two noun phrases, normally separated by the preposition: the former is
the direct object, the latter the prepositional object" (Quirk et al., 1985, p. 1158). For
example:
42
He invested his money in property. The gang robbed her of her necklace. This clothing will protect you from the worst weather.
May I remind you of our agreement? (Quirk et al., 1985, p. 1158) [Emphasis in original].
It is worth mentioning to say that some grammarians (like Close, 1992) do not
differentiate between the direct object and the prepositional object. Therefore, they
consider all constructions of prepositional verb (verb + preposition) are transitive, that
is, they have to be followed by objects (Close, 1992, p. 149).
2.4.2.3 Verb + adverb + preposition combinations
This type of a combination is typically termed as "phrasal-prepositional verb"
(Mitchell, 1958; Palmer, 1968; Quirk et al., 1985), in view of the fact that "they
contain, in addition to the lexical verb, both an adverb and a preposition as particles"
(Quirk et al., 1985 p. 1160). Palmer (1968) maintains that "[w]here there are two
elements following the verb, the first will always be an adverb, and the second a
preposition" (p. 183). Whereas, Kennedy (1967) calls them "double combinations" (p.
32) due to the fact that the whole phrase functions as a single verb, and can be
translated by one simple verb.
Phrasal-prepositional verbs are, registerwise, "largely restricted to informal English"
(Quirk et al., 1985, p. 1160). Like the previously mentioned combinations, they are of
two types, being: intransitive phrasal-prepositional verbs, and transitive phrasal-
prepositional verbs.
43
2.4.2.3.1 Intransitive phrasal-prepositional verbs
This subtype of phrasal-prepositional verbs is followed by prepositional object rather
than a direct object. It is illustrated by Quirk et al. (1985) as follows:
We are all looking forward to your party on Saturday. He had to put up with a lot of teasing at school. Why don't you look in on Mrs. Johnson on your way back? He thinks he can get away with everything (p. 1160) [Emphasis in original].
Quirk et al. (1985) make the point that "[t]he prepositional passive with such verbs is
not too common, and is liable to sound cumbersome" (p. 1160). However, they
indicate that sentences such as the following "are normal and acceptable" (p. 1160):
These tantrums could not be put up with any longer. ['tolerated'] The death penalty has been recently done away with. ['abolished'] Such problems must be squarely faced up to. ['confronted'] They were looked down on by their neighbours. ['despised']
(p. 1160) [Emphasis and bracketing in original]
2.4.2.3.2 Transitive phrasal-prepositional verbs
This subtype of phrasal-prepositional verbs is followed by a direct object. It is
exemplified by the following sentences given by Quirk et al. (1985):
Don't take it out on me! ['vent your anger'] The manager fobbed me off with a cheap camera. [especially British English] We put our success down to hard work. ['attribute to']
I'll let you in on a secret (p. 1161) [Emphasis and bracketing in original]
Table 2.2 below gives an outline of the abovementioned three types of combinations
along with their subtypes:
44
Type Combination Intransitive Transitive 1 Verb + adverb Can you please carry
on? Don’t let me down.
2 Verb + preposition He is looking for a car to buy.
She reminds me of our meeting.
3 Verb + adverb + preposition
She cannot put up with you.
I will get the price down on this.
Table 2.2 Types and subtypes of verb + particle combinations
It is necessary to point out, however, that Lindstromberg (1998, p. 23) rightly
criticizes the sub-classifying of EPVs into the abovementioned categories (i.e.,
prepositional verbs, phrasal verbs, and phrasal-prepositional verbs), saying that "I
have never found it useful to bear this terminology in mind when explaining meaning,
and so […] I use the term 'phrasal verb' to include all [the] three syntactic types" (p.
23).
2.4.3 Word order of EPVs
As it has been previously outlined, EPVs, like other ordinary verbs, can be either
transitive or intransitive (McArthur, 1975). There are some verbs, however, that can
be used both as transitive and intransitive verbs (Sinclair et al. 1998; Jespersen, 1976).
Along these lines, Dixon (1991) points out that "[t]ransitivity is a much more fluid
matter in English. There are, it is true, a number of verbs that are strictly transitive
[…] and a few that are strictly intransitive […]. But many verbs in English may be
used either transitively or intransitively" (p. 267). Such PVs have been illustrated by
Quirk and Greenbaum (1973) as follows:
Drink up quickly. [Intransitive PV] Drink up your milk. [Transitive PV] When will they give in? [Intransitive PV]
45
They gave in their resignation. [Transitive PV] (pp. 347-348) [Emphasis in original. My bracketing].
Similarly, Palmer (1968) observes that "[s]ome of the combinations may be used
transitively as well as intransitively, e.g., BLOW UP and BLOW DOWN", for
example:
The house blew up. They blew up the house. The chimney pot blew down. The wind blew the chimney pot down (p. 185) [Emphasis in original].
Further, Sinclair et al. (1998) indicate that some PVs can be ditransitive, that is, they
require two objects: a direct object and an indirect object as in:
The girl handed him back his card (p. xiv) [My emphasis].
Where the adverb back comes between the indirect object, which is the pronoun
(him), and the direct object, which is the noun group (his card).
It is necessary to indicate, however, that transitive PVs fall into two major types:
separable and non-separable PVs, or split alteration and non-split alteration as they
were termed by Sawyer (1999), or fused and separable as were named by McArthur
and Atkins (1974). Such a distinction typically depends upon the position of the
particle in the sentence (Bolinger, 1971; Quirk & Greenbaum, 1973; Fraser, 1976;
Jacobs, 1995; Gries, 2002). Particles may "occur on either side of the direct object
noun phrase as one of its defining characteristics" (Fraser, 1976, p. 16). Therefore, in
separable PVs the particle follows the object noun as in:
Can you turn the light off?
Whereas, in non-separable PVs the particle precedes the object noun as in:
I gave up smoking two years a go.
46
In other words, the former allows, and sometimes requires, "the particle to occur in a
slot that is not adjacent to its verb", but the latter does not allow such separation
(Jacobs, 1995, pp. 248-249). Normally, the particle, according to Quirk and
Greenbaum (1973), "tends to precede the object if the object is long or if the intention
is that the object should receive end-focus" (p. 248).
There is a crucial point that needs to be made here. When the direct object of PV is a
pronoun (e.g., him, her, it, them, etc.) the PV must be separable as in:
I picked it up.
He handed them in.
She let him down.
Lindner (1983) makes the point that "[t]he particle's position when the object is a
pronoun has been much commented on" (p. 5). Fraser (1976) emphasizes that "the
particle MUST move to the position following the direct object when the latter is a
pronoun; otherwise the particle movement is optional" (p. 16) [Emphasis in original].
Likewise, Chen (1986) indicates that "[i]f the direct object of the phrasal verb is a
personal pronoun, particle movement is obligatory" (p. 80).
The word order of IEPVs is summarized in Table 2.3 below:
Type Combination Separable Non-separable 1 Verb + adverb They closed their shop
down. She will not give in.
2 Verb + preposition - He looks after his parents. 3 Verb + adverb +
preposition I will get the price down on.
I'm looking forward to meeting you.
Table 2.3 The word order of EPVs.
47
Beate Hampe (1997) indicates that "[t]here is a general agreement in the literature
that, in principle, the two types of multi-word verbs [PVs and prepositional verbs] can
be separated from each other, although […] this distinction is not always completely
clearcut" (p. 204). He, further, gives two reasons for unclearcut:
(i) There is considerable overlap between the two categories 'adverbial particle' and 'preposition' […].
(ii) Some of the differences in syntactic behaviour disappear as soon as lexicalization and idiomatization processes have set in and make the separation of either adverbial particles or prepositional phrases from the preceding verbs undesirable (p. 204) [Emphasis in original].
Yet, Fraser (1976) argues that "[i]t is this property of being able to appear after the
direct object which we claim to be sufficient to distinguish a verb-particle from a
verb-preposition combination" (p. 2).
Such a word order alteration has been termed as 'particle movement' (Fraser, 1976;
Chen, 1986), and 'particle placement' (Gries, 2002). It has been largely studied over
the last 100 years or so for two reasons:
i) to provide an adequate structural description of the two possible constituent orders and
ii) to find the variables that determine native speakers' choices governing the alteration (Gries 2002, p. 269).
Obviously, in spite of several decades of research in this matter, as Gries (2002)
indicates, "there is still no account of particle placement that tries to explain why
speakers choose one construction over the other in a particular discourse situation" (p.
272). The available literature does not tell us "which of the two word orders is more
common or acceptable with which degree of idiomaticity of the verb phrase" (Gries,
2002, p. 277). However, Gries (2002) believes that construction in which the particle
48
is positioned after the direct object is "the natural choice for a speaker who intends to
communicate a state of affairs where the spatial meaning is prominent" (p. 277).
To conclude this section, the following syntactic features can be deduced from the
abovementioned literature, which would help sketch a syntactic prototype image for
EPVs against which their Arabic counterparts may be contrasted:
1. There are certain types of verbs, mostly monosyllabic, that can be
phrasalised. The grammarians have listed them under different names.
2. There are a number of words that may function as verbs only when
combining with particles. On the other hand, there are a number of words,
other than adverbs and prepositions, that may function as particles.
3. Although there are some verbs that may co-occur with every particle, there
are other verbs which co-occur with one particle only.
4. Particles of EPVs are either adverbial or prepositional. The former is of
two types, namely: directional or locative. Bearing in mind that the
majority of particles used in EPVs are locative.
5. Particle in EPVs constitutes an integral part. It typically fused with the
verb with which it combines to form a combination of one semantic unit.
6. Particles of EPVs are morphologically invariable.
7. There are many words that may function as both adverbs and prepositions.
8. Adverb and preposition are identical in form, but they differ in function.
The former typically modifies the verb, while the latter connects what it
comes before them and what it comes after them in any given sentence.
49
9. There are three types of verb-particle combinations (verb + adverb, verb +
preposition, and verb + adverb + preposition) each of which can be
transitive and intransitive.
10. The transitive EPVs may become separable or non-separable depending
upon the particle position whether it is before or after the direct object.
11. When the direct object is pronoun the particle must follow it.
In the following section this syntactic prototype image of EPVs will be completed by
adding to it its integral half, i.e. the semantic properties of EPVs.
2.5 Semantic properties of EPVs
As it has been already mentioned, the phenomenon of PVs is a contentious one and
there are numerous problems regarding their syntactic and semantic explanation. Such
problems, according to Beate Hampe (1997), take place due to the fact that:
This category [PVs] is not a homogeneous group with all its members showing similar semantic and syntactic properties. Phrasal verbs are 'situated' at the border of syntax, lexicology and morphology – i.e. particular constructions possess to varying degrees some of the properties of free syntagms, of phraseological units as well as derivative word formations (pp. 207-208).
In the present section I will be concerned with the semantic properties of EPVs. As in
the previous section, the aim here is to sketch a clear picture of the phenomenon of
EPVs that allows me to contrast it with its Arabic counterpart, to identify the gaps that
cause Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students a range of
difficulties when dealing with EPVs.
50
2.5.1 EPVs' criteria
To differentiate the proper PV combinations from the prepositional verb combinations
(verb + preposition), and "to narrow the class of PVs" (Azzaro, 1992, p. 44), scholars
have set out a number of criteria. Cowie (1993) considers that these criteria are related
to meaning rather than to grammar, whereas Dixon (1982) adopts the opposite view
and describes these criteria as "[a] number of explicit non-semantic criteria [which]
have been suggested to distinguish phrasal verbs from literal verb-preposition
combinations" (p. 3). Such criteria are outlined in what follows:
Substitutability by a single word (Live, 1965; Dixon, 1982; Cowie, 1993). For
instance: put off = postpone, look into = investigate, run away = escape, speed up =
accelerate, etc. This criterion was labeled by Bolinger (1971) as "replaceability by a
simple verb" (p. 6), and was described as "[t]he most general of all" (p. 6). Bolinger's
label has been adopted by many researchers such as Azzaro (1992, p. 44),
Lindstormberg (1998, p. 248), and Darwin and Gray (1999, p. 71).
Passivisation (Bolinger, 1971; Dixon, 1982; Azzaro, 1992; Darwin & Gray, 1999).
Transitive PVs can be passivized, to use Dixon's (1982) illustrative examples:
I was taken in (by his smooth talk). We were put up for the night (by John and Mary) (p.7) [Emphasis and bracketing in original].
Nominalisation (Fraser, 1976; Lindner, 1983; Azzaro, 1992). This criterion has been
termed by Darwin and Gray (1999) "formation of action nominals" (p. 71). It was
proposed by Lees in 1963 (Bolinger, 1971; Darwin & Gray, 1999). Bolinger (1971)
indicates that "[i]f transitive, the combination should yield an action nominal" (p. 8).
51
For example, "from he brought up the fact, one derives his bringing up of the fact"
(Darwin & Gray, 1999, p. 72) [Emphasis in original].
Gapping (Fraser, 1976; Dixon, 1982; Lindner, 1983), or "Double distribution"
(Azzaro, 1992, p.45), or "object movement" (Darwin & Gray, 1999, p.72). As it has
been explained (see 2.4.3 above), it means that the particle, in transitive combination,
can either precede the noun object or follow it (Bolinger, 1971, p. 10). For example:
He looked up his friend. He looked his friend up (Bolinger's examples) [My emphasis].
Pronoun placement. In transitive combinations direct-object pronouns typically
precede the particle (Bolinger, 1971; Lindner, 1983; Darwin & Gray, 1999). For
example:
How did you find that out? *How did you find out that? (Bolinger, 1971, p.11) [My emphasis].
Adverbial position (Mitchell, 1958), or "Adverb insertion" (Dixon 1982, p. 7;
Darwin & Gray, 1999, p. 73). This criterion also has been termed as "Insertion of
adverbial phrases" (Lindner, 1983, p. 12) and "adverb distribution" (Azzaro, 1992, p.
45). It means that Adverb cannot be placed between the verb and the particle, whether
the combination is transitive or intransitive, unless the latter is used in its literal
meaning (Bolinger, 1971). To use Mitchell's examples:
He turned suddenly off the road. [Literal] *He turned suddenly off the light. [Non-literal] (pp. 11-12) [My emphasis and bracketing].
Stress (Mitchell, 1958; Fraser, 1976; Bolinger, 1971; Lindner, 1983; Darwin & Gray,
1999). A particle of EPV can be stressed or, to use Bolinger's (1971, pp. 13-14) term,
"accented". For example:
52
He can't be taken IN at any price. [Stressed adverb] It can't be taken in large doses. [Unstressed preposition] (Mitchell, 1958, p. 104) [My emphasis].
Definite noun phrases (Bolinger, 1971; Azzaro, 1992; Darwin & Gray, 1999). "[i]f
the combination is transitive, the particle can precede a simple definite noun phrase (a
proper name or the plus a common noun) without taking it as its object" (Bolinger,
1971, p. 15) [Emphasis in original]. For examples:
I'm afraid to take on John in this contest. You left out the caption. Did you bring along the Joneses? (p. 15) [Emphasis in original].
Listing . (Bolinger, 1971, p. 17; Azzaro, 1992, p. 45; Darwin & Gray, 1999, p. 74).
This is not a criterion, it is rather a point suggested by Bolinger (1971) to define PVs.
He points out that "[p]hrasal verbs can be defined by simply listing them [the PVs]"
(p. 17). Nevertheless, he admits that the list of PVs will never be exhaustive for two
reasons. The first is that PVs are repeatedly being added to. The second is that they
are varying according to dialect (p. 17).
Nevertheless, it is quite vital to point out that these criteria have been subjected to
many criticisms even by the same abovementioned scholars who list them, illustrate
them and elaborate on their practicality. Dixon (1982), for instance, indicates that
"there are no clear-cut CRITERIA for distinguishing phrasal verbs from literal verb-
preposition constructions" (p. 9) [Emphasis in original]. In addition, he heavily
criticizes the criteria "Substitutability", "Passivisation" and "Adverb insertion" (pp. 4-
9). Bolinger (1971) follows suit and criticizes the criteria "Replaceability" and
"Passiveness" (pp. 6-7). Lindner (1983) considers that "these criteria are best thought
53
of as characteristic tendencies of each construction rather than exceptionalness
defining features" (p. 4).
This having been said, Trask (2000) neatly addresses the issue of differentiating EPVs
from prepositional verbs, or as he puts it "a sequence of a verb and a preposition" (pp.
101-102) by putting the differences in four points as follows, where call up is a PV,
whereas call on is merely a verb plus preposition:
1. The particle in a phrasal verb is stressed: They called up the teacher, but not *They call on the teacher. 2. The particle of a phrasal verb can be moved to the end: They called the teacher up, but not *They called the teacher on. 3. The simple verb of a phrasal verb may not be separated from its particle by an adverb: *They called early up the teacher is not good, but The called early on the teacher is fine. 4. The particle of a phrasal verb may not undergo PIED-PIPING1: *The teacher up whom they called is no good, but The teacher on whom they called is fine (pp. 101-102) [Emphasis in original].
Furthermore, Thomson and Martinet (1986) rationally maintain that one "need not to
try to decide whether the combination is verb + preposition or verb + adverb, but
should consider the expression as a whole" (p. 315).
2.5.2 Semantic categories of EPVs
In addition to classifying PVs on the ground of syntax, as it has been outlined in the
last section, English grammarians and linguists have classified them on the ground of
meaning, in view of the fact that they "vary in the extent to which the combination
preserves the individual meanings of verb and particle" (Quirk & Greenbaum, 1973,
p. 348). Palmer (1968), in this respect, indicates that
1 PIED-PIPING means moving a preposition to the front of its clause and replace it before its object, e.g., To whom were you speaking? With what did they hit it? (Trask, 2000, p. 102)
54
Two Kinds of classification are appropriate. The forms may be distinguished grammatically, first, in terms of the adverbial versus the prepositional nature of the particles. Secondly, they may be distinguished in terms of idiom, some of the combinations being idiomatic, others not. The two types of classification must be kept distinct. It is often not clear whether the term 'phrasal verb' is defined in terms of the first, the second, or both (pp. 180-181).
Due to the fact that meaning of PVs ranges from literal to idiomatic (Gries, 2002), and
their semantic types, as Chen (1986) puts it, "vary from the most literal to the most
idiomatic" (p. 82), they can be semantically classified as follows:
1.Non-idiomatic, literal PVs, where both components of the construction retain
their individual lexical meanings, for example:
Bring the box in.
Take it out.
Put your hand up.
2. Semi-idiomatic PVs, where one component of the construction retains its lexical
meaning while the other one is less transparent, for example:
Drink your milk up.
Knock him out.
I will find out the truth.
3. Idiomatic PVs, where both components of the construction are not transparent,
and the whole meaning of the idiomatic PV cannot be gained from the total sum
of the lexical meanings of its individual parts, for example:
55
The market is closed due to the black out.
I will never give up.
He cannot put up with him anymore.
(cf. Quirk et al., 1985; Cowie, 1993; Heliel, 1994; Lindstormberg, 1998; Darwin &
Gray, 1999).
The semantic categories of EPVs are outlined in Table 2.4 below:
Type Semantic category Example 1 Non-idiomatic Adam has come back. 2 Semi-idiomatic She wrapped up her luggage. 3 Idiomatic The war broke out suddenly. Table 2.4 Semantic categories of EPVs
Idiomatic and non-idiomatic PVs have been given many names by different scholars.
McArthur (1975), for instance terms them "literal and figurative" (p. 36), while
Sawyer (1999) calls them "Compositional (Literal) and Non-compositional
(Metaphorical)" (pp. 5-6).
By the same token, Dixon (1982) summarizes the variety of cases in which PVs may
occur, as follows:
In some cases the meaning of the phrasal verbs is similar to that of the constituent simple verb, it being the preposition that is used in a non-norm manner: thus eat up is plainly related to eat and slow down to slow, but in these combinations up and down clearly do not refer to vertical displacement away from or towards the centre of the earth […] In other cases the preposition appears in its normal meaning but the verb takes on a non-central sense, e.g., knock about/around (the world) […] Finally, the meaning of many phrasal verbs does not relate directly to the normal meaning of either simple verb or prepositions – examples include take off 'imitate' and put up with 'tolerate' (p. 1) [Emphasis in original].
Like PVs, prepositional verbs, according to Quirk and Greenbaum (1973),
56
[…] vary in their idiomaticity. Highly idiomatic combinations include go into (a problem) 'investigate', come by (the book), 'obtain'. [In addition] Like phrasal and prepositional verbs, [… phrasal-prepositional verbs] vary in their idiomaticity. Some, like stay away from ('avoid'), are easily understood from their individual elements, though often with figurative meaning, e.g: stand up for ('support'). Others are fused combinations, and it is difficult or impossible to assign meaning to any of the parts, e.g: put up with ('tolerate')" (p. 350) [Emphasis in original].
Such a semantic classification of PVs, however, is arguable as the distinction between
these categories is "not always clear and the same combination may fall into more
than one category depending on the context in which it is used" (Swierzbin, 1996, p.
3). As a result, a close look at the available literature reveals that scholars have varied
in their approaches of covering the phenomenon of PVs as what to include/exclude in
their coverage. Some of them, (such as: Fraser, 1976; Dixon, 1982; Courtney, 1983;
Cowie, 1993), have limited their studies to the idiomatic type of PVs excluding the
other semantic categories. They observe that PVs are metaphorical/idiomatic. Dixon
(1982), for instance, prefers "to retain the term 'phrasal verb' for any combination of
verb and preposition(s) that does not have a literal meaning" (p. 2). Similarly, Cowie
(1993) emphasizes that he "follow[s] fairly common practice in applying the term
[PV] to idiomatic combinations, whether of verb + adverb or verb + preposition" (p.
39). On the contrary, other scholars have widened the scope of their research to
include all the semantic categories, such as Lindstormberg (1998) who goes for the
above classification, claiming that it is the correct view since "some literal verb-plus-
particle combinations tend to be stored in memory much like single verbs"( p. 143).
Along these lines, in her doctoral dissertation A lexico-Semantic Analysis of English
Verb Particle Constructios, Lindner (1983) classifies the scholars who dealt with the
phenomenon according to their ways of treatment to five different groups: 1) Scholars
57
who concentrate on both idiomatic and literal combinations of verb + adverb, and
exclude the verb + preposition combinations, such as (all of the following scholars are
cited in Lindner, 1983): Declerck (1976), Mitchell (1958), Fairclough (1965),
Bolinger (1971), Lipka (1972), Meyer (1971), Druisinga (1952), Wood (1955), Dogen
(1919), Draat (1921) and Lindner (1983); 2) Scholars who focus on both verb +
adverb combinations and "certain path" of verb + preposition combinations, such as:
Poutsma (1926), Taha (1964) and Jespersen (1961); 3) Scholars who "include the full
range of combinations", i.e. the literal and idiomatic types of both verb + adverb
combinations and verb + preposition combinations, such as: Kennedy (1967), Konish
(1958), Roberts (1958) and Sroka (1972); 4) Scholars who limit their studies to the
idiomatic type of the verb + adverb combinations, and exclude the verb + preposition
combinations, and the literal type of verb + adverb combinations, such as: Fraser
(1976) and Legum (1968); and 5) Scholars who cover verb + adverb combinations
and verb + preposition combinations "as long as both are idiomatic", such as: Jowtell
(1951), Potter (1965), Smith (1925), Live (1965) and Sweet (1955) (cf. Lindner, 1983,
pp. 2-4).
I have to make it clear here that for the purpose of this study I will adopt the view of
the scholars in number five above, (i.e. Jowtell, 1951; Potter, 1965; Smith, 1925;
Live, 1965; Sweet, 1955) and the view of Courtney (1983), Cowie (1993), and Cowie
and Mackin (1993) who consider PVs as combinations of a verb and an adverb, or a
verb and a preposition (or a verb with both an adverb and a preposition) as far as they
are idiomatic. Hence the idiomaticity will be my parameter in tracing such English
combinations and contrasting them with their Arabic counterparts. The reason for
such a focus is the fact that it is the idiomatic type of PVs which causes difficulties to
58
Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students, rather than the non-
idiomatic/literal type, which has a straightforward meaning in Arabic (see Chapter
Five below).
Dixon (1982) asserts that the non-literal PVs "have essentially the same syntax as
literal co-occurrences of verb and preposition; the difference is almost entirely
semantic" (p. 2). Therefore PVs "are idiosyncratic only at the semantic level; their
syntactic behaviour can be predicted from general grammatical statement and rules
that apply to all combinations of verb and preposition, both literal and non-literal" (p.
2).
It needs to be noted though that the combinations of idiomatic PVs are not freely
formed; there are, rather, several "collocational restrictions" governing them (Palmer,
1974). In other words, we cannot substitute the particles of PVs for their opposites,
viz. we can look after someone, but we cannot look before someone, and we can put
up with something, but we cannot put down with it (p. 212). By the same token, we
cannot substitute the verbs of PVs for their opposites, viz. we can say 'I helped him
out', but we cannot say 'I aided him out', and we can say 'He yielded up all his
property', but we cannot say 'He abandoned up all his property' (p. 226). Palmer
(1968) has argued that "[a]part from their semantic unity and the collocational
restrictions on the occurrence of verb and the particle, there is nothing that will
establish which are phrasal verbs and which are not" (p. 185).
In their Oxford Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs Cowie and Mackin (1993) provide two
tests to distinguish idiomatic from non-idiomatic PVs; both of the tests have to do
59
with meaning rather than with syntax. The first test being "to ask whether one word
can be substituted for the whole phrase", and the second being "to ask whether the
second word can be deleted". For example, to know whether the PVs fall out, as used
in I was pleased with the way things had fallen out, an idiom or not, you need to apply
one of the tests. In fact the answer of the first one is: yes, we can substitute fall out for
one word, that is, 'happen' or 'occur', and the answer of the second test is: no, we
cannot delete the second part of fall out, as its form is fixed and cannot be broken up,
it is an idiomatic PVs (p. ix).
Moreover, the major function of PVs, following Yatskovich (1998), is "conceptual
categorization of reality in the speaker's mind" (p. 1). Hence, in addition to denoting
actions or states as "ordinary" verbs do, they specify their spatial, temporal or other
characteristics. The adverbial components impart PVs such ability to describe actions
or states more precisely, vividly and emotionally. "[b]y combining with these
elements, verbs of broader meaning are subjected to a regular and systematic
multiplication of their semantic functions" (pp. 1-2). Thus, adverbial particles'
function falls in two major types: 1) to pass on an additional aspective meaning to the
base verb, e.g., sit down; 2) to introduce a lexical modification to the verb's
fundamental semantics (p. 2). That is to say, PVs may have, according to McArthur
(1989):
(1) any of the meanings of the verb plus any of the meanings of the particle, (2) any meanings that emerge from such a union for particular purposes in particular contexts, and (3) the capacity to drift from 1 to 2 and back again, a literal use carrying a figurative nuance and vice versa, especially in jokes (p. 40).
McArthur (1989) selects the PV get up to illustrate the range of possibilities as
follows:
60
This phrasal verb is intransitive in 'They got up', transitive in 'Get them up', means from lower to higher in 'He got the child up on to the wall', means from far to near in 'One of the other runners got up to him and passed him', means accumulate under pressure in 'The engine got up steam', organize or make in 'He can get up the plot of a new film in no time at all', and put on the special clothes in 'They got themselves up as pirates' (p. 40) [Emphasis in original].
The particle up, on the other hand, has a variety of meanings when it combines with
different verbs, to use McArthur's (1989) instances:
The smoke rose up (upward direction). He swam up to the boat (approaching direction). They used up all the oil (completion in the sense that nothing is left).
They tidied the room up (completion in the sense that something is done as fully as possible).
Hurry up! (literal emphasis). Shut up! (metaphoric emphasis).
Drink up (completive and emphatic) (p. 40) [Emphasis and bracketing in original].
Furthermore, Lindstromberg (1998) sketches a class of PVs called "perfective phrasal
verbs" or perfectives. PVs of this class are "extremely common expressions each
consist of a main verb plus up, down, out, off, or through (e.g., wash up, calm down,
chill out, cool off, think through)" (p. 23) [Emphasis in original]. Such perfective PVs
"all have to do with the notions of completeness or thoroughness" (p. 24). For
example:
Type this letter up, please. They've close down their business. Mammoths died out a long time ago. Let's finish this job off and go home.
I've read it through. Now let's talk about it. (Lindstormberg's examples) [Emphasis in original].
The meanings of particles and the semantic contributions they make when combining
with verbs to produce PVs have been taken up by such researchers as Sinclair et al.
(1998) and Hannan (1998). They will be explored in more detail in the forthcoming
sections of this Chapter.
61
A few remarks need to be stated regarding the issue of polysemy, which means using
one PV in many different meanings. Some EPVs are said to be "highly polysemous"
(Villavicencio & Copestake, 2003, p. 358). Kennedy (1967) indicates that
[…] owing to the multiplication of meanings, the possibility of confusion or of misunderstanding is greatly increased. A verb-combination that is capable of fifteen different uses or phrases of meaning has become more or less a 'Jack of all trades' and its capacity for good work on a given job is open to suspicion. Even though it is not likely that one would be long in doubt as to the meaning of blow up 'to inflate', 'to explode', 'to stop', 'to praise extravagantly' […] yet it is not conductive to linguistic thrift but rather to a certain amount of verbosity, if the phrase is not self-explanatory. If one holds up a person he may be doing him a favor or a great wrong; if two actors make up they may resume a former friendship or merely their places on the stage; if an object is all stuck up it may be inclined to adhere or […] it may have been treated much worse (p. 43) [Emphasis in original].
Moreover, a PV "may be polysemic in having both an idiomatic and a non-idiomatic
use [and] it may well be polysemic in having more than one idiomatic use" (Cornell,
1985, p. 270).
Live (1965) maintains that "[c]onfusion is further compounded by the obscuring of
the original metaphor; therefore non-native speakers may find these verbs
troublesome" (p. 430).
More detailed instances of this issue will be given in the forthcoming section of 'PVs
in English lexicography' as the phenomenon has been touched upon by many
lexicographers (Taha, 1972; McArthur & Atkins, 1974; Kirkpatrick & Davidson,
1982).
62
2.5.3 Cohesion of PVs' elements
Relevant to the purpose of this study is DeArmond's (1977) definition of cohesion.
Cohesion, according to him, "refers to the fact that certain verbs and a following
preposition receive a semantic interpretation which cannot be subdivided into two
semantic units, where one unit refers to the verb and the other to the preposition" (p.
20). Along these lines, Bolinger (1971) makes the point that PVs "show some special
degree of cohesion that sets them apart from the more freely composable
constructions like to fall headlong, to live at home, or to leave tomorrow" (pp. 3-4).
In the main, the closeness of the verb and the particle in PVs has been outlined by
Kennedy (1967, p. 9). He indicates that in such combinations as bear out
(corroborate), come by (acquire), get at (reach), hit it off (agree, be congenial), make
out (understand), own up (confess), put out (extinguish), stack up (fare), whack up
(share or divide), "the elements of the combination have almost or altogether
sacrificed their individual meanings and by the act of combination have assumed a
new meaning" (p. 9). While in such combinations as bake up (make a batch of),
blossom out (blossom in a showy manner), blot out (destroy), bottle up (enclose in a
bottle), button up (fasten with buttons), "the verb is modified in meaning by a certain
weakly adverbial function of the particle but does not entirely merge its verbal
personality in the combination [and the particle] loses much of its usual adverbial or
prepositional signification" (p. 9). Whereas in such combinations as brush off, brush
out, bubble over, burn down, cave in, fall down, flame up, hang up, leak out, rinse
out, and tack down "the usual value of verb and prepositional-adverb remain fairly
evident" (p. 9).
63
Further, Live (1965) provides evidence of the close cohesion of the verb and the
particle in these combinations, indicating that
[…] the two elements function as one verb is further demonstrated by the fact that the combination readily occurs in conjunctional parallel with a single verb, having a common object or joint membership in a series (I sent for and received the goods. He was never heard from nor seen again. He was adopted, cared for, brought up, and educated by the couple) (pp. 428-429) [Emphasis in original].
Live (1965) provides another evidence of the close cohesion of the components of
PVs being:
[…] the juxtaposition of its two elements in other morphological configurations, with the particle prefixed or suffixed: upstanding, ongoing, incoming, outstretched, outspoken, downtrodden, broken-down (ruin), put-up (job), paid-up (bills), sought-for (result), worn-out (clothing), shut-in (invalid) (p. 429) [Emphasis in original].
2.5.4 British and American dialects It is quite important to mention that EPVs differ according to the English dialects
(Bolinger, 1971; Dixon, 1982; McArthur, 1989; Lindstormberg, 1998; Villavicencio
& Copestake, 2003). This is particularly evident in the British and American dialects.
Palmer (1968) points out that "[a] rather interesting contrast across the Atlantic is the
use in Britain of FILL IN, and in America of FILL OUT. In Britain we fill in a form,
in America a form is filled out" (p. 187) [Emphasis in original]. McArthur (1989)
provides some more instances illustrating such a phenomenon. He indicates that the
particle on to is used as such in British English, whereas it is onto in American
English. The particle off of, which is typically regarded as standard in American
English, is considered non-standard in British English, The particle out, which is
typically followed by of in the standard usage of England as in: They looked out of the
64
window, need not be in Scotland and North American English as in: They looked out
the window. There is also some difference in the use of the particles about and
(a)round as Britons prefer to use the former as in: running about, while the North
Americans prefer to use the latter instead as in: running around. The two dialects
differ as well in terms of hyphenating nouns derived from PVs, such as breakdown
which commonly written solid in British English and hyphenated (break-down) in
North American English (McArthur, 1989, pp. 39-41).
Yet, Lindstormberg (1998) calls attention to the fact that such a difference is very
little and the vast majority of PVs have the same form and the same meaning in both
dialects. This seems, according to him, "to suggest that these meanings have derived
from common meanings of verbs and prepositions in non-idiomatic fashion" (p. 243).
Whereas Bolinger (1971) considers this phenomenon as one of the two reasons that
make the task of listing PVs difficult (see 2.5.1 above).
It should be noted in this connection that such differences in the English dialects
might become more serious when it comes to such sentences as knock me up which
means in British dialect (knock on my door) whereas when it is said by a woman in
America she may run the risk of being raped (Najiib, 2001, p. 37).
Incidentally, as we will see in section 2.8 of this Chapter, such an issue has been
given a considerable attention by lexicographers in such dictionaries as: Cambridge
international Dictionary of Phrasal verbs (1997); Oxford Phrasal verbs Dictionary
for Learners of English (2001); Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs (1983); NTC's
65
Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and Other Idiomatic Verbal Phrases (1993) among
others.
2.5.5 Register variations of EPVs
Although EPVs are commonly used informally in everyday spoken English (McArthur,
1975; Kennedy, 1967; Cornell, 1985; Sinclair et al., 1998; Turton & Manser, 1985;
McArthur, 1989; Villavicencio & Copestake, 2003), they are quite often used formally in
a variety of English written texts (Cowie & Mackin, 1993; Swierzbin, 1996). Thus,
Goodale (1994) maintains that "[i]t is misconception that phrasal verbs are mostly used in
spoken language. They can be found in many styles of writing, including highly formal
government reports" (p. iv). To take only a two examples of using them formally:
(i) Eight Iraqis were killed and 23 wounded when fresh clashes broke out
between US forces and the militia (The Sydney Morning Herald, June 3,
2004, p.11) [My emphasis].
(ii) Lexicographers need to have had some training in lexicography, if they are
to come up with good dictionaries (Crystal, 1997, p. 118) [My emphasis].
And to take just a few examples of using them informally:
(i) Let me get this straight - you had a job where you open fetes, cut ribbons,
sing the Anthem, drink champers, ride in the Rolls, get paid - and you stuffed
it up (Cartoon speech bubble, The Daily Telegraph, August 12, 2004, p. 41)
[My emphasis].
66
(ii) Greatly enfeebled by the strain of chronic scandal. The leader seems to be
slipping away, on long even responsive to criticism (Cartoon speech bubble,
The Australian, May 10, 2005, p. 22) [My emphasis].
(iii) Leave out the technical stuff because it will only confuse him (Cartoon
speech bubble, The Australian, May 10, 2005, p. 2) [My emphasis].
English speaking children, as McArthur (1975, p. 6) asserts, "learn them [EPVs]
before they learn other kinds of verbs: Get up! Go away! Drink up your milk! Put
your toys away darling! Shut up!" [Emphasis in original].
Kennedy (1967, p. 10) makes the point that "[…] correct usage [of PVs] is such an
intangible and varying thing that it is practically impossible to determine the social
status of each combination and usage" (p. 10). Some combinations, he elaborates,
would be accepted by all people such as ask for, bow down, cry out, go on, make off,
and point out, while "in some cases, very careful speakers might prefer to employ
single words of more highly specialized meaning, such as request, bow or keen,
exclaim, continue, depart, demonstrate" (p. 10) [Emphasis in original]. Other
combinations might be "justified by the technical or specialized use to which they are
generally put. So we can say call up by telephone, connect up with the assistance of
plumber or electrician, kick off at the beginning of a game, lay by corn at the last
plowing, make up for the stage" (p. 10) [Emphasis in original].
Nonetheless, Heliel (1994) makes the point that "[a]s the changing attitudes of users
of English toward levels of usage become more flexible, the combinations which were
67
once labeled 'slang', 'informal', or 'colloquial' are now considered 'neutral' and thus
have risen in social importance" (p. 142).
Furthermore, Turton and Manser (1985, p. viii) advise non-native speakers of English
to treat PVs with caution since many of them "could cause offence if used
inappropriately". Likewise, Sinclair et al. (1998) ask foreigners to be careful when
using the single-word equivalents of PVs as:
[…] in many cases phrasal verbs and their synonyms have different range of use, meaning, or collocation, so that a single-word synonym cannot be substituted appropriately for a phrasal verb. Single-word synonyms are often much more formal in style than phrasal verbs, so that they seem out of place in many contexts, and students using them run the risk of sounding pompous or just unnatural (p. iv).
Similarly, Side (1990) indicates that "direct equivalents of phrasal verbs do not always
exist.'I'm done in' would be used in a different social context from 'I'm exhausted'" (p.
145) [Emphasis in original]. And "show off is show off, not to impress another with
one's prowess by preforming difficult yet completely unnecessary feats" (Darwin &
Gray, 1999, p. 66) [Emphasis in original].
Consequently, Cowie and Mackin (1993) make the point that PVs need to be
cautiously used not only in their correct grammatical patterns but also in their
appropriate contexts (p. xi).
Along these lines, Cornell (1985) indicates that quite a few of one-word or PV
equivalents can be deemed as alternatives for their PV. It all has to do with "the
degree of synonymity" since "synonymy is generally recognized as being a very
relative concept" (p. 274). To use some of Cornell's examples:
68
lie in does not merely mean "to stay in bed", but "to stay in bed beyond one's normal time for getting up". put up with: unlike tolerate it cannot be used in a positive manner (to tolerate other people's opinions is not the same as to put with other people's opinions). run down is never constructive (unlike criticize) (pp. 274-275) [Emphasis in original].
Kennedy (1967, p. 41) observes that although the combination of a verb and a particle
"may not be figurative, it is often more expressive than the simple loan-word. Blow
out, for instance, tells the average person more of the method employed than does
extinguish".
As we will notice in section 2.8 of this Chapter, most of the English lexicographers
have included the register variations of PVs in their dictionaries (cf. Cambridge
international Dictionary of Phrasal verbs (1997); Oxford Dictionary of phrasal verbs
(1993); Oxford Phrasal verbs Dictionary for Learners of English (2001); Longman
Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs (1983)) among others.
To sum up this section, the phenomenon of EPVs is, to a certain degree, a
controversial one. The literature at hand shows that a great deal of disagreements have
been arisen amongst the scholars who tackled the phenomenon. Such disagreements
are manifested in their contradictory views regarding such issues as the set of criteria
of phrasal verbness, what to include/exclude as PVs, semantic categories, and degree
of idiomaticity of each component of PVs. However, one can extract the following
semantic sketch as a prototype model of EPVs:
1. EPVs are of three semantic categories, namely: literal, semi-idiomatic, and
idiomatic PVs.
2. The meaning of EPV ranges from the most literal to the most idiomatic.
69
3. Both the literal and the idiomatic types have the same syntactic
characteristics. The distinction between them, however, is confined to their
semantic properties.
4. Unlike the non-idiomatic type, the idiomatic type of PVs has the virtue of
substitutability by one word synonym.
5. The combination of the components (verb and adverb) is not freely
formed. It is rather subjected to many collocational restrictions.
6. The particle modifies, to a greater or lesser degree, the meaning of the verb
it combines with.
7. There is a close cohesion between the verb and the particle that makes
them fuse together and sacrifice their individual meanings to produce one
semantic unit.
8. One EPV may carry more than one meaning. In other words, its meaning
may vary according to the contexts it is used in.
9. There are some varieties amongst English dialects with respect to using,
spelling, and hyphenating PVs.
10. Even though EPVs are typically used in an informal English, they are quite
often employed in more formal register.
It goes without saying that such a complicated picture of intricate semantic properties
of IEPVs has a great deal of impact on the process of learning and understanding
them by Arab English learners, and in turn on translating/interpreting them by Arabic
translators and interpreters.
70
2.6 PVs in Arabic
Having known the syntactic and semantic properties of EPVs, in this section I will
move on to investigate whether the phenomenon of PVs exist in Arabic. And if so, do
they fit the previously established syntactic and semantic criteria of IEPVs?
It is worth noting, at the beginning, that Arab scholars who dealt with the
phenomenon of EPVs have given them various labels in Arabic. Heleil (2000), for
instance, calls them ��5&1ا89*&7ل�ا+*)7ر (literally: phrasal verbs), and Daud et al. (2003)
name EPV ��%&)*8�|&-آ,} (literally: verbal compound), whereas Najiib (2001) considers
EPVs as one part of ��5&)1~3+ا89*&7ل�ا (literally: tailed verbs) which consist in addition to
PVs, prepositional verbs and phrasal-prepositional verbs.
As far as the Arabic language is concerned, there exist many constructions in which
verbs are followed by prepositions such as: 0/�K�1آ (to eat from), �.1�,�p+إ� (to look at),�
�&QF1[��0&Eث� (to talk about), _1��&'�,��%&8 (to think of), *1��&)��p&)E�� (to comment on), �ب�|&F'1 (to
write with) etc. These constructions are fairly common, frequent and widely used in
both written and spoken Arabic. However, unlike English grammarians, Arabic
grammarians do not group such constructions under a specific heading. Therefore, the
main question here is can we consider them as PVs? And to what extent do they meet
the abovementioned syntactic and semantic criteria of IEPVs?
It is important to say that while there are some researchers (e.g., Kharama & Hajjaj
1989; Bataineh & Bataineh 2002) who have touched upon the issue of the existence of
PVs in Arabic without elaborating on their form and function criteria, there are, on the
71
other hand, quite a few who have given such an issue more attention and tried to
explore it in some more detail. In what follows, I will outline their contributions one
by one in order to sketch a clear picture of such constructions that will enable me to
contrast them with their English counterparts.
2.6.1 Lentzner
The leading study in this regard was conducted by Lentzner (1977) in his doctoral
dissertation entitled Semantic and Syntactic Aspects of Arabic Prepositions in which
he assigns a chapter to explore the verb-preposition structures in Arabic (pp. 155-
195). Given the importance of the profound insights considered in such a chapter, it
merits being summarized.
In his attempt to examine the relationships between verbs and prepositions in Arabic,
Lentzner claims, from the very beginning, that only the "true" Arabic prepositions
��,&I+وف�ا,&Z "are able to combine semantically with verb roots and to act as integral
parts of verb-preposition structures" (p. 19). By "true" Arabic prepositions, he means
prepositions such as 7ء�&(+8&%�,�ا�,�p&)E�,ا+&2م��,�p&+�0,�/&�0,�إ&E (baa?, fii, 3alaa, laam, ?ilaa, min,
3an) "which embody the most essential locative and directional notions" (p. 159).
Lentzner makes the point that such constructions in Arabic "exhibit characteristics
similar to both compound verbs [PVs] and tight verb-preposition constructions in
English" (p. 159). Further, he admits that it is difficult to compare such Arabic
structures with those in English mainly, due to the fact that unlike English
prepositions, Arabic prepositions always require an object of some sort and cannot
occur without one. This makes some testing procedures in English inapplicable to
72
Arabic. He also outlines the past efforts done by scholars, such as Wright, Cantarino,
Fleisch and others, at establishing systematicity between the classes of Arabic verbs
and the prepositions they combine with. He believes that such efforts were
unsuccessful, claiming that most attempts at categorization of Arabic verb-preposition
idioms "have tried to group verbs and prepositions together on the basis of (rather
vague) semantic cohesion" (p. 160), for example [cited from Cantarino], because �0&/
means "the casual point of departure" it is used with "verbs meaning to sell and to
give in marriage" or that because �p&)E means 'to be on, over' it is employed with verbs
meaning "to cover, to include" and "domination, power" (p. 160). These analyses in
Lentzner's view:
[…] while often intuitively valid, are nonetheless restricted by two facts: first, such statements are only generalities and cannot account for all instances of verb-preposition occurrence. Second, they are not precise enough to be able to predict which preposition will be used where (pp. 160-161).
He, accordingly, excludes such semantic analyses, and devotes his study to provide
"tentative categories of semantic structure for certain types of verb-preposition
idioms" (p. 161). These idioms have been extracted from a corpus, which is Halim
Barakat's novel entitled " �ا+}&L7,�إ+&�pا+)X&E���,&Qدة� ", and categorized by prepositions. He
starts with the locative prepositions: (&�,�8&%�,�ا+)&7ء�Ep to consider their relations to verbs
they often combine with. He maintains that 7ء&&(+ا and p&&)E "are by far the most
commonly used in conjunction with verbs" and ا+)&7ء� "is the most widely ranging
preposition of all" (p. 162).
73
(?baa) ا+)7ء
In addition to its function "as an integral part of certain verb-preposition idioms" (p.
can act as a transitivizing particle which serves to convert intransitive verbs" ا+)7ء ,(162
of motion into transitive verbs of transport" (p. 162). Arabic grammarians refer to
such a function of ا+)&&7ء as �ا+F*]1&&�5\&&7ء� (the transitivizing baa?) or K&&�.+7ء�ا&&\ (baa? of
transport), e.g., �ب�K&�.} (to transport by), �ه&,ب�ب (to run off with) (p. 162). Moreover,
there are some intransitive verbs which may use ا+)&7ء� in construction with a noun
phrase such as: �3&[�بFا� (to meet with), �ب�,&nF8إ (to boast about), �ب�,&/ (to pass by) etc.
In such verbs ا+)7ء has two functions:
1) Specifying the subject, for example:
5-P7� ا�2W�]3Fب�ا+Y.�5ا9و+�p\}2ب�ا+Y.�5ا+
The first year-students met with the second year-students.
2) Bringing a second element into the predication, for example:
ا�3F[�ا+}2ب�\7H97{~ة
The students met with the professors.
In both of the above cases, ا+)7ء "serves the purpose of specifying those who took parts
in the action" (pp. 165-168).
Furthermore, there exist some verbs that do not occur without ا+)&7ء� such as: ��0ب&/� (to
believe in), ع�ب,(} (to donate), ر�ب[� (to be worthy of), ب�|Zر (to welcome), ف�ب�,FEا
(to confess), ب��QF+ا (to join with), ب��SY3} (to stick to), �4بFاه (to be interested in), و���
.etc. (pp. 170-171) (to contact) ا{�KUب ,(to trust) ب
74
There are, however, some transitive verbs which use ا+)&7ء� "to mark noun phrases in
particular syntactic relations" (p. 171), but may occur without it in other contexts such
as: ��4ب&)Z (to dream about), ��4ب)&H (to accept) and �3[�ب&H (to hear about) (p. 171). Also,
there are some verbs which use ا+)7ء "to mark the direct object, but […] can be directly
transitive with no change in meaning" (p. 171) such as: �ب�K&/أ (to hope for), �7ط�ب&Zأ (to
surround), أ�ب[\ (to begin), ��بZأ (to feel), ب�p/ر (to throw), ب��Q+ (to overtake), م��F+إ
etc. (p. 171). There are other verbs, "which are passive in either form or (to pledge) ب
meaning" (p. 172), and use ا+)&7ء� "to mark an underlying agent or instrument" (p. 172),
such as: �ب�~&yأ (to be influenced by), �ب�|&IEأ (to admire), �ب���X&8 (to be surprised at)
etc. (p. 172). Finally, there are some verbs which involve two noun phrases, one of
which is marked by 7ء�&(+ا such as: Z��4&'+�p&)E+ا+)&7ء� (to condemn someone to something),
ا+)&7ء�+�اE+��4&H&,ف�� (to introduce someone to someone), ��]&.w��4+�أ&Hا+)&7ء�+�ا (to convince
someone of something), �[/�4+�أHا+)7ء+�ا (to provide someone with something), �,/�4+�أHا
ا+)7ء+� (to command someone to do something) etc. (p172).
%8 (fii )
Lentzner claims that the occurrence of %8 with verbs "is not common" (p. 173), and he
pinpoints four different cases in which verbs combine with %8: Firstly, "verbs that take
[%8] optionally; can be directly transitive" (p. 173), e.g., %8�K/أ (to hope for). Secondly,
"verbs that take [%8] for one meaning, another preposition for other meaning" (p. 173),
e.g., %8�|Gر (to desire). Thirdly, "verbs that require [�%&8]" (p. 173) such as: ��%&8�47ه&H (to
participate in) and ��%&8ك�,F&oا (to share). Lastly, "Intransitive verbs that use [�%&8] in
construction with a noun phrase" (p. 173), e.g., ��%&8�,&'8 (to think of) and ��%&8�,3F&Hا (to
continue) (p. 173).
75
p)E (3alaa)
Lentzner observes that "[m]any intransitive verbs use [�p&)E] in construction with a
noun phrase" (p. 175), such as: ��p&)E��&Hأ (to regret), ��p&)E�p&'\ (to cry over/for), ��p&)E7ف�&y
(to fear for), �p&)E �,O&H (to watch over) in which �p&)E "denotes a type of casual
relationship between the action depicted by the verb and the object of the preposition"
(p. 177), and embodies a concept of "FOR THE SAKE OF". The second function of
�p&)E is illustrated in: ��p&)E7ر�&� (to rebel against), ��p&)E�SQ&R (to laugh at), ��p&)E�|^&G (to
become angry of), ��p&)E�|&)�} (to overcome) which have to do with actions or feelings
directed "AGAINST" someone or something. Thus, p)E has two meanings (i.e. 'for the
sake of' and 'against') which are considered as "two sides of one coin", and the
difference in these meanings "lies not in the preposition itself, but in the verb with
which it is used" (pp. 176-180) [Emphasis in original].
There are some verbs that require ,��p&)E such as: ��p&)E�,&�أ (to influence), ��p&)Eص�,&Z (to
ensure), ��p&)E�4&'Z (to pass judgment on), �p&)Eدل� (to indicate), ��p&)E�,{-&H (to dominate),
��p&)E�K&Wأ (to look out upon), �U&Fwا�p&)E�, (to be limited to), ��p&)E�4&Iه (to attack) etc. (pp.
180-181). Whereas there are some transitive verbs that "may occur with [�p&)E]", such
as: p)Eرآ�� (to concentrate on), �p&)E��)E (to comment on), ��p&)E�[&3FEا (to depend on) etc.
(p. 181). Finally, there are some verbs which involve two noun-phrases, one of which
is marked with p)E such as: �[E7H�+�4Hا�+p)E (to help someone to do something), �K 8�+
��4&Hا�+�p&)E (to prefer something to something), ��p&)/��4+�أ&Hا�+�p&)E (to dictate something to
someone) etc. (pp. 181-182).
76
Having considered the relations of Arabic locative prepositions to Arabic verbs,
Lentzner goes on to explore the relations of Arabic directional prepositions to Arabic
verbs. He makes the point that, like the locative prepositions, Arabic directional
prepositions ( E&��0,�/&�0,�إ+&�p,�ا+2م ) combine with verb roots to provide "lexical structures
with particular semantic content", however, they are less frequent than either ا+)&7ء� or
p)E (p. 182).
(laam) ا+2م
This preposition is interchangeable with �p&+إ with no change in meaning. It may
combine with four types of verbs as follows: 1) Verbs which require it, such as: �p�`أ
ا2) "Transitive verbs that can optionally take it" (p. 183), such as: �]3FH ,(to listen to) ل
marks the person(s) (or thing(s)) [ا+&2م�] 3) "Verbs of permitting, where .(to listen to) ل
to whom permission is granted" (p. 183), such as: �أ{&7ح�ل (to permit someone to do
something), and ���3ل&H (to permit someone to do something). 4) "Intransitive verbs
which use [ا+&2م�] in construction with a noun-phrase" (p.183), such as: �ى�ل,&� (to
happen to), �4ل)YFHا (to surrender to), �4ل�FPا (to avenge) etc. (pp. 182-183).
p+إ (?ilaa)
There are three types of verbs that may combine with �p&+1 : إ) verbs which require it,
such as: p+ق�إ[Z (to stare at), p+�0إZ (to long for), ��p&+7ج�إ&FZا (to need), ��p&+إ�p�&`أ (to listen
to), ��p&+إ�]&){} (to look at), ��p&+إ��&I+ (to resort to), ��p&+إ�xU&Pأ (to listen to ) etc.; 2) transitive
verbs which use �p&+إ optionally with no change in meaning, such as: ��p&+3[�إF&Hا (to listen
to), ��p&+7ء�إ&Hأ (to harm), ��p&+7ق�إF&oا (to miss) and ��p&+إ�,&�P (to look at); and 3) intransitive
77
verbs which may use �p&+إ in construction with a noun-phrase, such as: ��p&+ث�إ[&Q} (to
speak to), �p&+7ر�إoأ (to indicate to), ��p&+3&�ن�إWا (to trust), ��p&+�4إ^&Pا (to join), and ��p&+إ��&(FPا (to
notice). However, the function of �p&+إ in most of the above instances is "essentially
directional", and the relationship between the verb and the object of p+إ can be termed
"TOWARDS" (pp. 185-187) [Emphasis in original].
0/ (min)
Similarly, there are three types of verbs that may combine with �0&/: 1) verbs which
require it, such as: ��0&/��&)n} (to get rid of), ��0&/�,n&H (to mock), ��0&/ب�,&Fwا (to approach),
and �/&��4�F&P��0ا (to take revenge on); 2) "[t]ransitive verbs which may take [�0&/]", such as
and 0/�K)w (to reduce); and 3) "[i]ntransitive verbs which may take ,(to increase) زاد�/0
[�0&/] in construction with a noun-phrase", such as: ��0&/�|&*} (to get tired of), ��0&/7ف�&y (to
be afraid of), 0/�p'o (to complain about), 0/�SQR (to laugh at), �0&/�|^G (to get angry
with), 0/�,_P (to avoid) etc. (pp. 188-189).
0E (3an)
Likewise, �0&E may combine with three types of verbs: 1) verbs which require it, such
as: 0&&E�p&&)n} (to abandon), 0&&E�,&&(E (to express),�and 0&&E��&&n3} (to produce); 2)
"[t]ransitive verbs which may take [�0&E]", such as: ��0&E��&Q\ (to search for), ��0&Eأ�&7ب� (to
answer), ��0&E�]&8دا (to defend), ��0&Eب�,&Eأ (to express), ��0&E�0&)Eأ (to announce), and ��0&E�|&�P
(to search for); and 3) "[i]ntransitive verbs which may use [�0&E] in construction with a
noun-phrase", such as: 0E�[*F\ا (to move away), ��0&E��&)Fyا (to differ from), ��0&E�K&w (to be
less than), ��0&E�]&.3} (to desist from), and ��0&E��&wX} (to stop). With intransitive verbs, �0&E
78
has three kinds of functions: first, it embodies the semantic component "FROM" with
verbs of motion, as in: +7{+ت�ا[*F\�7اOL7w[&`�0أE�5( (the student withdrew from her friends);
secondly, it functions "as a comparative predicate", as in: ����7O}7�1[&`�0&E�5&(+7{+ا�x&_)Fyا (the
student differed from her friends); and thirdly, it extends "the condition predicted by
the verb to an action in which the subject is involved" as in: ��5&H�0ا+]را&E�|+7{+ا��wX} (the
student stopped studying) [Emphasis in original] (pp. 191-194).
On the basis of the details outlined above, Lentzner (1977) labels every construction
of verb-preposition as an Arabic verb-preposition idiom, which is not accurate by any
means. He confuses the idiomatic verb-preposition constructions with those of non-
idiomatic ones, and this sort of confusion, in my view, is due partly to his approach.
Lentzner approaches the point ably from the prepositions rather than the verbs
standpoint, concentrating on the function of each preposition when it is combined
with certain types of verbs. In spite of giving the syntactic characteristics of the verbs,
he ignores the semantic features of them and their contribution when combined with
Arabic prepositions.
2.6.2 Abboud and McCarus
Some researchers, such as Abboud and McCarus (1968), have taken up the issue from
the verb standpoint. Abboud and McCarus (1968) observe that there exist two kinds
of verb-preposition constructions in Arabic; idiomatic and non-idiomatic. The first
one being the construction of verb-preposition in which the verb changes its basic
meaning, for example, the meaning of the verb ��&Q\ which basically means (to
discuss), becomes (to look for) when combining with the preposition �0&E. Likewise,
79
the verb �[&3FEا (to authorize, to sanction) and the combination ��p&)E�[&3FEا (to depend on).
In such combinations, Abboud and McCarus elaborate, a verb-preposition idiom
constitutes a single unit of meaning "distinct from the verb alone or from other verb-
preposition idioms" (p. 352).
The second kind being construction of verb-preposition in which the verb retains its
basic meaning. For instance: the verb [E7H (to help someone) and the combination �[E7H
p)E (to help someone in doing something) (p. 353).
2.6.3 Heliel
Another major contribution was made by Heliel (1994) in an article titled Verb-
Particle Combinations in English and Arabic: Problems for Arab Lexicographers and
Translators in which he approaches the issue from the transitivity �5&1[*F+ا standpoint.
He starts with the traditional classification of verbs in the Arabic grammar where
they, like English verbs, can be transitive verbs ��5&1[*F/أ8*&7ل� or intransitive verbs أ8*&7ل��
M. The former verbs govern the accusative of a noun through themselves, they areز/&�5
traditionally known as ���7OY&_.\�5&1[*F/أ8*&7ل� (verbs which pass on to their objects through
themselves). The latter verbs govern a preposition with a noun in the genitive case
instead of accusative, they are traditionally known as ,ف��,Q\�51[*F/أ8*7ل���(verbs which
pass on to their objects through a preposition). There are some verbs, however, that
may be used in both ways with different meanings, for instance the verb �7&Eد (to call),
which can be used transitively, as in: �7Eد (he called him), or intransitively as in: ��&+�7Eد
(he prayed for him) (p. 144).
80
Heliel, then, asks the same question arisen at the beginning of this section whether the
Arabic construction of verb + preposition constitutes "a 'phrasal verb', a 'prepositional
verb', or a different category" (p. 144). To answer this question, he gives the
following example: ى�\*&]�ا+�&]اء�������X&)Q+�0ا&E�p.�F&Hا (he went without dessert after lunch).
Heliel asserts that the phrase ا+�&]اء����[&*\ (after lunch) is a genuine prepositional phrase.
But he proposes two ways of bracketing the remainder, verb phrase plus prepositional
phrase, or verb phrase plus noun phrase as follows:
] or [ اp.�FH ] [ �0Eا+X)Qى�] Q+ى�اX) ] [ 0E�p.�FHا ]
Verb phrase + prepositional phrase / verb phrase + noun phrase
In order to identify a prepositional phrase Heliel conducts three tests:
a) fronting the prepositional phrase, e.g., �p.�FHى�اX)Q+�0اE
b) questioning the prepositional phrase with a 'what' question, e.g.,
�0Eأي�o%ء�اp.�FH؟
c) separating the prepositional phrase from the rest of the sentence by an
adjunct, e.g., ىX)Q+�0اE�~�.-Z�p.�FHا��������������������
He comes to the conclusion that the phrase �0Eى���X)Q+ا "is indeed one stable constituent,
and hence a prepositional phrase" (p. 145). Consequently, the combination of ��p.�F&Hا
0E (dispense with) along with similar combinations like: p)Eف�,oأ (supervise), �ب��&{\
(attack with violence) "may be structurally interpreted, as in English, to be
prepositional verbs, or alternatively to be transitive verbs followed by an 'oblique'
object related to the verb via a preposition" (p. 145). From a semantic standpoint,
Heliel argues that the preposition is essential to the meaning of the verb and is
invariable, so that changing the preposition leads to the alteration of the meaning of
the entire combination, e.g., ��5&31,I+�0ا&E��Nآ (expose the crime) versus ���5&(-�Q+ا�p&)E��N&آ
81
(inspect the bag). In a similar manner, he elaborates that in the Arabic construction of
verb + preposition the verb often keeps most of its meaning and may be extended via
the preposition and perhaps the following noun, e.g., 8&%�ا+3&,�ة����,&�P (looked in the
mirror) versus ���5-^&�+8&%�ا�,&�P (looked into the case). Prepositions, on the other hands,
almost always retain a degree of their physical meaning, e.g.ار{&)��ب��, (to connect
with),���0&/ه&,ب�� (to escape from) etc. Yet both the preposition and the noun it governs
complete the meaning of the verb. This kind of link between the preposition and the
noun it governs and the verb is traditionally termed as ���&)*} (dependency) (p. 146).
Hunce, the verb is "a fair guide to the meaning of the combination" (p. 146). Heliel
explains that it is not difficult to understand the Arabic verb via the structure whether
it is used with or without a preposition, e.g., ��Q+ (to follow him) versus �\��Q+ (to catch
up with him) (p. 146). This is mainly due to the fact that the verb in Arabic verb +
preposition constructions "is used in extended but rarely too idiomatic or unmotivated
ways" (p. 146), as in: 7ن�U&G9ا�x+7/ (the branches swayed) [my translation] versus ��x&+7/
`�p+ا�x.(+7اO�1[ (the girl tended towards her friend) [my translation] where the verb x+7/
is literal in the first sentence and extended in the second since it is associated with the
preposition p+إ (to) (p. 146).
It is not unusual to see Arabic native speakers using Arabic prepositions wrongly.
Such a misuse of Arabic prepositions, according to Heliel (1994), "indicates the
centrality of the verb to whose meaning the preposition adds" (p. 146). He,
accordingly, concludes that "these Arabic combinations could be syntactically
considered verbs followed by specific prepositions and be classed as prepositional
verbs, not phrasal verbs" (p. 145).
82
2.6.4 Alkhuli
In his book Comparative Linguistics: English and Arabic, Alkhuli (1999) maintains
that there is only one type of PV in Arabic, that is, prepositional verbs, e.g., ���p&)E��&)�
��%&H,'+ا (he sat on the chair), ����-&Q3+8&%�ا�,&Q\أ (he sailed through the ocean), ���,&/98&%�ا��&wد
(he inquired into the matter).
It is quite evident that the above examples used by Akhuli (1999) illustrate the
literal/non-idiomatic type of Arabic verb-adverb constructions.
2.6.5 Najiib
Along these lines, Najiib (2001) confirms that PVs exist in the Arabic language (p.
71). Further, he gives the following examples to illustrate them:
%8�|Gر (to desire, to crave for) 0E�|Gر (to avoid, to dislike) p+7ل�ا/ (to like, to sympathize) 0E7ل�/ (to avoid, to dislike) %8�]wو (to fall down) p)E�]wو (to come across, to find) p+ا�,�P (to look at)
%8�,�P (to consider) (p. 71) [My translation].
2.6.6 Siinii, Hussein and Al-ddoush
In their monolingual Arabic-Arabic dictionary ����5-Z2{&`Mات�ا,&-(*F)+�%w7-Y&+�4ا&I*3+ا (The
Contextual Dictionary of Idiomatic Expressions) [My translation], Siinii, Hussein and
Al-ddoush (1996) list around 2000 Arabic idiomatic expressions collected from a
wide variety of sources such as ancient and modern Arabic-Arabic dictionaries,
83
linguistic studies, arts and history literature, and proverbs. The compilers do not
mention Arabic PVs (henceforth APVs) as such, but the vast majority of the listed
Arabic idiomatic expressions contain constructions in which verbs are followed by
prepositions. To take only a few examples:
y7\�~أYZ�%8� (To take into his account) (p. 3) [My translation]�
y7ر~أ(FEJ�0ا-*\� (To take into consideration) (p. 5) [My translation]
Z�����()w�%8� (To be touched with) (p. 42) [My translation]�
-*1�K�+8%�ا� (To be away from people) (p. 143) [My translation]
� ,G7ءق/�,(o�%8� (To fail in facing even the easiest problem) (p. 94) [My translation]�
�Hأ��[1�%8� (To be confused) (p. 10) [My translation]�
�ا+]ه,�E(-��وo,بKأآ (It is too old) (p. 15) [My translation]
0Y+ا��\�x/[�} (To grow older) (p. 33) [My translation]
�4O\�x*{�} (They got lost) (p. 33) [My translation]اH9)7ب
0Y+8�0%�ا*W (to be old, to be advanced in years) (p. 80) [My translation]
What is so important about this book is the listing of a number of fixed and idiomatic
Arabic expressions in which verb and preposition fuse in one semantic unit to provide
a new idiomatic meaning different from their literal meanings. To cite just a few
instances:
1. p)E�p}أ (p. 2) (To terminate or destroy). For example:
.(p. 2) أ{�xا+.-,ان�8�M�./�0-Y3y�p)E%�ا+�,51
(The fire destroyed fifty houses in the village) [My translation]
2. ��0&E�~&yأ (p. 6) (To learn from, to study under, to borrow, to transmit, to narrate). For
example:
0-�\7Y+�0اE�4م�أ8'7رهX-+73ء�ا)E�0/�,-� (p. 6) أy~�آ
84
(A lot of contemporary scientists have adopted their thoughts from their predecessors)
[My translation]
3. %8�~yأ (p. 6) (To begin, to start). For example:
(p. 6) أy~�ا7FH9ذ�8%�إ+�7ء�/R7Q,{��\*]�و`Xل��3-[�ا+}2ب
(The professor started delivering his lecture after the arrival of all the students) [My
translation]
4. 0E�])wأ (p. 15) (To give up). For example:
0-y[F+�0اE��1,3+ا�])wأ (p. 15)
(The patient gave up smoking) [My translation]
�0E�SY/5.أ (p. 18) (To refrain). For example:
�3N+وب�ا,G�pFZ�,I_+اب�/�0ا,N+�0ا+}*7م�واE�4L7U+ا�SY31 (p.18)
(The fasting man refrains from having food and drink from dawn to dusk) [My
translation]
�6. p)E�|QYPا (p. 20) (To include or apply to). For example:
QYP7ء|�إ.�FH�0دون�ا-.WاX3+3-[�ا��p)E�[1[I+ا+�,ار�ا� (p. 20)
(The new decision has applied to all citizens without exception) [My translation]
QY.1�|د[I+ا+}2ب�ا�Kآ�p)E�4)*3+آ2م�ا� (p. 20)
(The teacher's order applies to all new students) [My translation]
7. p+إ�]{�Pا (p. 21) (To devote oneself to, to dedicate oneself to). For example:
�p+إ�[3Zأ�]{�P�7اO.�}أ�pFZ�5-\,*+�5ا+(��5اHدرا (p. 21)
(Ahmad devoted himself to study the Arabic language until he mastered it) [My
translation]
8. 0E�]{�Pا (p. 21) (To quit, to give up, to stop). For example:
21XW�7./�7زO}�0ز71رE�x*{�Pا�%F+�7اOF�1[`ت�ه]ى�[�F8ا (p. 21)
(Huda has missed her friend who stoped visiting her for a long time) [My translation]
85
:�p.\ (p. 27) (To consummate the marriage with). For exampleب .9
5-*/7I+�7اOFHدرا�x)3أن�أآ�[*\�،�Fا��\�و��[(E�p.\ (p. 27)
(Abdullah consummated the marriage with his wife when she completed her
university study) [My translation]
10. %8�,Q(} (p. 30) (To study thoroughly, to go deeply into, to be an authority or expert
in). For example:
(p. 30) آ7ن�ا+�]/7ء��1�MذXPن�+2F/-~هF+7\�4]رQ(F1�4+7/�،�1,وا�8%�ا+*(4
(The ancestors did not allow their students to teach unless they are acquired through
knowledge) [My translation]
�:For example .(To fall in love with, to be very fond of) (p. 32) {*(��ب .11
,�U+��3/.~�اE��x.(\�pF_+ا��)*}�� (p. 32)
(The young man fell in love with his cousin since childhood) [My translation]
12. p+إ�p/ر (p. 61) (To intend to, to aim at). For example:
(p. 61) ر/�pا+]\(��Q1,U}�%8�%H7/Xإ+�pإزا+�5ا+_XIة�ا+F_3*(�5\-�0ا+)(]01
(The diplomat intended, by his statement, to eliminate the fabricated gap between the
two countries) [My translation]
13. p)E�,OH (p. 66) (To look after, to take care of). For example:
�-,�/�0ا+I]�وا+73Qس'\��[)\�717Eون�ر�o�p)E�,OY1�,-_Y+ا�K� (p. 66)
(The ambassador kept looking after his fellow citizens' affairs with a lot of diligence
and enthusiasm) [My translation]
14. %8�]�1 (p. 144) (To consist of, to contain, to make up of). For example:
5Q_`�0-Y3y�%8�1[�ا+7�3ل� (p. 144)
(The article is made up of fifty pages) [My translation]
86
2.6.7 Summary of section 2.6
To sum up, I agree with Lentzner (1977) in his view that Arabic constructions of verb
+ preposition have characteristics of both PVs and prepositional verbs in English. I
believe that they are syntactically prepositional verbs but semantically PVs due to the
fact that they are idiomatic in nature. That is, each of which constitutes a single unit of
meaning which has nothing to do with the individual meanings of its components.
However, I disagree with him as to labeling all Arabic verb-preposition constructions
as verb–preposition idioms, owing to the fact that most of these constructions do not
satisfy the criteria of idioms set out by grammarians and linguists who define idioms
as "frozen patterns of language which allow little or no variation in form and […]
often carry meanings which cannot be deduced from their individual components"
(Baker, 1992, p. 63). I will apply the two tests, mentioned in the previous section,
introduced by Cowie and Mackin (1993) on some Arabic verb-preposition
constructions to see whether they are idioms or not. The first test is substituting the
whole phrase with one word. This begs the question: can we substitute a phrase like
��p&)E�[E7&H 'to help' with one word? The answer is: no, there is no one word for this
Arabic phrase, simply because it is made up of two lexical constituents each of which
has its own literal meaning, and the whole meaning of the phrase is so transparent that
it can be easily deduced from the total sum of the meanings of its components. The
second test is to delete the second word of the phrase. Again, can we delete the Arabic
preposition without changing the whole meaning of the phrase? The answer is: yes,
we can say �[E7&H only to express the same meaning of the phrase 'to help'. Therefore,
this type of Arabic constructions is non-idiomatic/literal by any means.
87
I, also, disagree with Abboud and McCarus (1968) who divided these structures into
two types only, i.e. idiomatic and non- idiomatic. I believe that there is a third type in
between, that is, the semi-idiomatic type which is manifested in many Arabic verb +
preposition structures. To take just one example, ��p&)E�[&3FEا 'to depend on', which cannot
be substituted for one word. However, unlike the case of the previous example, the
preposition in this phrase cannot be deleted without changing the whole meaning, this is
owing to the fact that the verb ��[&3FEا�(to authorize, to recognize) sacrifices its basic
meaning when combining with preposition, while the preposition retains its basic
meaning. For that reason this type of Arabic constructions, in my view, can be called
semi-idiomatic rather than idiomatic one.
With regard to Heliel's claim that these sorts of Arabic combinations are syntactically
prepositional verbs but not PVs, I believe that he opted for such a view because he
deems that EPVs mean verb + adverb only, i.e. not verb + preposition nor verb +
preposition + adverb, which explains why he studies them under the name of verb-
particle combinations and distinguished among them syntactically. As far as I am
concerned, as I have proposed before, I consider the three abovementioned types of
English combinations as PVs since they are idiomatic in nature. Idiomaticity is my
parameter in this study, therefore, I consider the idiomatic Arabic verb-preposition
constructions as idiomatic Arabic PVs (henceforth IAPVs). They, undoubtedly,
constitute constructions more or less similar to IEPVs in that each of which forms one
unit of meaning, and exhibits strong semantic relationships between prepositions and
the verbs with which they combine.
88
Consequently, in order to answer the question raised at the beginning of this section. I
strongly agree with the views of Lentzner (1977), Najiib (2001), Kharama and Hajjaj
(1989), Alkhuli (1999) and Bataineh and Bataineh (2002) that PVs do exist in the
Arabic language. PVs constitute a significant phenomenon in the English language;
however the Arabic language does not distinguish this phenomenon as such. It is quite
evident from the above literature that Arabic grammarians do not classify the Arabic
construction of verb + preposition under a specific heading.
As for the criteria, not all APVs can fit the syntactic and semantic criteria of IEPVs.
They have rather different usage and criteria. Some of them may fit the criteria of
their English counterparts, but differ in their usage. The similarities and dissimilarities
can be shaped as follows:
1. Unlike IEPVs which are of three types (i.e., verb + adverb, verb +
preposition, and verb + adverb + preposition), APVs are of one type only,
that is, verb + preposition.
2. The directional and locative 'true' prepositions, as Lentzner (1977) terms
them, can be used to form APVs, since adverbial particles are not used in
such Arabic constructions.
3. Like EPVs, Arabic verb + preposition structure can be idiomatic, semi-
idiomatic, and non-idiomatic.
4. Like IEPVs, the majority of APVs constitute integral parts of Arabic
idiomatic and fixed expressions.
5. Like polysamic IEPVs, APVs may occur in more than one meaning in
different contexts.
89
6. Like EPVs, meanings of APVs subject to change according to word or
words with which they may collocate.
7. Like the particle in IEPVs, in IAPVs the preposition modifies to a certain
extent the meaning of the verb it combines with. It is so essential that
changing it entails altering of the meaning of the whole structure.
8. Unlike EPVs, whose communicative function is mainly carried by
particles (Side, 1990), the communicative function of IAPVs is typically
carried by the verb in spite of the fact that the preposition modifies the
meaning of the verb it combines with.
9. Like EPVs, Arabic literal and idiomatic PVs share the same syntactic
properties. The distinction between them, however, is confined to their
semantic properties.
10. Like IEPVs, IAPVs can be substituted by a one word synonym.
11. Unlike EPVs which can occur without a syntactic object, APVs require a
syntactic object and cannot occur without it.
12. As far as register variations are concerned, unlike EPVs which are less
formal, less rhetorical and commonly used orally by everyone in everyday
contexts, APVs are far more formal and highly rhetorical. They are
typically used in formal settings such as literary works, religious sermons,
political speeches, academic contexts, etc. Most of them are confined to
the written mode and used only by educated people from a certain sector
of society and educational background. APVs, in short, are so rhetorical
that using them in an informal setting makes the speaker sound very odd
and unnatural.
90
The final point needs to be taken up here is the fact that Arabic makes "a sharp
distinction between written and spoken discourse" (Baker, 1992, p. 71). It "has two
varieties: a high written (formal) variety and a low spoken (mainly informal) variety"
(Al-Qinai, 2000, p. 501). Therefore, in rendering such colloquial expressions as EPVs
into written form of Arabic, Arabic translators would run the risk of shifting the
register from informal/colloquial to formal/standard expressions (see 5.3.6.2.2 below).
One of the strategies suggested to Arabic translators to tackle such a dilemma is,
according to Al-Qinai (2000), "to reduce the gap by steering a middle course between
the formal style of the high variety and the informal language of Colloquial Arabic"
(p. 501). In other words, translators are best advised to use Modern Standard Arabic
which lies half-way between the highly formal classic Arabic and the highly informal
colloquial Arabic.
2.7 Derivation of PVs in English and Arabic One of the major aims of this study is to pinpoint the difficulties encountered by
Arabic translators when dealing with the notion of IEPVs. The phenomenon of
derivation of PVs constitutes, to a certain extent, one aspect of such difficulties. In the
previous sections the syntactic and semantic properties of idiomatic PVs in both
English and Arabic were explored in detail. In this section I will be considering the
ways by which EPVs can be derived from adjectives and nouns and vice versa. Yet,
before proceeding in so doing, a brief account of the notion of derivation in both the
English and Arabic languages will be outlined. The aim here is to present the
morphological, grammatical and semantic features of derivation upon which the
process and the scope of deriving PVs are based.
91
2.7.1 Derivation in English The phenomenon of derivation in the English language has been of interest to a wide
range of grammarians, linguists and lexicographers (cf. Hurford & Heasley, 1983;
Crystal, 1997; Kaplan, 1995; Crowley, Lynch, Siegel & Piau, 1995; Trask, 2000). It
has been covered in the frameworks of word-formation, productivity, and in the
context of converting deep structure into surface structure in Transformational
Grammar (Kaplan, 1995; Crowley et al., 1995; Trask, 2000).
Derivation can be broadly defined as "[…] the process of forming new words
according to a (fairly) regular pattern on the basis of pre-existing words" (Hurford &
Heasley, 1983, p. 206), or a process of word-formation by which words are derived
from other words by adding affixes, such as deriving the words national, international
and internationally from the word nation (Trask, 2000, p. 40). The vast majority of
English vocabulary emerges by the process of forming new lexemes from old ones -
either by adding affixes to them, or combining them to create compounds (Crystal,
1997, p. 128). The new derived words, however, are typically of different "part of
speech"; a good example would be the English "manner" adverbs which are formed
from adjectives by adding the suffix –ly to them, as in the adjective rapid and the
manner adverb rapidly. Another example is making nouns from verbs by adding the
suffix –ment to them as in the verb excite and the noun excitement (Kaplan, 1995, p.
27).
Furthermore, English, following Crystal (1997), "does not have affixes in large
numbers – only about 50 common prefixes, somewhat fewer common suffixes, and no
92
clear instances of infixes. But these limited resources are used in a complex and
productive way" (p. 128).
There exist three kinds of affixes in the English language, namely:
1- Prefixes which are typically placed before the roots of words, such as: in-,
un-, de-, dis-, miss-, sub-, anti-, ex-, etc. (A more comprehensive list in
Crystal, 1997, p. 128).
2- Suffixes which are usually placed after the roots of words, such as: -tion, -
ship, -ness, - able, -ese, -like, -let, -ess, -ism, etc. (Crystal, 1997).
It is worth noting that unlike prefixes which rarely alter the words class, suffixes do
not only modify the meaning of the word to which they are attached. but also, in many
cases, change the word's grammatical status, for instance, the suffix –ify turns the
noun beauty into the verb beautify, and the suffix –ing turns the concrete noun farm
into the abstract one farming (Crystal, 1997, 128). Another point needs to be
mentioned here is that English does not allow using more than one prefix at a time,
but, however, it does allow using two or more suffixes as in: person-al-ity and norm-
al-is-er (Kharma & Hajjaj, 1989, p. 38).
3- Infixes which occur within the roots of words. It is necessary to point out
though that, unlike many languages including Arabic which make a great use
of infixes to express such notions as tense, number, or gender, the English
language has no system of infixes, but English speakers do occasionally create
words into which other forms have been inserted for the sake of swearing or
being emphatic, as in kangabloodyroo (Crystal, 1997, 128).
93
In their book The Design of Language, Crowley et al. (1995) approach the
phenomenon from the perspective of distinguishing between inflectional and
derivational affixes. They consider that words with inflectional affixes such as expect,
expects, expected and expecting are mere different forms for one lexeme (expect),
while words with derivational affixes such as expectant, expectancy, expectantly,
expectation and expectative are considered five different words, even though they are
all related to the form expect morphologically. In other words, inflectional affixes do
not create new lexemes, but they rather create other shapes of the same lexemes,
while derivational affixes do create new lexemes from other ones. Further, the full set
of forms of any lexeme that are inflectionally related are usually referred to as the
paradigm for that lexeme. Hence, the forms expect, expects, expected and expecting
are considered to be the paradigm for expect. Derived forms, however, have their own
paradigm as well. Therefore, the forms expectation and expectations are considered to
be the paradigm for expectation (pp. 257-258).
Further, the process of derivation, according to Hurford and Heasley (1983), is
actually not merely one process; it is rather of three simultaneous processes, as
follows:
1- A morphological process, by which the shape of a derived word is changed
by adding prefix or suffix as in: laugh – laughter, table – tabulate, bake –
bakery, honest – honesty, etc.
2- A syntactic process, by which the part of speech of a derived word is
changed, e.g., from verb to noun as in: teach – teacher, from adjective to
noun as in: red – redness, from adjective to verb as in: wide – widen, from
verb to adjective as in: avoid – avoidable, etc.
94
3- A semantic process, by which a new sense is produced, e.g., producing a
word denoting an act or an activity when deriving laughter from laugh;
producing a word denoting an agent when deriving teacher from teach; or
producing a word denoting a property when deriving redness from red, etc.
(pp. 206-207).
To be more precise, however, the process of derivation is not always involved in the
three abovementioned processes. There exist some cases in which derivation involves
two processes only, as in the case of 'zero derivation' where no morphological process
is involved, e.g., deriving cook (agent noun) from cook (transitive verb). This case
typically occurs when the same word is used in different part of speech. On the other
hand, there exist some cases in which no grammatical process is involved, as in
deriving larger from large where both words are adjectives, but have different forms
and distinct semantic properties (pp. 207- 209).
2.7.2 Derivation in Arabic
The notion of derivation in Arabic stems initially from the issue of inflection
(��1,U&F+ا) which constitutes the cornerstone of morphology (ف��,U&+�4ا&)E) in Arabic.
Inflection, as it has been defined by Al-jurjaanii (died 1413 A.H), is a "transferring of
the single root to a variety of patterns for intended meanings which cannot be
achieved without such patterns" (p. 61) [my translation]. Arabic scholars, however,
divide the verb morphologically into two types: defective ([&&/7�) and inflected
The defective verb is a verb that carries a meaning unrelated to time, hence .(/U&F,ف�)
it is a frozen verb in the sense that it is confined to one particular pattern, e.g., ��-&+ (it
95
is not),��pY&E�(it may be), �(��4&*P how good), ���&\ (how bad). The inflected verb, on the
other hand, is a verb that carries a meaning related to time; therefore it is capable to
appear in different patterns depending on the time in which the action takes place. The
inflected verb is of two types: fully inflected which can produce the three verb
patterns (past: �%&R73+ا, present: ا+3&^7رع� and imperative: �,&/9ا). And partially inflected
which can produce only two verbs patterns, either past and present such as: 1'&7د�–آ&7د���
(to be on the brink of), ��S&oأو–�S&oX1� (to be about to), �/&�17ال�¡�/&7زال� (still, yet), 7\,ح��&/–�
�/S_.17–/7ا�S_P ,(to continue to be) /17),ح �(not to cease doing)��or present and imperative
such as دع،�–1]ع�� (to leave) (Al-ghalaayiinii, 1986, pp. 55-64).
Derivation (7ق��F&oMا) in Arabic, in its simplest definition, is an extraction of one word
from another provided that there is suitability (�5(&H7./) between them in meaning and
structure but not in form (?ibin Jinnii died 392 A.H as cited in Hammaad, 1983, p.17;
Al-jurjaanii, 1986, p. 27). For example, from an infinitive such as: �5&\7Fآ (writing) we
can derive the past tense �|&Fآ (he wrote), from which we can derive the present tense
�|&F'1 (he writes) from which, in turn, we can derive the imperative �|&Fاآ (write).
Infinitive always constitutes the basic form from which all other derivative forms can
be derived (Al-ghalaayiinii, 1986, pp. 208-209).
Derivation in Arabic falls into three types:
1) The small derivation (��,-�U&+7ق�ا�F&oMا) where suitability (�5(&H7./) has to be
between the two words in letters and letters' order such as: �ب,&R (to hit)
and ا+^,ب (hitting).
96
2) The big derivation (,-('+7ق�ا�FoMا) where suitability between the two words
is in form and function but not in letters' order such as: �~&(� (to attract) and
.(attraction) ا+I~ب
3) The biggest derivation (��,&(7ق�ا9آ�F&oMا) where suitability between the two
words is in articulation as in: ���&*P (to croak) and ��&O.+ا (croaking) (Al-
jurjaanii, 1986, p. 87).
In his book ��5&�)+�8&��ا (Philology), Waafii (1973, pp. 179-180) attempts to be more
general in outlining the notion of derivation, He argues that every triliteral root (��K&`أ
�%&�2�) in Arabic correlates with a general meaning to which it has been assigned. Such
a general meaning can be captured in every word comprises the three sounds
occurring in the same order as the root from which the word has been generated. The
general meaning of �4&)*+ا (knowledge), for instance, correlates with the sounds of its
triliteral root, i.e. �0-&*+ا (3ayn), ا+&2م� (laam) and �4-&3+ا (miim), and it can be captured in
each word containing these three sounds occurring in the same order no matter what
sounds may be inserted before, after or through them. Hence, the general meaning of
+*(&�4ا (knowledge) can be captured in the following derived words: �4&)E (he knew), �7&.3)E
(we knew), �4&)Eأ (I know), �4&)*P (we know), �4&¢)E (he taught), ا�X&3¢)E (they taught), �4&£)*1 (he
teaches), �4&£)*P (we teach), �4&¢)*} (he learnt), ا�X&3¢)*} (they learnt), �4+7&E (scholar), مX&&)E
(sciences) etc. Waafii terms this sort of derivation as 7ق�ا+*&&7م�F&&oJا (the general
derivation), and indicates that it is of two types:
1- Derivation from the names of substances (7ن��&-E973ء�ا&Hأ), such as: �|¢ه~&/ (gilded)
from |ذه (gold), �¢ _/ (silver-plated) from�5 8�(silver), etc.
97
2- Derivation of the synthetic infinitive (��%E7.U&+ر�ا[U&3+ا) by adding to words 1&7ء��
�|Y&.+ا (relative yaa?) along with 7ء�&F+ا (taa?) such as: �5&-)7ه� (state of ignorance)
from �K&7ه� (ignorant), �&-\X\5ر or �5&-هX+إ (godhood) from رب or ��&+إ (god), �5&-+Xر�
(manhood) from Kر� (man) etc.
Interestingly, these two types of derivation were not widely used in ancient Arabic,
but owing to the real need of them in the last forty years or so to express a tremendous
number of philosophical and scientific facts, Academy of the Arabic language (��]&3I/
.allowed using them when necessary (pp. 179-180) (ا+(��5ا+*,\-5
Moving on to the issue of Arabic derivative forms, In his book 7ق���F&oM7+�5ا&Hر (the
message of derivation) [my translation], Al-sarraaj (died 316 A.H.) imposes two
conditions for derivation to be accepted: 1) The two words have to share the three root
letters of the trilateral verb (K*8), and 2) The two words have to share a particular type
of meaning (p. 20). Arabic grammarians have agreed on using the trilateral verb as
paradigm, and call the first radical of it ا+_7ء (faa?), the second 0-*+ا (3ayn) and the third
.(Wright, 1981, p. 30) (laam) ا+2م
The Arabic language plays with the trilateral root of the verb to make new words with
subtle changes to the meaning (Wightwick & Gaafar, 1998, p. 38).
In what follows I will enumerate the major eight derivative forms (paradigms) in
Arabic. There exist some other forms, but they are very rare and only used in poetry
and archaic texts (cf. Wright, 1981; Al-bustaanii, 1963; Wightwick & Gaafar, 1998):
98
1- ������ (fa33ala) which is coined by doubling the second radical of the basic
verb, for example: درس (the basic verb meaning: to study), در¢س (to teach),
,Yآ (to break) ,¢Yآ (to break in pieces).
2- ������ (faa3ala) which is coined by adding a long vowel aa after the first
radical, e.g., ��&)� (the basic verb meaning: to sit down), ��+7&� (to sit down
with someone) KFw (to kill), K}7w (to fight).
�,.which is formed by adding an ?alif before the first radical, e.g (af3ala?) أ��� -3
��&{P (the basic verb meaning: to articulate) ��&{Pأ (to make someone talk) ى�,&�
(to flow) أ�,ى (to make flow).
4- ����� (tafa33ala) which is coined by adding taa? on the front of the above first
form (K¢*8), e.g., ,¢ذآ (to remind someone) ,¢آ~} (to remember), ف¢Xy (to terrify)
.Xn} (to be afraid)¢ف
5- ����� (tafaa3ala) which is coined by adding taa? in front of the above second
form (�K&E78), e.g., �7ون&E (to help someone) �7ون&*} (to cooperate with someone),
.7n} (to pretend to be deceived)دع 7y (to deceive)دع
6- ��� (?infa3ala) which is coined by adding ?alif and nuun in front of the root إ�
letters, e.g., �,Y&آ (to break something) �,Y&'Pإ (to be broken), ��N&آ (to uncover)
�N'Pإ (to be uncovered).
7- �� (?ifta3ala) which is coined by adding ?alif with short vowel i in front of إ�
the first radical and taa? after it, e.g., K*8 (to do something) K*F8إ (to fabricate
something), �3+ (to touch) �3F+إ (to seek for something).
8- ���� (?istaf3ala) which is coined by adding ?alif with short vowel i, siin إ��
and taa? in front of the first letter and placing a sukuun over the first root
letter, e.g., ج,y (he went out) �ج,nF&Hإ (he took out something) (Wright, 1981,
pp. 29-47 ;Wightwick & Gaafar, 1998, pp. 38-61).
99
The point to be made here is that derivation is not confined to verbs only; nouns can
be derived from verbs as well. There are twelve kinds of nonverbal derived from
Arabic verb, and Arabic linguists have agreed to call them 7ت��FN&3+ا (the derivatives).
They are: ر[U3+ا (infinitive, verbal noun) �4ا+3&,ة�Hا (noun that expresses the doing of an
action once) عX.+�4اHا (noun of kind or manner) �4ا+3'7نHا (noun of place) �4ا+�/7نHا (noun
of time) ��5&+¤�4ا&Hا (noun of instrument) ��K&E7_+�4ا&Hا (active participle) ل��X&*_3+�4ا&Hا (passive
participle) ��5O(¢N&3+�5ا_U&+ا (assimilate epithet) ��K-^&_F+ا�K&*8أ (competitive and superlative
adjectives) 5�+7(3+�5ا)� .(intensive paradigms) (Wright, 1981; Al-bustaanii, 1963) أ/
It is important to stress that despite the complexity of the Arabic derivative forms,
they are of a great benefit for Arabic learners. For instance, one can guess the
meaning of any word if he recognizes the derivative form and knows another word
with the same root (p. 38). They are, on the other hand, not confined to the Arabic
language only; many of them occur in Hebrew and Aramaic (cf. Wright, 1981, pp. 31,
32, 34, 36, 38, 40, 41).
2.7.3 Derivation of PVs in English
Forming PVs from other word classes is quite noticeable phenomenon in the English
language. This is mainly due to the productive nature of these kinds of verbs which
can be emerged at any time, in any situation and within any context throughout the
stretch of the English language. In this regard there are two points that need to be
taken up. Firstly, the sources from which EPVs are derived and, secondly, the ways
by which nouns can be derived from PVs.
100
EPVs are derived from three sources, namely adjectives, nouns and Latinate verbs as
follows (McArthur, 1989, pp. 40-41):
2.7.3.1 Deriving PVs from adjectives
EPVs can be formed from the three types of adjectives:
a) Adjectives which can take the suffix –en as in: "fresh, freshen, freshen up
and flat, flatten, flatten down" (McArthur, 1989, p. 40) [Emphasis in original]
.
b) Adjectives which cannot take the suffix –en as in: "calm, calm down and
warm, warm up" (McArthur, 1989, pp. 40-41) [Emphasis in original]
.
c) Adjectives which can be both (with and without the suffix –en) as in:
"damp, dampen, dampen down and damp, damp down" (McArthur, 1989, p.
41) [Emphasis in original].
2.7.3.2 Deriving PVs from nouns
In this process "a phrasal verb containing a regular phrasal verb and a special noun is
telescoped into a new phrasal verb" (McArthur, 1989, p. 41) as in: wall in (close in
with a wall) and channel off (lead off by means of a channel) (McArthur, 1989, p. 41).
Other examples are: "button up, dish out, fog up, iron out, and sponge down"
(McArthur, 1989, p. 41) [Emphasis in original]. This process has been named by
Fraser (1976, pp. 22-24) as "noun verbalization" and the derived PV as "noun-particle
101
combination" where nouns may occur as verbs in combinations with such particles as
down, in, over, and out. He provides the following examples to illustrate the classes of
nouns and the particles that may occur with them:
a) Nouns occur with the particle down: batten, blot, button, cement, clamp,
glue, nail, past, pin, rivet, screw, staple, tack, and tape as in: He glued down
the loose edge of the painting.
b) Nouns occur with the particle in: box, fence, glass, pen, rope, screen, and
wall as in: He fenced in the porch.
c) Nouns occur with the particle over: board, brick, cement, glass, mortar, and
wall as in: The man bricked over the entrance way.
d) Nouns occur with the particle out: chalk, crayon, ink paint, pen, and pencil
as in: The clerk penciled out the entry.
Fraser (1976) also indicates that the majority of the abovementioned nouns never
occur as verbs except in these combinations, therefore, the combinations "will have to
be listed in the lexicon as individual verbal elements apart from the listing of the
verbs and/or nouns with which they are associated" (p. 24).
2.7.3.3 Deriving PVs from Latinate verbs
In this process Latinate verbs of two and three syllables are attached to particles for
emphasis or completion to form PVs. McArthur (1989) cites the following examples:
"contract out, divide off/up, level off, measure off/out, select out, [and] separate
off/out" (p. 41) [Emphasis in original]. PVs from this type are still being widely used
102
even though their usage is avoided by some researchers and regarded as pleonastic
(McArthur, 1989).
2.7.3.4 Deriving nouns from PVs
Nouns are typically formed from PVs. Such derived nouns "are becoming
increasingly common in modern English, in conversation, in newspapers and in
technical usage" (McArthur, 1975, p. 48).
Theses new forms have been labeled by Fraser (1976) as "Verb-Particle
Nominalizations" and exemplified in what follows:
The blast-off occurred at 4 o'clock. The foulup was caused by a faulty gas line. The stowaway was found hiding under the lifeboat. Where were you during the cave-in? (p. 27) [Emphasis in original] .
Moreover, they have been named by Cowie and Mackin (1993, p. xiii) as
"Nominalized forms" and given the following instances:
Make-up is formed from make up (to apply cosmetics to one's face).
Take-off is formed from take off (to leave the ground in an aircraft).
Telling-off is formed from tell off (to reproach or to reprimand).
McArthur (1975, pp. 48-52) demonstrates that there are two patterns of formation in
this regard. He terms them as: the major pattern and the minor pattern of formation.
The first pattern being the commonest one for deriving nouns from PVs in which the
PV remains unchanged as in:
to break down a breakdown
to round up a round-up [Emphasis in original]
103
The first element of the noun is stressed in the spoken mode. And the noun formed is
either written as one word or with a hyphen in the written mode. This "stress shifting
rule" of generating nouns from PVs has been also mentioned by Bolinger (1971) who
considers PVs as "probably the most prolific source of new nouns in English" (p. xiii).
The second pattern of deriving nouns from PV is the minor one wherein nouns are
derived by a process of inversion as in:
Disease broke out. The outbreak of disease alarmed us (McArthur 1975, p.
49) [Emphasis in original].
The noun here is derived from the PV by fronting (or prefixing) the particle. In
spoken mode stress should be placed on the first element of the derived noun, i.e. the
particle (McArthur, 1975).
It is necessary to point out, however, that there exist some nouns derived from PVs on
both patterns (i.e. the major and minor patterns) Consider, for example, the following
pairs cited by McArthur (1975):
Breakout and outbreak [Nouns derived from the PV break out]
Layout and outlay [Nouns derived from the PV lay out]
Lookout and outlook [Nouns derived from the PV look out]
Additionally, some of such nouns appear with the gerund form of the verb such as:
beating-up, bringing-up, dressing-down, falling-out, thinning-out, and chewing-out.
And some of them appear with the past participle form of the verb such as: left-over
(Fraser, 1976, p. 27).
104
It must be pointed out that each noun of the above pairs has its special use, for
instance the use of breakout differs from the use of outbreak in that the former usually
has something to do with people whereas the latter has something to do with diseases
and troubles (McArthur, 1975, p. 50).
2.7.4 Productivity
Productivity can be broadly defined as "[t]he degree to which a grammatical pattern
can be used freely to construct new instances" (Trask, 2000, p. 109). Or rather "[t]he
formation of new linguistic expressions based on the existing pattern of usage" (Daud
et al., 2003, p. 159). It is undeniable fact, however, that such a phenomenon is not
solely confined to the English language, it is rather a common factor among all
languages. Hence, the fact that the human language allows its users to communicate
in entirely productive way is considered one of the main features that differentiate the
human language from non-linguistic aspects of communications such as non-verbal
human communication, and perhaps all aspects of animal communication. There is in
fact no limit to the using of human language (Crowley et al., 1995). Therefore,
productivity in language means, following Crowley et al. (1995), "that once we have
learned a particular rule for combining two or more items together, we can combine
any like items in the same way to produce a novel utterance" (p. 262).
105
2.7.4.1 Productivity in English
English linguists, grammarians, and lexicographers have paid a considerable attention
to the phenomenon of productivity. It has been studied at length on the light of
derivation and word-formation. Since, as it has been outlined above, affixes are of two
types, namely, inflectional and derivational, the former is said to be more productive
than the latter, in that they can be used more freely to invent new words. Hurford and
Heasley (1983) maintains that "[i]t is doubtful whether any derivational process is
actually completely productive, but some are very productive and others hardly
productive at all" (p. 213).
Consequently, the English language scholars have divided affixes, according to their
productivity, into three categories: productive, non-productive, and semi-productive
(Kaplan, 1995; Crowley et al., 1995; Trask, 2000). Yet, for the purpose of the study, I
will not go into the details of theses types of productivity as my focus is on the
productivity of IEPVs in particular, in an attempt to explore the mechanism by which
such combinations can be typically produced.
It is not an exaggeration to say that thousands of IEPVs are being formed casually
when needed; they pop up on a regular basis with new special meanings (McArthur,
1975). They are undoubtedly "a highly productive category in English" (Heliel, 1994,
pp. 141-142), which "probably accounts for more new 'stereotypes' than any other
source" (Bolinger, 1971, p.xii). One when dealing with them, following Kennedy
(1967),
[…] is not dealing with a fixed category of English speech, but with a changing, growing tendency in language which throws up over night, as
106
it were, new combinations, and new meanings, so that an absolute and complete list would be impossible of realization (p. 5).
In his attempt to explore the mechanism of coining such "a floodgate of metaphor"
Bolinger (1971, p. xii) indicates that there is no need for the everyday inventor of a
PV to arrive at such elements as roots and affixes which have no reality for him. All
what he needs is a rough familiarity with other use of words like head and off to make
up of the PV head off , this is mainly due to the self-suggesting nature of this kind of
verbs when the occasion for them comes up.
Unlike people from non English speaking backgrounds, English native speakers have
no difficulty obtaining this kind of "a rough familiarity with other use" of both
elements of PV. They "have an understanding, albeit unconscious, of the meaning and
use of particles that allows them to create, almost at will, new phrasal verbs" (Darwin
& Gray, 1999, p. 66). This highly productive nature of EPVs complicates the problem
of learning them by learners of English who already have a great deal of difficulties
with their syntactic and semantic characteristics (p. 66).
It might be plausible to explore here one of the most controversial issues in this
connection, that is, the dilemma faced by lexicographers. There is no doubt that
people will keep generating newely coined PVs (along with other derived word
classes) unendingly. This will, in turn, make the task of capturing such new items by
lexicographers even harder. They would be as if they were, to use Hurford and
Heasley's (1983) words, "shooting at a moving target" (p. 205), because their
dictionaries will soon be out of date if they recorded only attested words "as new
words will have been coined and perhaps added to the everyday vocabulary of the
107
language" (p. 205). The question of lexicography will be investigated in more details
in the forthcoming sections. But what needs to be considered here is that such newely
coined, unrecorded, EPVs pose a great deal of challenge to Arabic translators as they,
in dealing with them, have to play the role of lexicographers, in addition to their basic
role, in tracing them, analysing them within their situational contexts, and providing
their appropriate Arabic equivalents. To give just a few examples of such newly
coined items: to sex up, to google around, to shop out, to party out, etc.
2.7.4.2 Productivity in Arabic
There is no dout that abovementioned Arabic derivative forms are "the major way in
which Arabic achieves its richness of vocabulary" (Wightwick & Gaafar, 1998, p.
38), and it is one of the most important mediums by which the Arabic language has
maintained its development and productivity (Hammaad, 1983, p. 19) [my
translation].
Although the phenomenon of derivation exhibits considerable complexity, it is not
uncommon to hear Arabic speakers making up new verbs from existing roots for the
sake of creating jokes or being poetic (Hammaad, 1983, p. 39) [my translation].
Thus, it is not unusual to hear such new Arabic words as: �5&..(+ (to apply the Lebanese
sample of a sectarian civil war to another country), as in: �5ا+*&,اق��&..(+ (to put Iraq in a
sectarian civil war). And �5&أ/,آ (to copy the American style), as in: ك���,/�&F1�K&ه&~ا�ر� (this
man is copying the American style). Both words are derived by making use of the
Arabic derivative form K)*8 (fa3lala).
108
What makes this issue so interesting is the fact that a wide range of Arabic speakers
nowadays, especially those who live in countries where English is the dominant
language, are constantly deriving new verbs from English words using the
abovementioned Arabic derivative forms. To take just a few examples:
• The verb �,N&Pأ which is derived from the English verb (to insure) by
using the Arabic derivative form �K&*8أ, e.g., ��%}7ر-&Hت�,N&Pأ (I insured my
car).
• The verb �¥¢.&� which is derived from the English verb (to change) by
using the Arabic derivative form K¢*8, e.g., ا+�}7ر�¥.� (to change trains).
• The verb �KY&.آ which is derived from the English verb (to cancel) by
using the Arabic derivative form �K&*8أ, e.g., ��&EX3+ا�x)Y&.آ[ (I cancelled the
appointment).
• The verb �¥¢Y&/ which is derived from the English verb (to send a
message) by using the Arabic derivative form K¢*8, e.g., %.I£Y/ (send me
a message).
In addition to derivation, the other way whereby the Arabic language maintains its
enrichment and productivity is metaphor (7ز�&I3+ا). Arabic relies heavily on metaphors
in producing new words, structures, and collocations with new semantic connotations.
To use Hammaad's (1983) examples: 7ن�&I._+أذن�ا��(the ear of the cup), ��%&H,'+ا�K&ر� (the
leg of the chair),����5&�7��+ا��&.E (the neck of the bottle), ���N&3+7ن�ا.&Hأ (the teeth of the
comb), �0ا9\,ة��-E(the eye of the needle) [my translation].
109
Arab writers, poets and artists typically make use of such metaphorical expressions to
juice up their works or sometimes to avoid using taboo or being rude. They employ
words in a different way by widening/narrowing their semantic meanings according to
the requirements of contexts or thoughts they want to express. In other words, they
impart new life to such words, and inject the language with new items that can be
utilized later on in the everyday contexts (Hammaad, 1983) [my translation].
Let me now turn to the issue of the productivity of PVs in Arabic. As has been
previously shown, the only type of PVs that exists in the Arabic language is that of a
verb + a preposition one, where the both elements of the construction are fused
together to form one semantic unit (see 2.6 above). Such constructions, however, have
their productive nature. The metaphorical usage of theses verbs and prepositions plays
an important role in their productivity. Let me consider this issue by means of some
examples taken from Hammaad (1983):
�x/7wا+Q,ب�7H�p)Eق
(Literally: the war has stood on a leg, meaning, the war has erupted) [my translation]
7Ow7H�0Eب�,Q+ا�x_Nآ
(Literally: the war has exhibited its leg, meaning, the war has broken up) [my
translation]
�1~�7P�0E�,N+أ\]ى�ا
(Literally: the evil has shown his molars, meaning, the evil has been revealed) [my
translation].
To recaptulate the current section, having given a brief account of the derivational
mechanisms in both English and Arabic, one can come up with a number of frultful
110
insights, being: 1) both The English and Arabic languages derive new words by
adding affixes to the roots of basic verbs; 2) unlike English, Arabic can derive new
words by adding/omitting sounds and short vowels to/from the roots of the basic
verbs; 3) unlike Arabic, English does not make use of infixes; 4) both languages allow
for the derivation of nouns and adjectives from verbs; 5) unlike English, Arabic
(among other languages such as Hebrew and Aramaic) has a fixed set of derivative
forms by which new derived items can be created; 6) unlike Arabic, English relies, in
derivation only, on sets of prefixes and suffixes; 7) both languages, like any other
languages, have the characteristic of productivity as a result of word-formation
systems; and 8) while EPVs constitute a highly productive category, their Arabic
counterparts (prepositional verbs) can only be productive when used as a part of
metaphorical expressions.
2.8 PVs in English lexicography In this section attention will be paid to the ways by which English lexicologists have
treated the issue of PVs in their dictionaries. The aim is to explore the extent to which
such dictionaries have reached in covering, explaining, and providing equivalents to
such problematic items of the English language. The section will fall into two distinct
parts, the first will view the PVs in general English-English dictionaries, and the
second part will discuss the treatment of PVs in the specialized English-English
dictionaries.
111
2.8.1 PVs in general English-English dictionaries It might be plausible to argue that the ways whereby general English-English
dictionaries approach the question of PVs really merit a careful investigation. Yet, it
is beyond the scope of this thesis to trace the phenomenon in all English lexicography.
Therefore, three main authoritative dictionaries will be looked at, they are: Webster's
Third new International Dictionary (1993), The Oxford English Dictionary (1989),
and The Macquarie Dictionary (2001). The reason for selecting these three
dictionaries is due to the fact that they represent the major three dialects of English:
the first one is a dictionary of American English, the second is a dictionary of British
English, and the third represents a dictionary of Australian English.
A close look at the three dictionaries at hand reveals that they do approach the issue of
PVs relatively well, but it also reveals that they are, by no means, comprehensive in
their coverage.
Gove (1993), in the preface of Webster's Third new International Dictionary,
indicates that verb plus adverb combinations, which "function like one-word verbs in
every way except for having a separate suffix" (p. 4a), have been recognized and
assigned separate entries (p. 4a). This is, to some extent, true and evident throughout
the dictionary. The PV make up, for instance, is accorded a separate entry and given
nine meanings as a transitive verb, and five meanings as an intransitive verb followed
by the noun makeup, which is derived from it, and, in turn, given six meanings (p.
1364). Other examples include back up, which is given three meanings followed by
the noun derived from it, backup (p. 160), and put off, which is given four different
112
meanings followed by the noun derived from it, put-off (p. 1850). On the other hand,
some PVs are not accorded separate entries, such as the PV account for, which is
listed under the entry of the verb account (p. 13). Other examples include the PVs
bitch up (p. 222), egg on (p. 726), switch on, and switch off (p. 2313) which are
tackled under the verbs bitch, egg, and switch respectively. As for the coverage,
however, many PVs are not covered in this dictionary such as log on, log off, sign on,
sign of, sign out and put up with.
Along these lines, The Oxford English Dictionary (1989) handles PVs in very much
the same manner where some of them are specified in separate entries such as back-
up, (vol. I, p. 870), bring about (vol. II, p. 555), bring forward (vol. II, p. 556), bitch
up (vol. II, p. 229), make-up (vol. LX, p. 249) and put up (vol. XII, p. 922). Others
listed under their root verbs such as account for (vol. I, p. 85), pop up (vol. XII, p.
395) and start up (vol. XVI, p. 815) while a number of PVs have been entirely
ignored such as bring along, bring together, dine in, chill out, and click on.
By the same token, The Macquarie Dictionary (2001) accords the majority of PVs
separate entries such as backup (p. 133), count down (p. 440), make up (p. 1156), pull
out (p. 1534), push up (p. 1540), put up (p. 1541), and shut down (p. 1748) etc. PVs,
in some cases, are tackled after the entries of their verbs as in account for (p. 12),
brighten up (p. 241), chill out (340), dine in (p. 536), switch on, and switch off (p.
1900) which are listed under the verbs account, brighten, chill, dine and switch in that
order. While such PVs as bring along, bring together, bitch up, sign in and sign off
have been completely disregarded.
113
2.8.2 PVs in specialized English-English dictionaries
Following Cowie (1993, p. 39), specialized monolingual English-English dictionaries
devoted to PVs "are relative newcomers to the market". In this subsection they will be
taken up in a historical order, that is, the oldest will be treated first. The aim here is to
trace the progress of handling such a phenomenon by dictionaries compilers and to
touch upon the points in common amongst them and the points in which they vary
from one to another. And, most importantly, to explore the gaps, if any, that need to
be bridged.
2.8.2.1 An Analysis and Dictionary of Two-Word Verbs in English
Illustrated in Sentences
Compiled by Abdul Karim Taha, and first published by Kuwait University in 1972.
This book, to the best of my knowledge and research, is the first monolingual English-
English dictionary entirely devoted to PVs in English literature. It has been
republished by Librairie du Liban as York Dictionary of Two-Word Verbs in English
in 1996.
The first part of this book (pp. 1-37) has been set out to investigate the structural and
syntactic properties of two-word verbs (PVs). The main focus has been to classify
them syntactically to transitive and intransitive verbs, and to account for their stress
pattern and word order, "and to point out the important signals which may be used to
distinguish the different meanings of a given two-word verb" (p. vii).
114
The Dictionary of Two-Word Verbs in English Illustrated in Sentences has occupied
the second part of the book (pp. 39-274), whereby PVs are listed alphabetically, each
of which is labeled either transitive or intransitive. Most of the intransitive PVs are
illustrated by one example each owing to the fact that they are non-separable, for
instance the PV burn down (to be destroyed by fire) is illustrated by the sentence The
house burned down (p. 67), and ride off (to depart by riding) by After saying good-by,
he rode off (p. 182).
The transitive PVs, on the other hand, are illustrated by three sentences each due to
the fact that they are separable and may appear in three different word order patterns.
For example the PV act out (to perform) is exemplified in the following three
sentences: They acted out a play; They acted a play out; and They acted it out (p. 39).
And the PV leave out (to omit) is given the following examples: He left out several
answers; He left several answers out; and He left them out (p. 136).
It is worth mentioning to say that the meanings of polysemous PVs, which have more
than one meaning, have been attended to, for example the PV take out is given the
following meanings: 1) to run; to follow; to pursue; 2) to escort; to accompany out; 3)
to extract; to remove from; 4) (in bridge) to bid higher than one's partner in another
suit; 5) to obtain official papers; 6) to enter (a subscription) (p. 238).
As far as register variations are concerned, two labels have been provided throughout
the dictionary, colloquial and slang. For instance the PVs bash up (p. 45), break off (p.
63), and dream up (p. 95) are considered as colloquial, while beard down (p. 49), doll
up (p. 93), and zero in on (p. 274) are considered as slang, where no attempt has been
115
made to account for other variations such as formal, humours, literary etc. as it has
been the case in the other specialized dictionaries. No attempt has been made as well
to account for such crucial features as nouns and adjectives which are derived from
PVs, idioms in which PVs constitute fundamental parts, common words which
typically collocate with each PV, and English dialects other than the American dialect
upon which the analysis and the dictionary are based.
Moreover, the dictionary is by no means comprehensive in that there are many PVs
which have been ignored such as bring along, bring together, juice up, do without,
bliss out, boot up, butt out, factor in, hack into, rock up, slag down, tough out, veg
out, type in, scroll down, and scan in among others.
2.8.2.2 Dictionary of English Phrasal Verbs and their Idioms Edited by Tom McArthur and Beryl Atkins, and first published by Collins Clear-type
Press in 1974.
The compilers believe that PVs "are more consistent in their behaviour and far more
teachable than is generally supposed" (p. 5). Therefore, this dictionary has been
developed as a teaching material in the 1970-1972 classes of English for foreigners
carried out by the Department of Educational Studies, the University of Edinburgh.
Although the dictionary, according to its compilers, can be used as a general
reference, it is mainly meant to assist foreign learners of English, particularly those
who "have mastered the basic sentence patterns of the language and have an active
vocabulary of 3,000 words in plus" (p. 6). Such students have been advised to use the
116
dictionary in conjunction with a workbook entitled 'Using Phrasal Verbs' developed
by Tom McArthur in 1970-1971 as a teaching material as well, and published in
Collins 'Patterns of English' series (p. 6). However, the Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs
and their Idioms has some noticeable features, which I will now discuss.
In terms of the polysemy of PVs, unlike other scholars who argue that each sense of a
given PVs should be dealt with as a distinct verb, the compilers consider that
"differences of meaning occur within a continuum of meaning, beginning with the
simple verb + particle and ranging through to the more opaque idioms" (p. 6). Such
verbs, they elaborate, "are unique blends of syntax, semantics and idiom, and are dealt
with […] as so many themes and variations" (p. 6). To take just one instance:
The PV fix up is given five different meanings each of which is illustrated by at least
one example as follows: the first meaning is (arrange) where fix up is intransitive, as
in: We've fixed up to go out tonight. They have fixed up to visit us next month. I fixed
up to go a broad for a holiday. I have fixed up for a plumber to come tomorrow. The
second meaning is (fit or put up) as in: The carpenter fixed up the wall cupboards.
The third is (arrange) where fix up is transitive as in: I'll try to fix something up that
suits everyone. Let's fix it all up now. The forth is (provide an opportunity or work
for) as in: Can you fix him up? They fixed me up with this job. The fifth is
(accommodate) as in: They fixed him up in a small hotel. Can you fix her up for the
night? (p. 82).
As far as the coverage is concerned, the compilers admittedly indicate that "[n]o
claims are made to exhaustiveness either in the number of the verbs covered or in the
117
number of senses identified for any verb" (p. 6). Hence, the comparison with other
dictionaries reveals that many PVs have not been covered in this dictionary such as
bring along, bring together, drive through, trade in, chill out, juice up, and stand over
among others.
Some verbs are listed as 'special entries' and marked with asterisks. The compilers
justify such a distinction by claiming that "a large number of phrasal forms are simply
the grammatical operation of verbs of movement plus particle of direction" (pp. 6-7).
For example: "conduct + particle vt sep (convey by escort, with direction) [e.g.,] He
asked the guard to conduct us out. The receptionist conducted us in to meet the great
man" (p. 54) [Emphasis in original].
Further, in their attempt to account for every listed PV expansively, the compilers
provide four kinds of information in each entry about a given verb as follows:
1) A classification of the verb type, indicating whether it is a transitive (with a
direct object), or intransitive (without a direct object). And in the case of
transitive verbs, a distinction is made between separable and non-separable
(fused) PVs. For instance: "cash in vt sep (hand in for money) [e.g.,] She
needed money so she cashed in her shares. It's time to cash in those saving
bonds" (p. 41) [Emphasis in original] where vt stands for transitive and sep
stands for separable. Another example is "swear by vt fus (think highly of,
value) [e.g.,] He swears by the shop. I always swear by their products" (p.
223) [Emphasis in original] where fus stands for fused (non-separable).
118
2) The register variations of each PV are specified in order to show the field
and/or style of language in which a given PV may be employed. Special labels
are utilized to indicate the field such as:
Chem =chemistry; Cine =cinema; Fin =finance; Med =medicine; Mus =music,
etc. And some others to indicate the style such as:
Euph =euphemistic; Fam =familiar, informal; Lit =literal, basic; Pej
=pejorative; sl =slang; Vulg =vulgar.
3) A gloss is provided to each entry. McArthur and Atkins make the point that
"[t]he gloss for a particular entry is meant to be read together with the
illustrative sentences to show the area of meaning occupied by the verb" (p. 7).
Despite the fact that each gloss given to any PV in this dictionary is
considered by the compilers as a grammatical equivalent by which the PV can
be substituted, they admit that "[o]ccasionally the equivalent is not a perfect
match, because the verb may be unique in that sense" (p. 7), and in most cases
the Latinate verb equivalent does not carry "the same features of informality,
formality and vividness as the phrasal verb" (p. 7). As exemplified in the PV
book down in He booked us down for the next ship. This PV is glossed as (put
down in a book), which is not the perfect match, and given the Latinate verb
(register) as an equivalent which is in turn not as informal as the PV itself (p.
26).
4) One or more illustrative sentences. A random opening to page 142 shows two
distinct PVs, one (mark on), which is illustrated by one sentence, while the
other one (measure up), is exemplified in six sentences (p. 142).
119
Some PVs are given a reference to derived verbs, adjectives, nouns and idioms. For
instance, the PV be away, which has an idiomatic meaning, among other meanings, as
in: to be away with the fairies meaning to be slightly mad (p. 16). Similarly, the PV
come in, in to come in handy meaning to prove useful (p. 52).
In a nutshell, this dictionary has attracted a great deal of attention among researchers
and learners alike. Its list and classification of PVs are adopted to serve as the basis
for compiling four of the Collins bilingual dictionaries, namely: English to French,
English to German, English to Italian and English to Swahili (p. 9).
Such increasing attention, in my view, is because of its excellent presentation and
comprehensive treatment of the notion of PVs from a variety of perspectives. The
only weakness it has is the coverage of PVs. The number of PVs covered in this
dictionary is far less than the actual number of them presented in other dictionaries,
let alone the productivity nature of this type of combinations which makes them quite
difficult to be traced and captured.
2.8.2.3 Time-Chambers Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs Edited by E. M. Kirkpatrick and G. Davidson, and published by Federal Publications
in 1982.
It is worth mentioning to say that this dictionary has been developed from the
Chambers Universal Learners' Dictionary which was published by W & R Chambers
Ltd Edinburgh (p. iv).
120
Time-Chambers Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs is intended for learners of EFL, and, as
it has been claimed by its editors, "[i]t will not only help them to understand phrasal
verbs but will give them the knowledge and confidence to use them" (p. ix).
Nevertheless, in compiling this dictionary, the editors, in my view, have relied heavily
on the abovementioned Dictionary of English Phrasal Verbs and their Idioms by
Tom McArthur and Beryl Atkins (1974) in that they utilized very much the same
classification and label system (cf. pp. vi-x). With very few exceptions, however, the
dictionary has its own distinct features, which I will now discuss.
In the definitions given to the listed PVs, only the figurative sense of each PV is
provided, whereas the literal meaning is omitted. The editors justify such an omission
by claiming that it was "[f]or reasons of space" (p. ix), and they refer learners who
want to know more about the literal meaning to the Chambers Universal Learners'
Dictionary (p. ix). For example the literal meaning of the PV get across (to cross
something) is disregarded and only the figurative sense (to be or make something
understood) is given (p. 39).
And, "[f]or reasons of space and convenience" as well, some pairs of PVs, such as:
drain away and drain off (p. 27); nose about and nose around (p. 77) are dealt with
together, that is, each pair is tackled in one entry.
On the contrary, the dictionary comprises not only PVs (simple verbs followed by
adverbs or prepositions) but also verb phrases (verbs + objects followed by
prepositions + objects) such as: apply to in: apply force to a door; and build on in: I've
121
built all my hopes on this book being published, which are, by no means, regarded as
PVs, even though they are included "because it was felt that they would be useful for
learners" (p. ix).
It should be noted that the issue of polysemy of PVs is treated by numbering the
definitions of each PV "to avoid confusion" (p. vi), for instance the PV knock off has
six different meanings (p. 64), while pick up has nine meanings (pp. 81-82).
It is important to mention, however, that the register variations of the majority of the
listed PVs are indicated by means of labels such as: formal; inf. =informal; sl. =slang
etc. To take but one instance, the PV figure out is labeled as (inf) since it is typically
used in informal situations, as in: I just can't figure it out (to understand) (p. 34),
whereas the PV lie with is labeled formal since it is usually employed in formal
contexts as in: The decision lies with you (to be the responsibility of) (p. 69).
In terms of classification, as in other dictionaries, PVs are given grammatical labels
such as: vt =transitive; vi =intransitive; sep =separable; fus =fused (non-separable) etc.
What is novel, in this dictionary, are the separable transitive PVs (typically labeled vt
sep) have been classified into three categories (p. vii):
1) Transitive PVs, which are obligatory separated, have been labeled as vt oblig
sep as in: push around (p. 86).
2) Transitive PVs, which are usually separated, have been labeled as vt usually
sep as in: get across (p. 39).
3) Transitive PVs, which may be separated, have been labeled as vt sep as in keep
up (p. 62).
122
2.8.2.4 Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs Compiled by Rosemary Courtney, and first published by Longman Group Limited in
1983.
Three types of PVs are included in this dictionary: 1) verb + adverb such as nail down
as in: We shall have to nail him down to his promise (to state his intention) (p. 397);
2) verb + preposition such as see over as in: may we see over the house/ I understand
that it is for sale (to visit and examine) (p. 543); and 3) verb + adverb + preposition
such as: shape up to as in: It will not be easy for you to change your whole way of
thinking, but I believe that you have the strength to shape up to it (to face it with
courage) (p. 563).
Since such combinations can be either idiomatic or non-idiomatic, the main focus of
the dictionary being on the former while the latter is not covered unless "the verbal
combination also has an idiomatic meaning, then both senses are included" (The
introductory section, not numbered). In order to distinguish between idiomatic
meanings and non-idiomatic ones, an asterix (*) is placed before each idiomatic
meaning.
Besides, idioms such as: let the cat out of the bag (to tell a secret) (p. 354), in which
PVs are employed, are included and printed in bold type.
123
Interestingly, there exist some combinations, which are by no means PVs, that are
included such as: lie low (verb + adjective) and kid oneself (verb + pronoun) (The
introductory section, not numbered).
One of the most important features of this dictionary is listing the nouns and
adjectives which are derived from PVs. The compiler terms them as "Related words"
and places them at the end of the listed PVs, for instance the noun blackout and the
adjective blacked-out are mentioned with the PV black out from which they are
derived (p. 39).
Equally important, the issue of polysemy is dealt with by giving a separate numbered
sense for each meaning. Hence, the majority of the senses are provided as follows:
1- Ordinary meanings
2- Idiomatic meanings, marked with a star *
3- Fixed idioms in which the phrasal verb is used (The introductory section, not
numbered).
Such meanings are explained in simple English by using words from a list of 2000
words cited in the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. Each meaning is
illustrated by one or more examples taken from newspapers and books. The examples
are written in a way that they not only help the user to understand the expression but
also to give information on how it is typically used (The introductory section, not
numbered).
124
As far as register variations of PVs are concerned, the compiler provides, in the
beginning of the book, a list of short forms used to indicate four types of notes: 1)
notes such as: AmE, AuE, CanE, and ScoE, to tell the user that the expression is
always used in American, Australian, British, Canadian, or Scottish English; 2) notes
such as: law, mil, and naut, to tell the user that the expression is only used in
particular profession, i.e. law, military, and nautical (used about ships and sailors); 3)
notes such as: humor, and dergo to tell the user that the expression is used to show the
attitude of the speaker, i.e. whether it is humorous or derogatory (showing dislike or
lack of respect); 4) notes such as: fml, infml, and sl, to tell the user about the "level of
use of the expression", i.e. whether it is formal, informal or slang (The introductory
section, not numbered).
Further, cross-references are employed to help the user find other expressions with
related meaning of the one at hand, for example: the PVs book in, book out, and check
out are listed after the definition and examples of the PV check in. (p. 74).
Finally, a great deal of grammatical information is provided by means of codes taken
from Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. Such codes are listed and
explained at the front of the book. They consist of letters indicating the type of verb,
and numbers indicating what comes after the verb.
Last of all, this dictionary is regarded by Sjoholm (1995) as "the most complete one"
(p. 102). I totally agree with Sjoholm, since the comparison with other specialized
dictionaries reveals that the vast majority of PVs have been tackled in this dictionary.
Yet there exist some newly coined PVs which have not been covered, such as click
125
on, chill out, sex up, and google around. Such a skipping can be justified by the
productive nature of PVs which makes it almost impossible to list them all in one
book.
2.8.2.5 The Student's Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs Edited by Nigel D. Turton and Martin H. Manser, and first published by Macmillan in
1985.
Intermediate and advanced students who, according to the editors, "want an easy-to-
use reference book that deals with this area of the language" (p. iii), are the intended
users of this dictionary, which is basically a development of two books written by the
late F. T. Wood, namely English Verbal Idioms and English Prepositional Idioms,
which are both described by Turton and Manser as "highly successful" (p. iii).
In their introduction to the dictionary, the editors have made a clear distinction
between idiomatic and non-idiomatic PVs, and made the point that they will exclude
the latter types of PVs "which simply combine the meanings of their parts" (p. iv).
Instead, the emphasis will be on the former "whose meanings and use are especially
difficult for the student" (p. iii). Since, however, there is no clear cut distiniction
between the idiomatic and non-idiomatic PVs and "these are merely labels for the
opposite ends of a scale" (p. iv), they decided to take the comprehensibility as a
"guide for selection in these cases" (p. iv), in that they included only the type of PV
whose "meaning is not obvious from its parts" (p. iv). Yet they introduced two
126
exceptions to this rule: "verbs used only in technical or specialized fields are not
included, nor are verbs which are no longer in common use" (p. iv).
Furthermore, the style-markers Formal and Informal are used occasionally to indicate
the register variations of the listed PVs, where formal indicates that such a PV is used
in "formal written English" (p. viii), such as bear down on/upon (p. 5). While
informal means that a PV is used in such situations as "between close friends or
express the speaker's anger or irritation" (p. viii), such as: barge in/into (p. 5). On the
other hand, students are advised to treat the latter with caution, "since many of these
verbs could cause offence if used inappropriately" (p. viii).
Further, in their endeavour to present the grammatical behaviour of the listed PVs, the
editors have devised a notation system "that shows at a glance how each verb is used
in a sentence" (p. iii). It is a simple guide, providing students "with a clear visual
impression of grammatical behaviour of a verb without involving him in a long
technical description" (p. iv). Two symbols are employed: "a filled circle and an
empty circle" (p. v). Each part of the PV is represented by a filled circle, and each
other word added by the user is represented by an empty circle. (p. v). For instance:
because there is no word that can be added after the PV went out, only two filled
circles are placed before it, representing its two parts, as in the sentence Suddenly all
the lights went out (p. iv), whereas three circles are placed before the PV burst into,
two of them are filled (representing the parts of the PV) and the third one is empty
(representing the added word) as in the sentence The trees burst into blossom (p. 20).
127
This dictionary, in my view, is far from being exhaustive in that the comparison with
other dictionaries indicates that many PVs, which have been covered by others, were
skipped by the editors of this dictionary such as: bitch up, bid up, brighten up, drive
through, chill out, juice up, factor in, slag off, type in, scan in, and scroll down among
others.
2.8.2.6 Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs Edited by John Sinclair et al. and first published by Williams Collins Sons & Co Ltd
in 1989 and reprinted in 1990 (twice), 1991, 1993 (twice), 1994, 1995 (twice), 1996,
1997and 1998.
This dictionary contains more than 3000 combinations of verbs with adverbs or
prepositions, clarifying more than 5500 different meanings (p. v). Such combinations
are considered by the editors as "[…] the combinations which are in common use in
everyday modern English" (p. v). Further, they argue that they "[...] can make this
statement with confidence because the dictionary has been based on a detailed
computational study of the extensive Birmingham Collection of English Texts, now
part of The Bank of English" (p. v). In the foreword of the dictionary Sinclair et al.
list the 48 particles which are included along with the 38 verbs which "[…] are
especially problematic for students of English" (p. vi). All the combinations included
are made up of one verb from the first list and one or two particles from the second
list.
128
One important feature is that the types of combinations covered in this dictionary are
ranging from combinations with highly unpredictable meanings, such as: go off (to
explode), put off (to postpone), and turn down (to reject) to combinations with
reasonably predictable meanings, such as: spread out, link up, and slave away (p. v).
PVs are explained in "simple English". The explanations are designed in a way that
they tell the user about the meanings of PVs, as well as they show him/her how they
are typically used in terms of "what kinds of word collocate with it, what kind of thing
is usually mentioned as the subject or object of the verb, and what sort of sentence
structure it is used in" (p. viii).
In addition, an extra column is provided, to the right of the explanations, to highlight
the grammatical patterns of PVs. Such patterns "are mainly given in frequency order:
that is, the commonest pattern appears first" (p. xiii). The types of information given
in this extra column have something to do with the grammatical behaviour of PVs
such as: transitivity, word-classes of particles, positioning of particles and some
additional structures (pp. xiii-xiv).
Moreover, different meanings of PVs, which have more than one meaning, are
explained and "arranged in order of frequency, so that the commonest ones come
first" (p. viii), for example the PV shoot up is given the following three meanings
which are numbered in order of frequency: (1) to grow or increase very quickly; (2) to
move around in a place shooting a gun; and (3) to inject illegal drugs into oneself (pp.
330-331).
129
At the same time the register variations are clearly outlined throughout the dictionary.
The explanation of a given PV tells whether it is only used formally or informally,
and whether it is found in British or American English (p. viii). The PV yield up, for
instance, is labeled as "a formal expression" (p. 446), while sick up as "an informal
expression" (p. 335).
Since a lot of PVs have synonyms of single words, which are always much more
formal, synonyms and antonyms of PVs are mentioned right after the explanations
and examples. Other PVs may serve as synonyms or antonyms of the listed ones (p.
ix). For example, the verbs install, deposit, invest, and interject are given as more
formal synonyms for the PV put in, whereas the PVs pay in, chip in, and bring in are
given as synonyms which mean almost the same as put in (pp. 280-281).
Besides, nouns and adjectives which are derived from PVs are stated in the same
paragraph of the explanation of a given PV "[i]f they are closely linked with a
meaning of the phrasal verb […]. If there is not such a clear link, they appear in a
paragraph on their own" (p. ix). The noun offprint, for instance, is mentioned with the
PV print off to which it is closely related (p. 263). The noun turnover, on the other
hand, is specified in a separate paragraph away from its basic PV turn over (p. 423).
The most important feature, which makes this dictionary different from the others, is
the particle index provided at the end of it, where "the common meanings that
particles contribute to phrasal verb combinations" are explained, and PVs in which
such meanings may appear are listed (p. ix). In an attempt to account for the
productivity of PVs, the editors provide such an index maintaining that "phrasal verbs
130
are not just arbitrary combinations of verbs and particles. Instead, they fit into the
broad patterns of choice and selection in English" (p. 449). To take just one example,
the particle up is given the following twelve meanings each of which associated with
a group of PVs which share a given meaning: (1) movement and position; (2) increase
and intensification; (3) improvement and preparation; (4) fastening and restriction; (5)
approach; (6) disruption and damage; (7) completion and finishing; (8) rejection and
surrender; (9) happening and creation; (10) collection and togetherness; (11)
disclosure; and (12) separation (pp. 487-490).
In spite of the fact that this index has only concentrated on the meanings contributed
by the particles to the PVs and utterly ignored the meanings contributed by the simple
verbs which constitute the first element of each PV and can also be used in a
productive way, it is, in my view, a plausible remedy for the unavoidable
phenomenon of productivity of PVs which make them hard to be traced and taken up.
It is to be highlighted, however, that this dictionary, like the others, is by no means
comprehensive, since a lot of PVs have not been dealt with in it. Some of the omitted
PVs include: bid up, drive through, dine in, chill out, and juice up among others.
131
2.8.2.7 NTC's Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and Other Idiomatic Verbal Phrases Compiled by Richard A. Spears, and published by National Textbook Company
(NTC) in 1993 and reprinted in 1996.
This dictionary is intended for both the new-to-English users and for fluent speakers
(p. vii). It has been presented as "a dictionary of form and meaning, and not a
dictionary of grammar or categorization" (p. viii). Hence, all types of collocations of
verb + particle are included, as well as both the idiomatic and non-idiomatic
sequences of them are covered.
There are 71 particles used throughout this dictionary some of which are prepositions,
and others are directional adverbs. The list of theses particles contains such words as
aboard, abroad, aground, alike, open, overbroad and still which are considered as
particles (p. xvi). On the other hand, there are 2796 verbs appearing in conjunction
with these particles, to form the 7634 combinations covered in this dictionary (p. vii).
One of its special features is the indication which is given to show whether the object
of a given PV is human, non-human or both, by employing the pronouns someone and
somebody. The compiler points out that such a kind of "information is vital to learners
of English, although it seems to come perfectly naturally to lifelong English speakers"
(p. viii).
The other important feature is the optional elements which are provided in
parentheses to refer to "the extended forms of the verb phrases with the frequently
132
omitted parts" (p. ix). For instance the PV see ahead is followed by the phrase (of
someone or something) in parentheses to indicate that such elements are optional parts
which can be added or omitted to/from the given PV (p. 643).
Furthermore, some of the listed PVs are explained by more than one definition where
the "additional definitions are usually given to show slight differences in meaning or
interpretation" (p. xi). The PV float (up) on, for example, is explained by the
following two definitions "to drift as if on the surface of something; to drift along
through the air" (p. 272).
In addition, the polysemous PVs are attended to by numbering the meanings of a
given PV with boldface numerals. The following three meanings, for instance, are
provided for the PV bring down "1. to move something from a higher place to a lower
place […]. 2. to lower something, such as prices, profits, taxes, etc. […]. 3. to defeat
or overcome something, such as an enemy, a government, etc," (p. 75).
However, each PV is illustrated by two or more of the "carefully written examples"
which are designed to "lead the user to the meaning and appropriate usage of each
expression" (p. viii). The following two examples, for instance, are provided to
illustrate the PV pull over: Betty pulled over to the side of the road and waited for the
traffic to thin; The police officer ordered her to pull over (p. 550).
Moreover, such labels as colloquial, formal, informal, jocular and slang are
introduced to indicate the register variations of the listed PVs. The PV conk off (to fall
133
asleep), for example, is labeled as slang (p. 151). While the PV itch for is labeled as
colloquial (p. 386).
Besides, nouns and adjectives derived from PVs have been accounted for, for example
the PV burn out is followed by the adjective burn-out and the noun burnout which are
derived from it and they are illustrated by the following two examples: Send the
burned-out part back to the factory; One burnout after another! These cheap motors
are not worth it. (p. 91).
Lastly, despite the fact that this dictionary comprises more than 12000 combinations
and is said to be "[t]he most comprehensive dictionary of its kind" (the back cover,
not numbered), it has, in fact, omitted a number of PVs such as: click on, dag out,
factor in, fang up, guck up, hack into, rock up, ramp up, scan in, sex up, and scroll
down among others; it may be, however, that some of theses PVs were coined after
the dictionary was compiled.
2.8.2.8 Oxford Dictionary of phrasal verbs Edited by A. P. Cowie and R. Mackin, and first published by Oxford University Press
in 1993.
This dictionary is, following its editors, a revised and updated edition. The first
edition of it relied basically on "an analysis of works of fiction, history, biography
etc." (p. 422). This edition, however, has made use of "a variety of contemporary
sources" (p. 422). Data from three new sources has been added: 1) the collection
134
made by the co-author of the Oxford Dictionary of English idioms (Isabel McCaig) in
the late 1970s and 1980s; 2) the quotations illustrating PVs which are held at Oxford
for the updating of the Oxford English Dictionary; and 3) a computerized corpus of 30
million words which covers the period 1989 to 1992 and compiled at OUP as well (p.
422).
The dictionary is chiefly intended for students of English as "a practical and teaching
aid" (p. 428). Such prospective users are directed to the best way of using the
dictionary in systematically presented principles set out in the introductory section
whereby they are guided to where to find complex idioms, nominalized forms (nouns
derived from PVs), collocates of PVs, and synonyms (p. xi). Three sets of
complicated symbols are employed, one for grammar codes, the other for letters
introducing collocate lists, and the third for synonyms (pp. xvi-xvii).
From the very beginning of the dictionary, the areas of difficulty of PVs are
pinpointed and restricted to: grammar, idiomatic or non-idiomatic, and complex
idioms (pp. x-xi). By complex idioms the editors mean using PVs as part of idiomatic
expressions such as: put back in put the clock back (p. x).
The nature of idiomaticity, on the other hand, is chiefly discussed to exhibit the
criteria "used in deciding what to include in a dictionary which has 'idiomatic' as part
of its title" (p. 426). A decision is made to include the items that constitute units of
form and meaning (only idioms or semi-idioms). Therefore, the following types of
combination are considered:
135
1) Verb + particles (with no object following the verb) such as: (of a witness)
come forward; (of an aircraft) take off.
2) Verb + preposition (with no object following the verb) such as: come across
(an old friend); run into (difficulties).
3) Verb + particle + preposition (with no object following the verb) such as: face
up to (one's responsibilities); put up with (interruptions).
4) Verb + particle (with an object following the verb) such as: make (one's face)
up; take (a politician) off.
5) Verb + preposition (with an object following the verb) such as: hold
(someone's past failings) against (him or her); put (someone) off (driving).
6) Verb + particle + preposition (with an object following the verb) such as:
bring (someone) up against (a problem); take (one's anger) out on (someone)
(pp. 427-428).
Like the Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs, in Oxford Dictionary of
Phrasal Verbs a special attention is paid to the issue of collocation, i.e. collocates of a
PV or "the words which, in the judgment of native speakers, normally and naturally
combine with it to form sentences" (p. 429). As knowing accurately which noun or
adjective can collocate with a given PV is considered one of the difficulties facing the
English learners (p. xv). For example: the PV carry out typically collocates with the
noun investigation to make the commonly used sentence to carry out an investigation.
On the contrary, the PV carry on always collocates with the noun conversation to
make the sentence to carry on a conversation, but not vice versa (p. xv).
136
It is useful to mention here that the PVs with different meanings are given numbered
entries under one shared headphrase as in the PV pick up which has five different
meanings (to take hold of and raise (sth); to collect (sth); to collect (sth) as wages; to
take (sb) on board; and to rescue (sb) from the sea) each of which is numerated under
the same headphrase (pick up) (p. 439).
Formal, informal, slang and taboo are the style labels given to the listed PVs
throughout the dictionary to indicate their register variations. Such labels, the editors
maintain, "reflect various factors in the situations in which they are normally used" (p.
xix). The main three factors of theses are:
• the relationship between the speakers, or correspondents (remote or official, or intimate and relaxed).
• whether one is speaking or writing (compare a spoken commentary on a football match with a newspaper report of it).
• the level of seriousness, detachment, etc suggested or imposed by the occasion (compare a speech at an official banquet with one given at a farewell party for a personal friend) (p. 473).
Another noteworthy feature is that this dictionary relies mainly on the British English
as its entries "represent the usage of educated British speakers in the latter part of the
twentieth century" (p. xviii), and no attempt has been made by the editors to include
entries "which are solely, or largely, American" (p. xviii). However, there exist a few
entries marked (US) or (esp US) "which have a marginal status in British English" (p.
xviii) such as: run for, which is marked as (esp US), meaning "offer oneself as a
candidate for (office)" (p. xviii).
Finally, like the abovementioned dictionaries, this dictionary has skipped a number of
PVs such as: bid up, bliss out, boot up, butt out, chew out, chill out, click on, dine in,
137
drive through, fang in, guck up, hack into, pig out, rock in, scan in, juice up, sex up,
sign in, and scroll down among others.
2.8.2.9 Cambridge International Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs
Edited by Michael McCarthy et al. and first published by Cambridge University Press
in 1997.
This dictionary contains more than 4500 PVs presented in a quite logical and
accessible manner. Further, it exhibits several unique features which make it far more
distinct than the other dictionaries in this area.
In their endeavour to make this dictionary "truly international" (p. viii), the editors
have provided coverage of the main three dialects of the English language (p. xiii),
namely: British, American and Australian English by employing the following
regional labels:
1) British, placed after a PV which is only used in British English, such as:
clued-up (p. 49).
2) American, placed after a PV which is only used in American English, such
as: clued-in (p. 49).
3) Australian, placed after a PV which is only used in Australian English, such
as: get into (p. 114).
4) Mainly British, placed after a PV which is mainly used in British English,
such as: contract in (p. 60)
138
5) Mainly American, placed after a PV which is mainly used in American
English, such as: block in (p. 14).
It is evident that a great deal of information is presented with each PV "in a way
which is clear and helpful" (p. vii). Such information includes the inflection patterns
of each PV followed by ample details of syntactic properties given in "an explicit
fashion which does not require the user to decipher complex codes" (p. vii). Thus, in
addition to the provision of the grammatical cases of each PV, such as whether it is a
transitive or intransitive, or whether it is a separable or non-separable, the kind of
object used with each PV is specified. The label sb (somebody) is placed after the PV
if its object is human, while the label sth/sb (something/somebody) is introduced if the
object is human or non-human, whereas the label swh (somewhere) is used if the
object of the PV is a place (pp. viii-ix).
Interestingly, the editors are so comprehensive that they do not surpass such tiny
properties as: situations where PV is always used in the passive form, such as, be cut
out (p. 68). Or situations where PV is always used in the reflexive form, such as: fend
for (p. 95). And situations where PV is always used in continuous tenses, such as: die
for (p. 73).
Moving on to the issue of polysemy, the dictionary groups such different meanings
according to the syntactic patterns of the PV, as in: fill in which has three different
syntactic patterns, each of which carries a distinct meaning (p. 97). Each meaning of a
given PV is illustrated by example sentences taken from the Cambridge International
Corpus to show how it is "used in natural written and spoken English" (p. xi).
139
Besides, in order to make the definition of PVs easy to understand, they are "written
using words from a list of less than 2000 common words" (p. xi).
Most importantly, PVs occur as parts of fixed expressions (complex idioms) are also
clearly shown and well explained, such as: get along in getting along like a house on
fire (p. 110).
Furthermore, nouns and adjectives that are derived from PVs are stated after the PV
from which they are derived, such as: the PV drop off and the noun drop-off (p. 83).
Moreover, as a teaching hint for learners of English, the PVs, which are considered to
be quite common and useful, are highlighted as in: let down; let off; and let out (pp.
172-173).
What is more, register variations of most of the listed PVs are indicated by employing
the following register labels:
1) informal, placed after PVs which are typically "used with friends or family or
people you know in relaxed situations" (p.xiii) such as: stick up (p. 294) and
wash out (p. 334).
2) formal, placed after PVs which are typically "used in a serious or polite way"
(p. xiii), such as: issue from (p. 153) and join with (p. 155).
3) slang, placed after PVs which are typically "used in an informal or not very
polite way, often between members of a particular social group" (p. xiii), such
as: knock over (p. 164) and skin up (p. 272).
140
4) old-fashioned, placed after "phrasal verbs which are still used but sound old
fashioned" (p. xiii), such as: gad about/around (p. 109) and lay about (p. 168).
5) taboo, placed after "phrasal verbs which are likely to offend people and are
not used in formal situations" (p. xiii), such as: screw around (p. 254) and suck
off (p. 299).
6) humorous, placed after "phrasal verbs which are intended to make people
laugh" (p. xiii), such as: dragoon into (p. 79) and hark at (p. 139).
7) literary, placed after "phrasal verbs which are mainly used in literature" (p.
xiii), such as: thirst for (p. 313) and wheel around/round (p. 338).
The most valuable feature of this dictionary is the supplementary material attached to
it, where fifteen "theme panels" are provided in which "phrasal verbs shown in groups
according to their meaning" (p. vii). Such theme panels embrace the following topic
groups: Agreeing & Disagreeing; Computer; Crime; Emotions; Food & Drink; Giving
& Getting Information; Illness; Money; Reading, Writing & Studying; Relationships;
Speaking & conversation; Thinking & Considering; Travel; Weather; and Work (pp.
350-346). Each theme panel begins with a short text contains some PVs which are
commonly used in this particular field. Then, the contextual meanings of such PVs are
given. For example, the theme panel titled (Computer) starts with a short text in which
such PVs as switch on, log in, back up, and print out are used. Then, the contextual
meaning of each PV is individually provided. The meaning of switch on, for instance,
is given as "to turn on an electrical device by using a switch", while the meaning of
back up is "to make a copy of computer information so that you do not lose it" (p.
351).
141
Another valuable feature of this dictionary is the "photocopiable exercises" material
along with its answer key, which really makes the dictionary "a unique resource
which can be used not only for reference purposes but also as a valuable classroom or
self-study learning aid" (p. vii).
However, there exist some PVs which have been ignored in this dictionary such as:
knock off, bid up, click on, drive through, and dine in among others.
2.8.2.10 Oxford Phrasal Verbs Dictionary for Learners of English First published by Oxford University Press in 2001.
This dictionary has benefited, to a great degree, from all the previous dictionaries by
adopting the best features of each one of them.
Like the Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs, which devotes an index to
account for the meanings contributed by each particle, the Oxford Phrasal Verbs
Dictionary for Learners of English has a section at the end of it entitled "Guide to the
particles" (pp. 349-371) whereby the meanings of each particle occurred in the
dictionary are outlined. The purpose of attaching such a guide is to help learners learn
and understand the ways by which PVs are formed and to help them understand the
newly produced PVs when they occur (p. 349).
This dictionary, like the Cambridge International Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs (1997),
provides learners with a "study pages" section along with photocopiable exercises to
help them practice and become more familiar with PVs (pp. 182-183).
142
There are, on the other hand, more than 6000 British and American PVs covered in
this dictionary illustrated by 10500 examples and explained by simple definitions
using a definition vocabulary of less than 3000 words (the back cover, not numbered).
Further, the dictionary covers not only the idiomatic type of PVs, but also it includes
such types as: 1) "[v]erbs which are always followed by a particular particle", e.g. rely
on, crop up, and abide by; 2) "[v]erbs that are followed by a particle in a particular
meaning", e.g. nod off, grow up, and walk out; 3) "[v]erbs with a particle, where the
particle adds to, but does not change, the basic meaning of the verb", e.g. spread out,
fade away, and slave away; 4) "[v]erbs plus particles where each has their normal
meaning", e.g. phone back, and pin up (pp. vi-vii).
Furthermore, idioms, in which PVs are incorporated, are highlighted in this
dictionary. For instance, screw up your courage (forcing yourself to get enough
courage to do something) (p. 249).
Moreover, nouns and adjectives which are derived from PVs are listed. The noun
overpass, for example, is listed with the PV pass over (p. 199), and the adjective plug-
in (as in: a plug-in kettle) is mentioned with the PV plug in (p. 210).
Like all the abovementioned dictionaries, the majority of PVs listed in this dictionary
are followed by labels indicating their register variations (formal, humorous, less
formal, literary, slang, etc.). For instance, the PV strike off is labeled as formal, while
chop off less formal (p. 290).
143
Likewise, information about grammatical patterns of PVs along with common
subjects and objects typically collocate with them is ably accounted for.
In addition, synonyms and antonyms are stated with the vast majority of the listed
PVs. For instance, the PVs end up and finish up are given as synonyms for the PV
land up (p. 163).
Finally, despite the large number of PVs covered in this dictionary, there are some of
them which have not been attended to such as: bid up, bliss out, dag out, rock up, and
slag down among others.
2.8.2.11 Summary of section 2.8.2
All in all, there are many features in common among the abovementioned dictionaries
in terms of handling the phenomenon of PVs. Such similarity is not unusual, Holes
(1994) indicates that:
In many, perhaps most cultures, dictionary making has traditionally been seen as an accretive activity: you take the work of a predecessor and simply add the new words and meanings you have discovered without changing the old ones, which are regarded as 'original' or 'basic' meanings even if they have long since dropped out of use. This is the way lexicography developed in both English and Arabic (p. 167).
To recapitulate, the English-English dictionaries of PVs have a number of points in
common, being: 1) all of the dictionaries intended for English language learners, and
to be used as teaching aids. This is the reason behind the usage of simple and plain
English in defining PVs, and the employment of variety of symbols and labels in
verifying their register and grammatical patterns. Holes (1994) maintains that "[…]
144
the compilers' image of the typical user […] affects not only what they include and
how they put it in order but also how they format it with symbols, grammatical
terminology, pictures and so on" (pp. 161-162); 2) the register variations of PVs have
been accounted for unanimously, albeit mostly for the spoken mode; 3) grammatical
information has been presented for each PV; 4) a reference has been given to nouns
and adjectives derived from PVs in the majority of the dictionaries (An Analysis and
Dictionary of Two-Word Verbs in English, Time-Chambers Dictionary of Phrasal
Verbs and the Student's Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs are exceptions); and 5) the issue
of polysemy of PVs has been attended to in the all dictionaries (the Student's
Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs is an exception).
However, the abovementioned dictionaries vary in terms of the following features: 1)
the numbers of PVs covered in each dictionary. For instance the Collins COBUILD
Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs contains 3000 PVs, the Cambridge International
Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs consists of 4500 PVs, the Oxford Phrasal Verbs
Dictionary for Learners of English comprises 6000 PVs, and the NTC's Dictionary of
Phrasal Verbs and Other Idiomatic Verbal Phrases comprises 7634 PVs; 2) the issue
of collocation between PVs and the items typically appear with them have been
investigated only by three dictionaries namely the Collins COBUILD Dictionary of
Phrasal Verbs, the Oxford Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs, and the Oxford Phrasal
Verbs Dictionary for Learners of English; 3) the question of complex idioms,
whereby PV is part of fixed expressions and proverbs, has been accounted for only by
four dictionaries, they are: the Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs, the Oxford
Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs, the Cambridge International Dictionary of Phrasal
Verbs, and the Oxford Phrasal Verbs Dictionary for Learners of English; 4) the issue
145
of synonyms and antonyms of PVs has only been tackled by the Collins COBUILD
Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and the Oxford Phrasal Verbs Dictionary for Learners of
English; 5) some dictionaries have concentrated only on British English as in the
Oxford Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs, other on American English as in An Analysis and
Dictionary of Two-Word Verbs in English and the NTC's Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs
and Other Idiomatic Verbal Phrases, whereas others have included American and
Australian English such as: the Cambridge International Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs
and the Oxford Phrasal Verbs Dictionary for Learners of English; 6) the dictionaries
have differed in terms of what to cover. Some of them have devoted their books to the
idiomatic type of PVs in particular as in the Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs
and the Student's Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs. Others have widened the scope of their
dictionaries to include the idiomatic and the semi-idiomatic types as in the Collins
COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and the Oxford Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs.
Others have included types which by no means considered as PVs as in the Time-
Chambers Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and the Oxford Phrasal Verbs Dictionary for
Learners of English; 7) the essential issue of productivity of PVs has been almost
totally overlooked. The only exception is the index provided by the Collins
COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs, in which the editors have paid a considerable
attention to such a crucial issue and attempted to provide a plausible solution for it.
Such an endeavour has been replicated in the Oxford Phrasal Verbs Dictionary for
Learners of English. Rooney (2004) points out that "[t]he most exciting challenge for
dictionary editors today is to keep up with the change in our language as new words
come in and linguistic norms and conventions change and develop in response to
technological and cultural innovation" (p xiii). Along these lines Leech (1974)
indicates that "dictionaries are open-ended, and continually being adapted to new
146
requirements by the addition of new lexical entries" (p. 202); 8) although the vast
majority of PVs have been tackled in all specialized dictionaries, there exist some PVs
which have been handled in some dictionaries and ignored in the others, such as bliss
out which has been covered only by the Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal
Verbs and the NTC's Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and Other Idiomatic Verbal
Phrases, and factor in, hack into, and veg out which have been covered only by the
Cambridge International Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and the Oxford Phrasal Verbs
Dictionary for Learners of English; lastly, and most importantly 9) there is a number
of PVs which have not been covered by any of the abovementioned dictionaries. Such
as dag out, fang up, google around, guck up, ramp in, shoo in, scan in, sex up, and
slag down among others. Such PVs constitute a real dilemma for translators as well as
English learners.
Having said that, there exist a number of dictionaries which are not entirely devoted
for PVs, but, however, PVs constitute essential parts of them. Some of such
dictionaries exclusively assigned to the phenomenon of idioms in the English
language, such as: English Verbal Idioms, by F. Wood (1964); English Prepositional
Idioms, by F. Wood (1967); Oxford Dictionary of Current Idiomatic English, by A. P.
Cowie and R Mackin (1975); Dictionary of English Idioms, by M. J. Wallace (1981);
and The BBI Dictionary of English Word Combinations, by M. Benson, E. Benson
and R. Ilson (1997).
Others are mere long studies devoted to the topic of prepositions and adverbial
particles, such as: Prepositions and Adverbial Particles, by J. B. Heaton (1965); and
Prepositions and Adverbial Particles, by L. A. Hill (1968).
147
It needs to be mentioned though that some of theses dictionaries constituted the basis
upon which some PVs dictionaries have been compiled. For instance, Turton and
Manser (1985) the compilers of The Student's Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs have
acknowledged that their dictionary "is a development of the highly successful English
Verbal Idioms and English Prepositional Idioms by the late F. T. Wood" (p. iii), and
the Oxford Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs has been developed from the Oxford
Dictionary of Current Idiomatic English edited by the same compilers in (1975).
It should be noted in this connection that there are a number of internet sites devoted
to the notion of PVs whereby some online dictionaries are included, to mention just a
few of them:
http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/phrasal-verbs/
http://www.eslcafe.com/pv/
http://www.phrasalverbdemon.com/
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/esl/eslphrasal.html
http://valenciaenglish.netfirms.com/phrasals00.htm
http://www.english-zone.com/index.php
http://www.super-memory.com/sml/colls/pv.htm
2.9 PVs in bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries
In the present section I will deal with the ways by which English-Arabic dictionaries
have tackled the question of PVs. The aim here is to ascertain the extent to which
such dictionaries have arrived in covering, explaining, and providing Arabic
equivalents to such challenging items of the English language. The section will be of
148
two distinct parts, the first one will look at PVs in general English-Arabic
dictionaries, and the second part will examine the treatment of PVs in specialized
English-Arabic dictionaries.
2.9.1 PVs in general English-Arabic dictionaries
In this subsection, three main authoritative general English-Arabic dictionaries will be
looked at. They are: Al-Mawrid, Al-Mughni Al-Akbar, and The Oxford English-Arabic
Dictionary of Current Usage.
2.9.1.1 Al-Mawrid Compiled by Munir Ba'albaki, and first published in 1967 by Dar El Ilm Lilmalayin.
PVs are not specified in separate entries in this dictionary. They are rather casually
mentioned under their root verbs. The PV to iron out, for instance, is taken up under
its root verb iron (p. 481), and to use up under its basic verb use (p. 1019).
Nouns and adjectives derived from PVs, however, are accorded separate entries. Good
examples include the adjective cast-off (p. 158) and the noun close-up (p. 186).
Al-Mawrid is by no means comprehensive in covering PVs. The vast majority of PVs
have been utterly ignored. To mention just a few instances: bitch up, bring along,
bring together, brighten up, bump up, cast aside, chill out, do without, egg on, factor
in, pig out, and pop up among others.
149
Moreover, a number of the listed PVs are highly polysemous. Such PVs are not given
Arabic equivalents for all their meanings. Most of them, though, are glossed by one or
two meanings only. For example, the PV balled up is glossed only as شXN&&/
(confused) (p. 85) whereas it has some other meanings as: "to change things so that
something is difficult to deal with" (Cambridge International Dictionary of Phrasal
Verbs, 1997, p. 7), "to make a ball of (a substance) […] to spoil (something)"
(Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs, 1983, p. 15). The PV fly at is glossed as �4�7O1
��&.*\ (to attack violently) (p. 358), while it has another two meanings which are: "to
(cause to) travel by air (a certain height, cost, etc.)" (Longman Dictionary of Phrasal
Verbs, 1983, p. 199), "to suddenly speak to someone very angrily" (Cambridge
International Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs, 1997, p. 103).
2.9.1.2 Al-Mughni Al-Akbar Compiled by Hasan S. Karmi, and first published in 1997 by Librairie Du Liban.
In the preface of this dictionary, Karmi points out that idiomatic usage of the
headwords, if they have any, listed in sub-entries under them. PVs, he elaborates "are
also listed after the main verb headword, together with the idiomatic usages" (p. xi).
Therefore, we find the PV to use up under the verb use (p. 1563), and under the verb
run we find the PVs to run about, to run across, to run against, to run away, to run
down, to run into, to run on, to run out, to run over, to run through, etc. (pp. 1185-
1186).
150
On the other hand, adjectives and nouns derived from PVs are given main and
separate entries such as the adjective worn-out (p. 1657), and the noun work-out (p.
1655).
As far as coverage is concerned, Al-Mughni Al-Akbar has taken up the question of
PVs in more detail than Al-Mawrid in terms of the number of the listed PVs and the
examples provided to illustrate them in contexts. Yet it is, in comparison with the
abovementioned English-English dictionaries of PVs, far from being comprehensive.
There are, for instance, many PVs which have been utterly skipped, such as: zoom in,
zoom out, win away, mock up, rock up, tough out, print out and chew out among
others.
2.9.1.3 The Oxford English-Arabic Dictionary of Current Usage Compiled by N. S. Doniach, and first published in 1972 by Oxford University Press.
This dictionary has been described by Holes (1994) as "[…] the most commonly used
work" (p. 163). However, like in the previously mentioned two dictionaries, PVs are
not accorded separate entries in it. They are rather listed beneath their root verbs. The
PV bring up, for instance, is listed under its root verb bring (p. 157), and the PVs look
away, look back, look for, look over, and look through are listed under their basic verb
look (pp. 719-720).
On the other hand, nouns and adjectives derived from PVs are specified in separate
entries such as the noun pull-out (p. 1004), and the adjective lock-up (p. 715).
151
This dictionary, like the others, is by no means comprehensive in its coverage of PVs.
Thus, many of them are skipped, such as: bid up, dine in, juice up, pig out, and scan
in among others.
2.9.2 PVs in specialized English-Arabic dictionaries
It is very noticeable that the quality and quantity of bilingual English-Arabic
dictionaries dedicated to PVs are much lower than their counterparts of English-
English dictionaries of PVs. There are, to the best of my knowledge and research,
only two bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries of PVs. In this subsection they will be
accounted for in historical order. The aim here is to explore the ways by which the
compilers of these dictionaries have tackled the phenomenon of PVs, in order to
compare such ways with the ways by which the compilers of the abovementioned
monolingual English-English dictionaries of PVs have treated the same phenomenon.
In so doing, one can pinpoint the gaps in bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries of PVs
that need to be breached.
2.9.2.1 English Phrasal Verbs in Arabic Compiled by Kamal Khalaili, and published by Hodder and Stoughton in 1979. This book seems to be the first one of its kind, i.e. it is the first bilingual English-
Arabic dictionary which is entirely devoted to deal with the question of EPVs.
152
It must be pointed out that the book is intended for students in the Arabic-speaking
world (p. 5). It aims, according to its compiler, "to illustrate the different meanings in
context of a practical and representative selection of the most useful and widely used
phrasal verbs – both in spoken and written English" (p. 5). Therefore, it is divided into
forty-four sections, each of which is devoted to one particular basic verb. Under each
one of such verbs "the numerous combinations it can make with different prepositions
or particles" (p. 5) are listed. The section devoted to the basic verb catch, for instance,
contains the following combinations: catch on, catch out, and catch up (p. 33).
Like English-English dictionaries of PVs, this dictionary has provided grammatical
information about each listed PV to indicate whether it is transitive or intransitive,
and, in case it is transitive, whether it is separable or inseparable.
Furthermore, each PV is "given a definition in straightforward English" (p. 5). The
PV back up, for example, is defined as "give support to" (p. 11), and wear off as
"disappear; pass away" (p. 163). In addition, each definition is followed by two
examples "to fix the context" (p. 5). For instance, the PV hold with (to approve of; to
agree with) is given the following two examples: "We don’t hold with Communism
and all that it stands for. Do you hold with smoking in cinemas?" (p. 80).
Moreover, each listed PV is "translated into the appropriate Arabic equivalent" (p. 5).
For example, the Arabic equivalents ���4&O8�،م[&�}�،K/7Eare given to the PVs: do by (p. 45),
get along (with) (p. 54), and make out (p. 104) respectively.
153
In addition, the polysemic PVs have been accounted for. The PV knock up, for
instance, is given the following three meanings: 1) rouse; awaken ��¦&�1أ�،�pQ&`, 2)
prepare quickly 5E,Y\�[E3 ,أ) exhaust ��S&OPأره&��،�أ (p. 87). Whereas the PV pass away is
given the following two meanings: 1) die 7ت�&/���&(QP�p^&w�،� , 2) disappear; vanish �،زال�
po2} (p. 107).
Another noticeable feature is the exercises provided at the end of each section and
their key which is attached at the back of the dictionary. The purpose of providing
such exercises, as the compiler puts it, is to "give student and teacher extra material to
practise the correct and appropriate usage of these phrases" (p. 5).
No claim, however, has been made by the compiler "to be comprehensive or
academically rigorous" (p. 5). Hence, the forty four basic verbs, covered in this book,
and the PVs produced by combining them with some particles or/and prepositions are
by no means exhaustive. Scores of PVs have been disregarded by skipping their basic
verbs. By skipping the verb fly, for example, such PVs as fly across, fly away, fly off,
fly out, fly over, and fly up, which are produced by combining it with some particles
or/and prepositions, are omitted as a result. And by dropping the basic verb zoom,
such PVs as zoom across, zoom along, zoom in, zoom off, zoom out, zoom over, and
zoom up are dropped consequently.
Despite the fact that this dictionary has much in common with the previously
mentioned English-English dictionaries of PVs in terms of the information provided
to the listed PVs, some crucial information has not been given. No attempt has been
made, for instance, to indicate the register variations of a given PV, and no attempt
154
has been made to account for nouns and adjectives derived from PVs, or the types of
words which typically collocate with them, or to give such information as synonyms
and antonyms of PVs and the complex idioms and fixed expressions in which PVs
constitute integral parts.
2.9.2.2 York Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and Their Idioms By Mohammad M. H. Heleil, first published by Librairie du Liban in 2000.
This book is an English-English-Arabic dictionary based on the previously mentioned
Dictionary of English Phrasal Verbs and their Idioms compiled by McArthur and
Atkins (1974).
In his endeavour to provide Arabic equivalents to the listed PVs, Heleil adopts the
work of McArthur and Atkins (1974) entirely from A to Z. That is, the list of PVs,
their definitions, glosses, classification, examples, and the special labels used to
account for the grammatical terms, the field and the style are also replicated. The only
change made by Heleil to the original dictionary, other than providing the Arabic
equivalents, is the division of the dictionary into 26 sections according to the English
alphabet.
It should be remembered that the original Dictionary of English Phrasal Verbs and
their Idioms has been the source of not only Heleil, but also many other
lexicographers and bilingual dictionaries compilers. McArthur and Atkins (1974)
point out that "[t]he list of verbs and the classification adopted [in their dictionary]
155
have also served as the basis for entering phrasal verbs and their translation
equivalents in Collins bilingual dictionaries (English to French, German, Italian and
Swahili)" (pp. 8-9).
Heleil, however, indicates, in the preface of the book, that his work is intended for
Arabic translators, claiming that it is a new of its kind in that it contains, in addition to
the monolingual English-English dictionary where the PVs are glossed in the source
language, the English-Arabic part which can help Arabic translators express the PVs
in the target language (Arabic). Heleil maintains that in so doing he creates a new
method in the field of lexicography. Such a method, according to him, concentrates
on: 1) providing the Arabic translator with the English text as it has been put by the
compilers of the dictionary; 2) providing the Arabic translator with an Arabic text
which can help him in translating the PVs by knowing their contextual equivalents
and their collocations; 3) providing the Arabic translator with a number of synonyms
to convey the shades of meaning; 4) Adding vowel signs to the Arabic text to help the
translator (Arabic native speaker or otherwise) read it correctly; 5) treating the PVs
which have never been tackled by bilingual Arabic-English dictionaries, or have been
partially translated by giving some of their meanings and ignoring the others; 6)
providing the collocations of some PVs which their collocations are not clearly stated
in the English text; 7) providing the Arabic equivalent which expresses the meaning
of a given EPV, and not necessarily constitutes the same grammatical class of it. Such
an equivalent may range between one word and an expression consists of more than
one word (The Arabic preface, not numbered) [my translation].
156
In translating the listed PVs, Heleil does not translate into Arabic the information
given in the English text. Hence, no attempt has been made by him to tell the Arabic
readership whether a given PV is transitive or intransitive, separable or fused (non-
separable), British or American, and formal or slang. He confines himself, in this
regard, to providing only the English text. The Arabic equivalent [7ء�w[&`9ا]زار�, for
instance, is given to the PV visit with without mentioning that it is a transitive,
separable American PV (p. 297).
Moreover, the majority of the illustrative examples given in the English text are not
translated by Heleil. He gives only the Arabic equivalent of the PV associated, in
square brackets, with a word or some words which typically collocate with it. Most of
such collocations provided by Heleil are mentioned in the English examples. The PV
wet through, for example, is illustrated in the English text by the following two
examples: The rain has wet us through; He's wet through. And translated into Arabic
as: ��7&/73}�7&.))\ [�,&{3+ا] where the word (rain) typically collocates with wet through (p.
305).
Heleil sets up his own Arabic preface at the beginning of the book, and disregards the
introduction of the original dictionary where valuable information is included such as:
defining the phenomenon of PVs, classifying them, identifying the reasons behind the
difficulties posed by them, indicating their register variations, and outlining the
special features of the dictionary (cf. McArthur & Atkins, 1974, pp. 5-9). Such
ignorance has prevented the Arabic readership from understanding some special
features of the English text. A number of PVs, for instance, are listed as 'special
entries' in the English text and marked with asterisks. The compilers justify such a
157
distinction by claiming that "a large number of phrasal forms are simply the
grammatical operation of verbs of movement plus particle of direction" (pp. 6-7).
Heleil, on the other hand, does not explain to the Arabic readership in his preface
what the asterisks, which appear with some entries, mean.
With regard to coverage, the compilers of the original dictionary have made no claim
to be exhaustive, neither in the number of the listed PVs nor in the number of senses
given to each one of them (McArthur & Atkins, 1974). Therefore the previous
comparison between this dictionary and other specialized dictionaries has revealed
that many PVs have not been covered. As a result, Arabic translators, for whom the
York Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and Their Idioms has been compiled, will be
confronted by a number of PVs listed in other English-English dictionaries and have
not been covered by English-Arabic dictionaries of PVs such as the one at hand.
2.9.2.3 Summary of section 2.9
To sum up, the comparison between bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries of PVs and
monolingual English-English dictionaries of PVs shows that there are a number of
similarities and dissimilarities between them, being: First, the former is far less than
the latter in both quantity and quality, i.e. in terms of the number of the covered PVs
and the information given to gloss, classify, and illustrate them. Second, like English-
English dictionaries of PVs English- Arabic dictionaries of PVs are designed to meet
the needs of students and learners of English. Third, like English-English dictionaries
of PVs, grammatical information has been given in English-Arabic dictionaries of
PVs with each PV to indicate whether it is transitive, intransitive, separable or non-
158
separable. Fourth, unlike the majority of English-English dictionaries of PVs, English
Phrasal Verbs in Arabic disregards fundamental information such as: the register
variations of PVs, derivation of nouns and adjectives from PVs, types of words
typically collocate with them, synonyms and antonyms of PVs and the complex
idioms and fixed expressions in which PVs constitute integral parts. Finally, like
English-English dictionaries of PVs, Arabic-English dictionaries of PVs are by no
means comprehensive in their coverage. As previously mentioned, there are a number
of PVs which have been skipped over, leaving the translators and learners of English
with no choice but to work them out individually and create Arabic equivalents for
them, which may or may not be accurate.
2.10 Teaching IEPVs
In the present section the question of teaching idiomatic English phrasal verbs to Arab
students will be investigated to identify the extent to which the methods and materials
employed by teachers can help in solving the learning, teaching and translating
difficulties. Yet, before going into this, the methods and materials used in teaching
phrasal verbs to learners of English in general will be explored. The aim is to compare
such methods and materials with those employed by Arab researchers in order to
highlight the gaps that need to be bridged in this difficult area of pedagogy.
2.10.1 Teaching IPVs to learners of English A great deal of English literature has been devoted to account for the question of
teaching EPVs to non-native speakers who study English as a second or foreign
159
language. This stems from the fact that PVs, especially the idiomatic type of them,
constitute difficulty not only for learners of English but also for teachers, curriculum
designers and material writers in the fields of ESL and EFL alike. Heaton (1968)
makes the point that "[i]t has long been felt that this wide subject constitutes one of
the major areas of difficulty for students learning English as a second or foreign
language" (The preface, not numbered). Further, Cornell (1985), indicates that PVs
"have been 'discovered' as an important component in the curricula for English as a
foreign language" (p. 269).
In what follows a number of representative methods and materials will be
investigated.
2.10.1.1 Tom McArthur's method
In an article entitled Teaching English Phrasal Verbs, McArthur (1971) maintains that
PVs must be taught as units, and as the equivalent of single verbs (p. 71). Further, he
points out that the following points should be taken into account when planning a
course to teach them:
1. Phrasal verbs consist of a root verb and one or two particles. 2. They should not be confused with non-phrasal verbs which tend to take a
certain preposition, such as compromise (with), confess (to), etc. 3. They are both transitive and intransitive, and sometimes the same verb may
function in both ways […]. 4. The total meaning of a phrasal verb is seldom simply the sum of its parts […]. 5. Compilers of dictionaries have neglected the unitary nature of phrasal verbs
and therefore classed them under their root verbs […]. 6. Some phrasal verbs allow free variation in the position of the particle, while
others do not (pp. 71-72).
160
Moreover, McArthur (1971) proposes five specimen exercises which "are not
intended to be exhaustive [but to] serve as an introduction to the phrasal verb" (p. 72).
Each exercise is illustrated by two examples followed by ten sentences, and a
prospective student is asked to make similar changes in the sentences. Exercise 1 is "a
specimen of how to approach freely varying phrasal verb" (p. 72); exercise 2 is a
"specimen of how problems arise with this type of verb when the object of the verb is
a pronoun" (p. 73); exercise 3 is a "specimen of how phrasal verbs may be exchanged
for single verbs" (p. 73); exercise 4 is a "specimen of how single verbs may be
exchanged for phrasal verbs" (p. 74).
McArthur (1971), however, admits that such specimen exercises "do not pursue the
matter as far as it should be taken [since they] ignore the considerable problem of how
a learner can begin to know which phrasal verbs can be divided and which cannot be
divided" (p. 75).
Such a problem, however, has been ably taken up by Tom McArthur himself in his
workbook Using Phrasal Verbs (1975), which is the fourth in the Collins' series of
Patterns of English. The material of this workbook, according to McArthur, "has been
developed out of linguistic research undertaken for Collins Bilingual Dictionaries" (p.
8), whereas its "teaching material has been developed in 1970 and 1971 English
Language Summer Schools run by the Edinburgh University Department of Education
Studies" (p. 8).
161
Further, the book is intended for intermediate and advanced learners of English who
are advised to study it in conjunction with the Dictionary of English Phrasal Verbs
and Their Idioms by McArthur and Atkins (1974).
This book deserves a special attention as it makes a valuable contribution to this field
of pedagogy. It "takes phrasal verbs as a single problem, and as a major part of
English vocabulary and word-formation" (p. 6). It guides the learners through its eight
units step by step in a very systematic manner. In addition to being relatively
comprehensive in covering the main syntactic and semantic features of PVs presented
in a simple language, it provides scores of guided exercises, examples, tables, and
illustrative diagrams.
1.10.1.2 Colin Mortimer's method
In his book Phrasal Verbs in Conversation, Mortimer (1979) approaches the topic
from a quite unique perspective by putting together 432 conversations, each of which
is devoted to one separate meaning of one particular IEPV. One of the most important
aims of this book is to "contextualize individual meanings of a large number of
phrasal verbs in such a way that these meanings will be remembered" (p. iii).
Students, however, are best advised to go through conversations repeatedly as "[t]he
more the conversations are used and discussed […], the more effectively will they fix
in the mind of the student the meaning and use of the particular verbs on which they
focus" (p. iv). Students are also advised to memorize the dialogue so as to give them,
later on, "an opportunity to 'free' the language in the dialogue and to use it in a
consonant, normalized situation arising from his own experience" (p. v).
162
Moreover, Mortimer (1979) gives drills after the conversations, each of which "quotes
from the conversation [it follows] one or two lines involving the use of the phrasal
verb that is featured" (p. v). He recommends that "[t]hese lines should be drilled first
in chorus, then in groups and then in pairs, for pronunciation practice, and to fix the
idiom" (p. v).
What is more, the book is associated with three tapes as "an extensive source of
listening and pronunciation practice" (p. vii), on which 124 selected dialogues are
recorded. Unlike the ways of other tapes recorded for teaching purposes, the
conversations in these tapes are spoken in normal speed with suitable hesitations,
repetitions and interruptions to get "a considerable gain in naturalness" (p. vii).
2.10.1.3 Alan Cornell's method
In his article Realistic goal in teaching and learning phrasal verbs, Cornell (1985)
suggests to assemble a "core" of PVs which "could be arrived at by native speakers
working through a collection of phrasal verbs" (p. 276). He, further, proposes the
following four criteria on the bases of which a selection can be made:
1. Idiomaticity. Is the meaning of the phrasal verb easily deducible from its constituent parts? (In the case of polysemic combinations each meaning would of course have to be considered separately)
2. Replaceability. Is there a one-word or already familiar phrasal verb equivalent which the learner can readily use instead? Can the meaning of the phrasal verb be easily and naturally paraphrased in already familiar words?
3. Restrictions. Is the phrasal verb subject to severe collocational restrictions which would have to be learnt? Are there particular grammatical constraints which have to be observed?
4. Frequency (and usefulness). Is the phrasal verb commonly used? (p. 276) [Emphasis in original].
163
Cornell considers the last criterion (frequency) as the "overriding" one, and "presents
the greatest difficulties". This is mainly due to the fact that, unlike other aspect of the
English language, there is a shortage of frequency counts for EPVs. The perfect
solution to meet such a shortage is "a computer intelligent enough to scan a corpus
and recognize phrasal groupings and assign meanings to them" (p. 277). But such an
adequately intelligent computer has not been developed yet, therefore "the best
approach would appear to be to consult a sufficiently large group of native speakers
and see what frequency rating is assigned on average to each phrasal verb or phrasal
meaning" (p. 277).
Cornell points out that the core of PVs has to be of two lists, one for active mastery,
and the other for passive recognition. The former needs to receive "the extra practice
and attention necessary" (p. 276), it comprises the commonly used PVs such as: hung
up, put off, put up with, and show off, while the latter contains "phrasal verbs with
complicated restrictions" such as: drink up, go off, hold with, and shape up (pp. 276-
279).
Moreover, Cornell, in this article, ably addresses some didactic problems that PVs
raise. Due to the fact that there exist large quantities of PVs are used in everyday
spoken and written English, he makes the quantitative problem his starting point.
Cornell indicates that such a large number of PVs learners encounter constitutes a real
problem. In his attempt to water such a problem down, he confines it to the fully
idiomatic PVs, in the sense that the non-idiomatic PVs (which constitute the majority)
cause no real difficulty to learners owing to their transparent meanings. What
aggregates the problem, however, is the phenomenon of polysemy in that "[i]t is not
164
only the case that a particular verb + particle combination may be polysemic in having
both an idiomatic and a non-idiomatic use: in addition it may well be polysemic in
having more than one idiomatic use" (p. 270). Hence, Cornell raises the question of
"How many idiomatic phrasal verbs does an advanced learner know on average?" (p.
271). To answer this question he refers to the research he conducted in 1980 in which
he tested a group of his German ESL students "to establish their active knowledge of
selected idiomatic phrasal verbs" (p. 271) [Emphasis in original]. The result showed
"a widespread ignorance" of the 60 PVs tested. He concludes that "the learning of
phrasal verbs at school and university is generally not very successful" (p. 273). The
reason behind that, according to him, is the "limited contact with phrasal verbs", and
exposing students "to such a bookish form of the language" (p. 273).
The other didactic problem Cornell outlines is the interference between L1 and L2 (in
his case German and English) where PVs sound "illogical" for learners. As an
example, he cites: "why should one be laid up with illness when one is lying down?"
(p. 274).
He then investigates some of the semantic and collocational problems learners face
when dealing with PVs such as: the question of one-word equivalent. It is obvious
that some PVs have one-word equivalents, e.g., pull up which corresponds to stop,
and put up with to tolerate. Whereas other PVs have no such equivalents, they rather
have PVs equivalents, e.g., make up for which corresponds to compensate for, and put
in for to apply for. Or, otherwise, they have to be paraphrased (p. 274).
165
On the other hand, quite a few of one-word or PV equivalents can be deemed as
alternatives for their PVs. Such a problem is related to "the degree of synonymity"
since "synonymy is generally recognized as being a very relative concept" (p. 274).
To use some of Cornell's examples:
lie in does not merely mean "to stay in bed", but "to stay in bed beyond one's normal time for getting up". put up with: unlike tolerate it cannot be used in a positive manner (to tolerate other people's opinions is not the same as to put with other people's opinions) (p. 274) [Emphasis in original].
Finally, Cornell outlines the grammatical problems caused by the following syntactic
restrictions of PVs which typically "represent a considerable teaching and learning
load" (pp. 275-276). To cite just two of his illustrative examples:
come by cannot normally be used in the passive, unlike its equivalents acquire and obtain. do with can only be used with can or could in the sense of need: with could it only has a potential sense and does not refer to the past; it cannot be used in the passive (p. 275) [Emphasis in original].
2.10.1.4 Richard Side's method
In his paper Phrasal verbs: sorting them out, Side (1990) argues that the difficulties
PVs create for learners "are sometimes increased by the way in which phrasal verbs
are presented in course books or by teachers telling students that they will just have to
learn them by heart, thereby implying that there is no system" (p. 144). Thus, he
begins his article with criticizing the traditional treatment of PVs in course books in
which PVs are grouped according to the verb along with a definition and an example
for each one. Students, however, are advised to match the phrasal verb with its
definition and to learn them by heart (p. 144). Unfortunately, students in such cases,
166
stick to the Latinate definition given to them, and ignore the Anglo-Saxon PVs since
the Latinate verb is "easier to learn, particularly if it is related to a word in the
students' own language, and seems to make more sense" (p. 145). Another bad aspect
of the traditional approach is the random way by which teachers teach particles, Side
gives the following example:
A teacher recycling recently learned vocabulary is quite likely to ask 'Can anyone give me a phrasal verb meaning arrive starting with turn?' Students may then shout out the first particle which comes into their heads and this will continue until one of them hit the jackpot with up (p. 145).
Such ways of treatment, according to Side, aggregate the students' negative attitude
towards PVs, who already dislike the issue of PVs for such reasons as their
idiomaticity, confusion, polysemy, register or appropriacy, grammatical conditions,
etc. What is more, the traditional approaches make the students see PVs as random
combinations of verbs and particles, which is completely incorrect. PVs are not so
random. There is, rather, a system behind forming them and a close look at the
function of particles shows the patterns underlying their combining with verbs (Side,
1990).
Newly coined PVs, according to Side, are not invented randomly. They are rather
"formed by analogy with existing phrasal verbs" (p. 146), and "it is possible to isolate
areas of meaning by finding the connections between them" (p. 146).
The particle, for Side, is "integral to the meaning of the phrasal verb and in some
cases carries more weight of meaning than the verb" (p. 146). That is, the
communicative function of the PV is mainly carried by the particle (Side, 1990).
167
In his attempt to pinpoint patterns underlying PVs, he takes up three particles (off, out,
and up) to illustrate how the system of forming PVs by these particles works. He, for
instance, gives the particle off five lexical meanings (indicating distance in time or
space, departure, removal, disconnection and separation) illustrated by the following
examples, to make the point that "[m]ost phrasal verbs with off fit into this pattern" (p.
148):
Strain off the liquid = removal, separation The area was fenced off = separation (from surrounding area) The plane took off = departure I've been cut off = disconnection (telephone) It's time to knock off = departure (from work) Warn sb off = distance in space The meeting was put off = distance in time Come and see me off = departure, separation (p. 147) [Emphasis in original].
Some of PVs are ambiguous in nature. But, however, they could be understood by
analogy with other PVs from the same pattern, e. g., the PV ease off in: You should
ease off a bit "could be by analogy with taking one's foot off a car accelerator" (p.
148), and took off in: his business really took off "could be by analogy with an
aeroplane taking off" (p. 148).
What has to be noted here is that not all PVs with the particle off can fit easily in this
pattern. Some of them make Side (1990) admittedly declare that "[p]ersonally, I can
find no convincing place for these within the overall definition" (p. 148). Such
exceptional PVs are exemplified below:
He tried to buy me off Stop showing off You are always telling me off I must dash off a letter (p. 148) [Emphasis in original].
168
Moreover, not all particles are as straightforward as off. The particle out is a good
example where one cannot formulate a single overall meaning for it (p. 148).
Therefore, "it is sometimes necessary to think laterally, metaphorically, or even
pictorially" to understand the system in which PVs work (p. 147).
In his endeavour to find out more patterns, Side quite often refers to his own
experience. For example, in outlining the highly idiomatic meaning of cough up, he
narrates a real story relating an incident that happened to him when he was a child: "if
I choked on my food, my father would thump me on the back and cheerfully cry
'Cough it up, it may be half a dollar!' "(p. 150). And, in explaining the PV hung up in:
She hung up (to put the phone down) Side indicates that it "at first seems strange until
one remembers what old fashioned telephones looked like" (p. 150). Consequently,
Side concludes that the traditional approach is inadequate "either in that it fails to
create learnable patterns, or in that it creates patterns of the wrong kind" (p. 150).
1.10.1.5 Peter Dainty's method
In his textbook Phrasal Verbs in Context, Dainty (1991) claims that "a new method
for learning phrasal verbs" (p. 5) is offered. The book is in three parts. The first part
contains "a specially written cartoon story in which 325 common phrasal verbs are
introduced in a tale of adventure, love, money, crime, honour and blue Rolls Royce"
(p. 5). Such a cartoon story is of fifteen chapters each of which is ended up with some
follow-up exercises and grammatical notes.
169
The second part of the book, on the other hand, is devoted to "an extended blank-
filling revision exercises based on the cartoon" (p. 5).
The third part is dedicated to the answers of the exercises along with a list of the 325
PVs used in the cartoon story. This textbook is associated with a tape on which the
whole story is recorded.
Interestingly, Dainty (1991) claims that if the learner memorizes part of the story by
heart and does the follow-up exercises, the 325 PVs can become a part of his
everyday language as he develops "a more natural and more instinctive command of
English" (p. 5).
2.10.1.6 Martin Shovel's method
In his book Making Sense of Phrasal Verbs, Shovel (1992) implements the
"illustrations and question-prompts" method. Throughout the twenty units of the
book, IEPVs are accounted for in chunks, that is, each unit "introduces and practises
six separate phrasal verbs" (p. 4). Each PV is exhibited through one or two lively
cartoon illustrations followed by a number of question-prompts, which "are designed
to focus the learner's attention and help him or her make an informed guess at the
meaning of the phrasal verb" (p. 4). To take only one example, in explaining the PV
take after, a cartoon picture with a man standing next to his son, who looks exactly as
same as his father, is presented along with the following question-prompts:
Do you think these two people are related? What do you think their relationship is? Do you think they look a like?
Make a sentence describing the way the small boy looks compared to his father.
170
Think of another way of saying take after. Now turn to page 95 [reference section] to check your answer. (p. 10) [Emphasis in original].
This book, which is intended to increase the confidence of the students of English as a
second or foreign language at the intermediate level, is appropriate to be "used for
self-study, for pairwork, for conventional class or group teaching, and as a reference
book" (p. 4).
In addition, the presented PVs are listed alphabetically at the back of the book in a
dictionary-like reference section where each one of them is given the following:
- a list of words and phrases that can be used with [it] - a clear definition - a context sentence or sentences related to the introductory illustrations - easy to read structural information showing the positioning of noun
phrases and pronouns (p. 4).
Surprisingly, unlike other scholars, Shovel (1992) avoids the employment of the
grammatical classifications of PVs, claiming that "such classifications are often more
complicated and difficult than the phrasal verbs are used to teach" (p. 4).
Lastly, each unit is ended up with a practice section where a variety of exercises are
included. Such exercises "are very controlled to begin with and then gradually lead to
free-production" (p. 4). Students are advised to study the PVs introduced in the unit
before doing the practice section.
171
2.10.1.7 Malcolm Goodale's method
In his workbook Collins COBUID Phrasal Verbs Workbook (which accompanies the
previously mentioned Collins COBUID Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs), Goodale (1994)
points out that "[t]hough the workbook can be used on its own, more benefit will be
gained by working closely with the Dictionary" (p. iv). He approaches the practice
"through the individual particles, as featured in the Particles Index of the Dictionary"
(p. iv).
Goodale (1994), also, makes it clear that owing to the fact that adverbial PVs are
almost always the most important type and the most difficult for learners of English to
understand, "prepositional phrasal verbs are not included in this workbook" (p. iv).
Hence, the adverbial particles only are accounted for in alphabetical order throughout
the ten units of the book. Each unit has an introduction in which the important
meanings of a given particle are provided along with a list of the PVs to be taken up
in the sections of that unit. Every section is devoted to one category of meaning.
Given that most PVs are polysemic and have "as many as 20 different meanings", it is
quite normal to see a phrasal verb appears in many different sections (p. iv).
Further, there is a section attached to each unit called "Other Meanings" which
includes PVs "which are too common to be excluded, but which do not clearly fit into
any particular category of meaning" (p. iv). As an example, the particle over is given
two sections each of which is assigned to one particular category of meaning
(Considering and Communicating, as in: look over, put over, talk over, and think over,
172
and Changing and Transferring, as in: change over, hand over, take over, and win
over), and a third section which is assigned to other meanings, which include: get over
with, pass over, run over, and smooth over (p. 87).
2.10.1.8 Berman and Kirstein's method
In their textbook Practical Idioms: Using Phrasal Verbs in Everyday Contexts,
Berman and Kirstein (1996) design the whole book as chunks of dialogues between
Pat, an instructor, and Lee, a talkative student.
Berman and Kirstein (1996) consider that the quickest way for learning PVs is "to
practice them by families" (p. xi), as long as "it is a psychological axiom that
learning related material is much easier than learning unrelated material" (p. xii)
[Emphasis in original]. They, as a result, suggest two families in which PVs may be
grouped: family A where PVs are listed alphabetically according to the verbs they
begin with, e.g., get about, get across, get around, get back, get on, get out, etc., and
family B where PVs are listed according to the particles, e.g., back out, get out, give
out, learn out, pass out, throw out, etc. (p. xii). Berman and Kirstein (1996) make the
point that "[f]amily A is more familiar arrangement-dictionary style […and] fine for
the purpose of reference" (p. xii). However, "[f]amily B makes far more sense as a
learning strategy" (p. xii). Therefore, they opt for treating PVs in this book by
particle, claiming that it is "much more likely to find similarities of meaning […]
among verb phrases [PVs] having the same particle than among verb phrases
beginning with the same verb" (p. xii).
173
2.10.1.9 Peter Hannan's method
In his paper Particles and gravity: phrasal verbs with 'Up' and 'Down' Hannan (1998)
employs the 'experientialism' approach which is a philosophical / linguistic approach
outlined and applied by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson in their studies Metaphors
we live by (1985), Women, fire and dangerous things: what categories tell us about
the mind (1987), and The body in the mind: the bodily basis of meaning, imagination
and reason (1987) (as cited in Hannan, 1998, p. 22).
Hannan (1998) attempts to explain how these two particles "have the uses they have",
and discuss a number of implications of the experientialism approach for teaching
PVs (p. 22).
The essential idea of this approach, as he puts it, is that "the meanings of our language
[English], and indeed our structure of thought, are built up from regular patterns of
bodily experience, extended into the other realms which we inhabit such as the
emotional, mental and social" (p. 22). Such an extension, he elaborates, "is principally
metaphorical, and what is preserved from the original physical pattern is the structure,
or relationship between the elements, or some important association, and not the
specific content" (p. 22). To illustrate this idea, Hannan (1998) provides two examples
as "standard examples of metaphors" (p. 22): The line of people snaked around the
corner, and The dawn of a new era. Where the line, in the first example, "does not
have scales or a forked tongue, but the winding form of the snake" (p. 22), and, in the
second example, "there is no literal sun or light, but a noticeable beginning, perhaps
where new knowledge is involved" (p. 22).
174
Moving on to the particles up and down, Hannan (1998) makes the point that by the
term 'phrasal verbs' he means not only non-literal meanings of verb-particle
combinations, but also the literal meanings of them, as part of his thesis is that "there
is a continuity and extension from the literal meanings of verb-particle combinations
to the metaphorical meanings" (p. 22). Hence, he deals with the literal meanings of up
and down as basic and central meanings for their metaphorical extension. Therefore,
he begins with the literal meanings of these particles in such PVs as go up, come up,
climb up, stand up, move up, go down, come down, climb down, sit/lie down, fall
down etc. where up and down literally "refer to our experience of gravity" (p. 23). He,
then, moves on to take up the graduation of the meanings of these two particles from
literal to metaphorical from different standpoints, being: 1) Quantity: This metaphor is
exemplified by our experience when we add objects to a pile the level of that pile goes
up, while when we take away objects its level goes down. Such an experience "leads
us to associate more with up, and less with down [and such an] association is extended
to non-physical things to produce a simple correspondence of 'up = more, down =
less' ", as in: turn up, and turn down (the volume / heat) (p. 23); 2) Size: This
metaphor is stemmed from the fact that physical size of anything around us reflects its
power, in that big size means strong and powerful whereas small size means the
contrary. Such an experience leads to associate up with big and powerful, and down
with small and weak, as in: "bring up (children), [and] bring down (cause someone's
fall from power / respect; lower the tone or moral level of a conversation, etc." (p.
24); 3) Body posture: This point is built up on the fact that "[o]ur physical posture is
obviously related to our activities and to our mental emotional state" (p. 24). In the
sense that "[w]hen we are standing and moving around, we are active [while] when
we are lying down we are inactive, and sometimes passive […] So there is a natural
175
association between 'up' and 'active' and 'down' and 'inactive' " (p. 25), as in: wake up,
get up, start up, open up, calm down, settle down, shut down, break down, etc. (p. 25).
Body posture, on the other hand, is related to our mental and emotional state where an
erect and open posture reflects bright, lively and cheerful states of mind, while a
bowed or slumped posture reflects dull, tired and sad states of mind. This fact makes
us to associate up with happiness etc., and down with sad etc., as in: cheer up, be up,
feel up, be down, feel down, let down, etc. (p. 25); 4) Perspective: Owing to the fact
that close objects seem bigger, in the human vision, than far ones, and when they
move closer they appear to go up in the visual field, one can associate up with
nearness, and down with distance, as in: come up, and go down (p. 26); and 5)
External environment: This point is stemmed from the fact that the "ground is home
[of human], and high places are less frequented and inherently dangerous" (p. 26).
Consequently, "[…] 'down' is associated with what is familiar, real, easily reached or
touched, known, and 'up' with the contrary" (p. 26), as in: bring up, come up with,
bring down, get down to, etc. (p. 26).
Hannan (1998) concludes "that usually literal meanings are basic and central, and that
metaphorical extensions can be understood and systematised with reference to the
central meaning" (p. 26). And he introduces some implications for teaching of PVs,
they include: 1) despite the fact that the systems of meaning accounted for in this
approach are not 100% logical, they are "comprehensible in terms of human
experience, generalisable, and often universal" (p. 26). The approach, as a result, is
"opposed to the type of superficial use of quantitative information about frequency of
use and collocations which simply says 'These are the common usages, Learn them' "
(p. 26); 2) lack of logic and sense of PVs in the eyes of students make them "respond
176
to phrasal verbs with various degrees of pain" (p. 27). Therefore, proving to students
"that there is a human logic, based on experiences which they can recognise, gives
them confidence that it is feasible to learn these things, and open doors to useful
methods of vocabulary storage and organization" (p. 27); 3) highlighting such
physical experiences makes the process of explaining PVs easier. For instance, to
explain come up and go down, the teacher may move towards students closer and
closer till they move their heads up to see him, and so on. The advantage of this
process is that "relatively abstract concepts are grounded in direct sensory experience
and so stick better" (p. 27); 4) it does not matter how to sequence PVs in a syllabus -
"same verb, various particles; same particle, various verbs; random verbs in context"
(p. 27) - what really matters is that "literal or near-literal meanings are generally
presented earlier than metaphorical ones" (p. 27); and, finally, that 5) all the patterns
outlined in this approach can be grasped easily; "[t]his can lay the foundation for a
positive and exploratory attitude to phrasal verbs in general" (p. 27).
2.10.1.10 Darwin and Gray's method
In their article Going After the Phrasal Verb: An Alternative Approach to
Classification, Darwin and Gray (1999) assert that "[i]n research and pedagogy,
approaches to the phrasal verb have been, and still are, rather arbitrary" (p. 66). The
reason for such an arbitrariness, according to them, is "[…] the understanding of the
phrasal verb, by both students and instructors, has not progressed as far as it might
have if a more systematic approach had been used" (p. 66). They, therefore, have
concerned themselves with providing such a systematic approach.
177
In their attempt to clarify the problem of the lack of progress in understanding of PVs,
Darwin and Gray (1999) attribute the problem to the following three reasons: 1) the
definitions provided for PVs by researchers produce conflicting results, and lead to
confusion for both students and instructors; 2) the frequency of the commonest and
more needed PVs has not been determined. As a result instructors, curriculum
designers, and researchers are left with no choice but to use their intuition, which may
or may not be correct; and 3) the method of grouping PVs according to the verb.
Although such a method may help learners understand the idiomatic nature of PVs, "it
does little to promote their use" (p. 67).
Further, they point out that in order to avoid ambiguity in classification procedure of
PVs "linguists must agree upon a definition, thereby requiring them to begin from the
same point" (p. 67). Consequently, they adopt the definition produced by Quirk et al.
(1985) as the standard whereby "[a] phrasal verb consists of a verb proper and a
morphologically invariable particle that function together as a single unit both
lexically and syntactically" (Darwin & Gray, 1999, pp. 76-77).
They criticize the nine traditional tests proposed by Bolinger (1971), (previously
outlined in section 2.5.1 of this Chapter) maintaining that they admit noteworthy
exceptions which cause "a problematic lack of agreement among those who study
phrasal verbs as to exactly which verb + particle combinations are or are not included
in the category" (p. 75). Such a disagreement "can seriously impair the learning of
phrasal verbs by ESL students, preventing the placement of verb + particle
combinations in a grammatical paradigm" (p. 75). Hence, they confirm the real need
for a more systematic classification that can "promote greater agreement among the
178
experts and better presentation of verb + particle combinations to the ESL learner" (p.
75).
Darwin and Gray's alternative approach is "to take the opposite stance" (p. 75). That is
to say, instead of "excluding a verb + particle combination from the phrasal verb
category until it is proven to belong, linguists should consider all verb + particle
combinations to be potential phrasal verbs until they can be proven otherwise" (pp.
75-76). In doing so, they explain, two advantages that can be accomplished: 1) a
degree of definiteness can be added; 2) a curriculum-based confusion students have
can be eliminated (p. 76).
Moreover, in their attempt to clarify their new approach, Darwin and Gray (1999) set
out seven tests focusing on semantics, phonology and syntax. In addition, they
indicate that there is no need to apply all these tests to all combinations; one test is
enough to divide up a combination (p. 77). The tests in brief are:
1. Particle repetition, e.g., *I looked up, up, up your name. [PV]
I looked up, up, up to the very highest point [Not PV]
2. Where questions, e.g., He ran up the rally. Where? Up the rally [Not PV]
I looked up the address. Where did you look? *Up the address. [PV]
3. Fronting, e.g., He made up a story. *Up he made a story. *Up a story he made
[PV]. Up the tree he went [Not PV]
4. Verb insertion, e.g., He pulled on the lever, but it was stuck. He pulled and
jerked on the lever, but it was stuck [Not PV].
I really messed up on my test. * I really messed and fouled up on my test. [PV]
5. Adverb insertion, e.g., * The mine caved quickly and forcefully in. [PV]
179
They crept slowly and silently down the hall. [Not PV]
6. Stress, e.g., she RAN UP a huge bill. [PV]
She RAN to the park. [Not PV]
7. Intonation units , e.g., *I passed / out in the doctor's office. [PV]
I hid / behind the door. [Not PV] (pp. 77-81) [Emphasis in original] [My
bracketing].
Interestingly, in their response to some critiques rose by some scholars (which will be
outlined later in this section), Darwin and Gray (2000) elaborate in more detail on
their approach. They warrant their choice of Quirk et al's definition by claiming that it
is "the most concise representation of definitions presented by others working on
phrasal verbs" (165), and expect that such a definition "would lead to agreement about
which verb + 'something' […] combinations to include in the category of phrasal
verb" (p. 165) in order to establish a list of PVs that ESL learners are more likely to
encounter. The definition consists of two parts: grammatical part where the verb +
particle combination functions as a simple verb; and lexical part where the
combination of verb + particle functions as "a single lexical item with a meaning
significantly different from that carried outside the combination" (p. 166). For
convenience, Darwin and Gray (2000) utilize the following features: V + X
combination (where X represents particle, adverb, and preposition), [+ G]
(representing a grammatical unity of the combination), [+ L] (representing the lexical
unity of the combination). Thus, the definition of Quirk et al, according to Darwin and
Gray (2000) "defines only an ideal, a phrasal-verb prototype" (p. 166) where a PV has
to be [+ G, +L] not [- G, -L], [+ G, - L] or [- G, + L] V + X combination. In so doing,
Darwin and Gray limit their list to only those "prototypical phrasal verbs" (p. 166).
180
Their new method is to exclude any combination that exhibits any negative feature [-
G] or [- L]. Any test of the seven tests proposed by them would be enough to
demonstrate inclusion or exclusion of any given combination.
Thus, the lists of PVs built up by utilizing this method overlook many combinations,
which exhibit the abovementioned negative features. Darwin and Gray (2000) justify
such an omission by claiming that it reduces the "conflict between definition and
example in the pedagogical tools produced" (p. 167).
Using freshman humanities textbooks as their corpus, Darwin and Gray utilize their
abovementioned tests in frequency count to develop the list of frequently occurring
PVs.
Nevertheless, Darwin and Gray's method has been heavily criticized by Joan Sawyer
(2000) and Ron Sheen (2000), who both agree with them on the question of choosing
the most frequent PVs list to be taught to ESL learners. However, they both reject the
method of teaching PVs proposed by Darwin and Gray, and instead each one has
proposed his own method as in what follows.
2.10.1.11 Joan Sawyer's method
In her reply to the article of Darwin and Gray (1999), Sawyer (2000) denies the ruling
out of the semantically transparent constructions and the concentration only on the
semantically opaque ones (those which function as single units). She considers that
scholars should open the membership of the class of PVs to include all types of
181
combinations of verb and morphologically invariable particles because the
semantically transparent combinations have the surface structure as the more
semantically opaque ones, can "lead students to understand the surface structure of
the combinations" (p. 152). This in turn can reduce "avoidance of these combinations
on the part of students and gives teachers a simple functioning of the semantically less
transparent combinations" (p. 152).
By adopting Fraser's (1976) view, Sawyer indicates that all PVs have a verb and a
morphologically invariable constituent, but this constituent could be a preposition, an
adverb or real particle (the element that forms a unit with the verb), as illustrated in
the following set of examples:
The cowboy shot up the hill. (preposition) The cowboy shot up the bullet. (adverb)
The cowboy shot up the saloon. (real particle) (p. 153) [Emphasis and pracketing in original]
Sawyer believes that knowing the type of the particle "not only helps predict which
combinations might be easily taught but also suggests the order in which they might
best be presented to students" (p. 155). The "[a]nalysis of their different function
offers teachers one way of considering which ones to teach and suggest a step-by-step
process for doing so" (p. 157). Therefore, she outlines her method of teaching PVs,
according to the particle type, in the form of three steps, which are outlined below.
Step 1: Do Not Teach Verb-Preposition Combinations as Phrasal Verbs. Verb-
Preposition Combinations, according to her, mere "standard verbs followed by PPs
[prepositional phrases]" and "they do not present a challenge for comprehension or
production of this group". In addition, ruling them out "from the class of phrasal verbs
182
leaves only the combinations that include adverbs and real particles requiring specific
instruction" (p. 155).
Step 2: Teach Verb-Adverb Combinations. Sawyer notes that the student knows
the meanings of both elements of this type of combinations since it is semantically
transparent and its elements retain their original meanings. Besides, like the case of
verb-real particle combinations, these combinations have "word-order alternation"
(i.e. they can be split/separable or non-split/non-separable). Teaching a word order of
such semantically transparent combinations gives learners confidence in that when
"they begin working on less transparent types, they no longer need to be concerned
with word order" (pp. 155-156).
Step 3: Teach Verb-Real Particle Combinations. In her endeavour to account for
this step, Sawyer refers to her work Verb-adverb and verb-particle constructions:
Teaching and acquisition (1999) in which she studies child language acquisition and
demonstrates that real particles have at least three common functions: 1) telicity or
completiveness, as an example, the particle up in: eat up and drink up whereby the
object "is consumed completely". Teachers are advised to teach each one of these real
particles by offering a number "of verbs with which the real particle has the telic
reading" to encourage the students "to see a pattern that they can use to decode new
combinations encountered" (p. 156); 2) real particles which do not add much
semantically to the verb, such as: clean up, lock up, wash up, act out, sort out, and
start out. Teachers as well are advised to "demonstrate each real particle that works
this way with a set of verbs to which it adds little semantically" and the students also
"would see that these are not isolated cases but show a pattern" (p. 156); and 3)
183
idiomatic combinations which are "the most difficult to organize into groups for
presentation; they must be presented in context" and have to be learned individually.
For example, give up, think up, and wear out (p. 156).
Sawyer (2000) concludes that "[t]he fact that real particles can be clustered into
groups by function […] makes teaching more efficient" (p. 157). Such a method "may
help students learn patterns for decoding new combinations and increasing their
vocabularies while reducing their avoidance of these combinations" (p. 157).
2.10.1.12 Ron Sheen's method
In his reply to the article of Darwin and Gray (1999), Sheen (2000) admits that they
"make a valuable contribution to teaching phrasal verbs […] in pointing out the
unreliability of choosing such items as curriculum content based on intuition and in
emphasisng the need to base such a selection on authentic frequency of use" (p. 160).
He considers "[s]uch a selection would result in a bank from which one might choose
a restricted list for active use and much longer one for passive" (p. 164).
Sheen, on the other hand, criticizes the approach of Darwin and Gray (1999), claiming
that it addresses the complexities of PVs without touching upon the major question:
"[w]hat is the best way to achieve familiarity with and fluency in the use of PVs,
which is the absolute essential to a mastery of English?" (p. 161). In his attempt to
address such an issue, Sheen proposes his method which is called "explicit-plus or
explicit-minus?". By 'explicit-plus' he means "should teachers devote time and effort
to enabling students to analyse PVs both syntactically and semantically?" (p. 161),
184
and by 'explicit-minus' he means "[s]hould teachers be content with the minimalist
approach […] which would teach the word-order problems with transitive PVs and
leave the rest to exposure, memorization, and practice?" (p. 161).
Reporting on his own experience as a teacher at university level, Sheen claims that he
applied both abovementioned approaches. He first adopted the explicit-plus approach
in which he devoted a great deal of time and effort to teaching syntactic and semantic
complexities discussed by Darwin and Gray (1999), and McArthur (1979).
Meanwhile, he spent some minimal time on classroom oral work encouraging
students to use PVs outside. He then, conducted some written and oral tests. The
results yielded a success in written proficiency, but such a success did not apply to
oral proficiency which was poor and not encouraging.
On the contrary, when Sheen decided to adopt the explicit-minus approach in which
he spent most of the time on oral activities, the results of oral proficiency were far
better. Such an empirical experience has convinced Sheen to argue for the explicit-
minus approach, which "allowed the students to reach a standard nearer to that of
Anglophones than did the explicit-plus approach" (pp. 161-163). Therefore, he
concludes that "teachers need to devote time and effort to activities encouraging
frequent and spontaneous use of PVs and not to the sort of analyses involved in
exploiting the classification system proposed by Darwin and Gray" (p.164).
185
2.10.1.13 Rosemary Sansome's Method
In her paper Applying lexical research to the teaching of phrasal verbs, Sansome
(2000) summarizes the insights obtained from research conducted in the Lexical
Research Unit, Leeds University 1980-1984. The research has taken up a large sub-
group of PVs, that is, combinations of verbs with collocates in which the latter
changes the meaning of the former "in a systematic way by subordinating it to a new
meaning introduced by the collocate" (p. 56). However, such meaning-changing
collocates, according to Sansome, include not only adverbial particles; adverb;
preposition; and prepositional phrases, but also adjectives and nouns (p. 61). The
following two examples provided by her to illustrate such collocates:
He tricked her into taking her medicine. Trick into means: "to get someone to
do something by tricking them" (p. 60).
She tricked him out of a fortune. Trick out of means: "to get something out of
someone by tricking them" (p. 60).
Sansome (2000) maintains that the issue of 'meaning-changing collocates' has been
outlined in the works of linguists who dealt with the phenomenon of PVs such as
Bolinger (1971) and Fraser (1976), but it has not been described systematically. In the
sense, both Bolinger and Fraser have approached the issue from a syntactic viewpoint
excluding verb-preposition combinations from their scope (p. 60).
Concentrating on analysing the meanings of PVs grouped into only one major
subsection of the semantic area CONTACT, that is, PHYSICAL CONTACT, the
186
research yields insights into the pattern underlying PVs belong to this subsection.
Such a pattern, as Sansome puts it, is:
Nearly all the meaning-changing collocates in the PHYSICAL CONTACT area change the meaning of the verb according to the same patten: 'to___ by ___ ing' (e.g., pull apart 'to separate by pulling'; pull up 'to raise by pulling'). The verb-meaning is subordinated to a new verb-meaning introduced by the collocate (pp. 60-61) [Emphasis in original].
Sansome, however, believes that such an insight has practical applications in the field
of EFL teaching. She herself, as an EFL teacher, has conducted a comprehension test
given to first-year undergraduate Japanese, Korean, and Taiwanese students to find
out "to what extent foreign learners of intermediate level and above have absorbed the
pattern underlying these verb-collocate combinations and whether they cause
comprehension problems" (pp. 61-62). The result showed that students have not
acquired the pattern underlying the tested combinations. This matter "has implications
not only for comprehension but also production; if students are not aware of any
underlying pattern, they are unlikely to be able to use verb combinations except in
cases where they have learnt the whole phrase" (p. 63).
2.10.1.14 John Flower's method
In his practice book Phrasal Verbs Organiser, Flower (2000) makes a noticeable
contribution to the field of teaching PVs. Unlike other scholars who prefer to treat
PVs either by particle or by verb, Flower treats more than 700 PVs in three different
ways, i.e. by particle, by verb, and by topic. He rightly makes the point that "[t]he
more different ways you meet these verbs, the more you will learn" (p. 3). In treating
PVs by topic, for instance, he groups them according to the field they are commonly
187
used in. In the section of "Technology and Computing", for example, he accounts for
such PVs as cut out, filter out, wire up, print out, back up etc. (p. 89). While in the
section of "Sport and Leisure" he takes up such PVs as worm up, ease up, play off,
stretch out, pass through, etc. (p. 92).
Moreover, Flower (2000) provides, other than the mini-dictionary of the used PVs, a
"Test Yourself" section (pp. 108-112), where five tests are set up to give the learners
an opportunity to examine themselves in what they have studied throughout the book.
In addition, he establishes a "Your Personal List" (pp. 135-144) section, where nine
well-organized blank tables are given to allow students to add their own PVs, or PVs
that they learn in class or come across while they read.
2.10.1.15 Summary of section 2.10.1
Having explored a number of methods proposed for teaching EPVs to non-native
speakers of English, one can come up with a number of insights, being: 1) pedagogues
vary in what to teach as PVs to foreign students. Scholars like Hannan (1998), Sawyer
(2000), and Sansome (2000) strongly believe that all types of verb-particle
combinations (literal and idiomatic/semantically transparent and semantically opaque)
have to be taught. They are driven by the reason that the former constitutes the central
and the basis upon which the meaning of the latter can be grasped and understood.
Other scholars, on the other hand, like Darwin and Gray (1999) consider that only the
idiomatic/semantically opaque type of PVs has to be taught as it is the prototypical; 2)
pedagogues, also, vary in how to teach EPVs to non-native learners of English. Such
188
scholars as Side (1990), Hannan (1998), Sawyer (2000), and Sansome (2000) are
totally convinced that PVs have to be taught by knowing the patterns underlying
them, in order to pinpoint the system and the logic by which they work. Others
believe that PVs are random combinations of verb and particles and they have to be
memorized by heart; 3) the issue of how to sequence EPVs in textbooks, as well,
constitutes a debatable point. Such scholars as Side (1990), Goodale (1994), Berman
and Kirstein (1996), Darwin and Gray (1999), Sawyer (2000) and Sansome (2000) are
quite persuaded that PVs must be dealt with by particles. On the contrary, others
prefer to tackle them by verbs. Interestingly, Flower (2000) believes that they have to
be presented in different ways, i.e. by particles, by verbs, and by topics; 4) scholars as
Cornell (1985), Darwin and Gray (1999) and Sheen (2000) call for frequency counts
of the EPVs, just like other aspects of the English language, to determine the most
common and needed ones, and in turn to avoid designing pedagogical tools according
to pedagogues' intuitions; 5) despite the fact that most of the specialized dictionaries
of PVs are developed as teaching materials to be utilized in classes of English as a
second or foreign language, there are some workbooks written to be studied in
conjunction with specialized dictionaries, such as Using Phrasal Verbs by McArthur
(1975) and Collins COBUILD Phrasal Verbs Workbook (1994), which are produced
in conjunction with the Dictionary of Phrasal verbs and their Idioms, and the Collins
COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal verbs respectively; and finally 6) most of the
researchers agree on the necessity of teaching PVs in context owing to the fact that
presenting them in contexts enhances their learnability far much more than presenting
them as unrelated elements.
189
In short, the undeniable fact, in my view, is that PVs are not random combinations of
verbs and particles. There is, it is true, a pattern underlying each one of them. Though
these patterns vary in their degree of comprehensibility, they undoubtedly need to be
further investigated, and applied so as to provide learners of English in general, and
Arab learners of English in particular, with reliable pedagogical materials.
2.10.2 Teaching IEPVs to Arab students
As a result of the growing interest in the English language all over the world, and in
the Arab world in particular, as a means of communication in such vital domains as
business, transport, science and technology, teaching EFL has been boosted in the
majority of the Arab countries (Kharma & Hajjaj, 1989, p. 1). The Arab learner of
English spends approximately six to eight years learning the language "at a rate
ranging from four to eight 45-minute periods per week" (p. 1). In theory, this amount
of learning English should enable him/her to use the language perfectly. But,
unfortunately, this is not the case (pp. 1-2). Kharma and Hajjaj (1989) attribute such a
failure to a number of reasons, they include: 1) the majority of teachers are Arab
teachers of English. Their experience as trainees and teachers of the English language
is "limited to English-as-a-foreign-language teaching/learning situations, […with]
little, if any, genuine use of the language as a means of communication" (p. 2); 2) the
exposure of the Arab learners to the English language is "limited and lacks continuity
[…] it is exposure to formal/conscious instruction and learning with little, if any,
exposure to natural language" (p. 2); 3) the Arab learners' motivation of learning the
English language is very little in comparison with their motivation for acquiring a first
language (p. 2); 4) the Arab learners' attitude to EFL is a negative one, i.e. it is for
190
them "a 'school subject' rather than a means of communication" (p. 2); 5) the very low
pass mark indicates that "learners can proceed to further learning of the language
without having first mastered fully what they ought to have mastered in, say, a given
school year" (p. 2) and 6) the English language is taught to the Arab learner "years
after he [she] has already started learning formally, and acquiring informally, his [her]
mother tongue" (p. 2). In Addition, Kharma and Hajjaj (1989) introduce what they
call it the "idealisation of teaching materials" as a critical factor that leads to the
difficulty of teaching English to Arab students. By 'idealisation' they mean
The drill and practice exercises [utilized] are even more 'idealised' in the sense that they do not represent communicative situations but exemplifications of language structures. The result is that when learners have to use language at a level higher than the sentence they fail to do so correctly, whether the task at hand is composition writing or an extended monologue or dialogue (p. 8).
Along these lines, Holes (1994) summarizes the "Language-learning attitudes" of
Arab students "who have been through a government school education" in three
points as follows:
(a) perscriptivisim and dichotomization: language structure, phrases, and words, whether in their native language or a foreign one, are classified as 'correct/incorrect', 'beautiful/ugly', 'classical' (= good)/'colloquial' (= bad), 'literary' (= good)/'slang' (= bad), etc. These black-and-white value judgments are regarded as 'facts' regardless of evidence from actual usage.
(b) fixation on the lexicon: learning a language is viewed as essentially learning lists of words; technical language is regarded as the same as ordinary language, except for a lot of technical vocabulary (mainly nouns).
(c) lexical equivalence between languages: it is believed that any given lexical item in one language has a single 'correct' translation equivalent in another; and that understanding and translating mainly involve learning and using these unchanging, context-independent equivalences (p. 165) [Emphasis in original].
In their book Errors in English among Arabic Speakers: Analysis and Remedy,
Kharma and Hajjaj (1989) investigate the kinds of difficulties Arab learners typically
191
encounter in studying English as a foreign language. The book is intended for "those
who will be or who are already engaged in teaching English to Arab students" (p. 1).
Thus, Kharma and Hajjaj (1989) attempt to "identify and organise those problems that
face Arab learners of English and to provide teachers with a description of them and
ways of solving them" (p.2).
Given that the question of EPVs constitutes one of such problems Arab learners
usually face, Kharma and Hajjaj (1989) assign a small section to briefly describe them
and suggest ways of teaching them to Arab students. They determine two main factors
as "Sources of difficulty" of PVs, as follows:
(a) sometimes the whole phrase in English is equivalent to a single verb in Arabic (without any preposition) e.g.,:
be off �){.1 be out of his mind 0I1 be over %OF.1 Adverbial particles are not used in Arabic in a similar fashion. (b) At other times, the preposition used with the English verb is different from
its usual Arabic equivalent, e.g.,: be after ل�p*Y1 do without �FY10E�%. get rid of 0/��)nF1 look for 0E��Q(1 (p. 70).
However, it is quite obvious, from the literature reviewed above, that the sources of
difficulty of EPVs to non-native speakers of English by far exceed the two sources
given by Kharma and Hajjaj. In fact, most, if not all, of the didactic problems of PVs
outlined by Cornell (1985) apply to Arab learners of EFL.
Moreover, Kharma and Hajjaj (1989) propose two suggestions for teaching EPVs to
Arab learners:
192
The teacher must make his [her] own list of those phrasal verbs that occur in the textbooks, in oral discussions, dialogues, home-reading material, etc. which the students have special difficulty with, and to try to deal with them in different ways. For the teacher who is a non-native speaker of English and who wants to ascertain the meaning and use of some of those phrasal verbs, the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English is a good source, whilst Courtney's Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs is a recent and very comprehensive treatment of such verb (p. 72).
These suggestions are, in my view, neither practical nor recent in the sense that, as for
the first one, by advising the teachers to make their own list of PVs, Kharma and
Hajjaj give them a permission to rely on their own intuition in determining which PVs
may cause difficulty. Their intuition, it is true, may or may not be correct. Such an
approach, as previously mentioned, has been subject to a great deal of criticism by
pedagogues (cf. Cornell, 1985; Darwin & Gray, 1999) who proposed, instead, a 'core'
of PVs based on frequency counts.
As for the second suggestion, the two dictionaries recommended by Kharma and
Hajjaj are no longer the best and the most comprehensive ones. There are, as
previously outlined (see 2.8.2 above), many dictionaries of PVs now available which
are far much better and more comprehensive.
Surprisingly, Arabic books which are set up to teach Arab students the essence of the
English grammar and vocabulary have utterly overlooked, or slightly touched upon
the question of EPVs. To take just two examples, Taahir Al-bayyatii (1982) in his
book What Pupils Need in English, which is intended for beginners and advanced
Arab students of English, has totally ignored the issue of PVs in spite of its vital
importance to meet the needs of his intended readership. Other example is Ahmed
Mamdouh Al-Saghir's book English for all levels (1993) where PVs are assigned an
undersized section called "The Most Essential Phrasal Verbs" (pp. 324-329) in which
193
neither the syntactic nor the semantic nor the pragmatic properties of EPVs are
accounted for. It is rather a mere unrelated list of verbs followed by particles arranged
in alphabetical order and translated into Arabic.
The only workbook dedicated to EPVs, written in Arabic, to the best of my
knowledge and research, is Hind El-Nagar's book Phrasal Verbs (1998), which is
intended for Arab students at the intermediate level, and for those who prepare for the
first certificate (FCE) and (CPE) at Cambridge University (p. 6).
It is quite important to mention, however, that in her endeavour to present EPVs to
Arab learners of English in the best possible way, El-Nagar (1998) replicates the work
done by Malcolm Goodale (1994) and the method utilized by him in the previously
mentioned Collins COBUILD Phrasal Verbs Workbook without any
acknowledgement to Goodale's work or to the Collins COBUILD Dictionary of
Phrasal Verbs upon which the workbook has been based.
Hence, she sequences PVs, like him, by particles arranged in alphabetical order. Like
him as well, she organizes her workbook, in ten units. In the first nine units she takes
up the following particles one by one (away, back, down, in, off, on, out, over, and
up). She assigns the tenth unit to "other particles". Each unit deals with one specific
particle and subdivided into sections each of which is assigned to a particular category
of meaning of that particle illustrated by example sentences and translated into
Arabic. Unit five, for instance, is devoted to the particle off ( �E&�0\*-&]ا� ) and divided into
four sections. The first section is assigned for the first category of meaning of the
particle off, which is "Leaving and beginning K-Z,+ا+)]ء�وا", the second is for "Rejecting
194
and Preventing ].3+ا+,��8وا", the third is for "Stopping and canceling 7ء�+Jوا��wXF+ا" and
the fourth is for the "Other meanings ى,y7ن�أ*/" (pp. 49-54). Each section contains the
PVs of a given category of meaning. For example, the third section of the particle off
embraces the PVs break off (��&wXF1) and call off (�%&�)1). Each of which is followed by
some example sentences such as:
a- Let's break off for ten minutes. أ¡�L7wد�,NE�5+3]ة�Zا,)+��wXF.+� b- He broke off and didn't start again. 7¡ب-P7و+1�4)]أ����wX}�[�+� c- She has broken off the engagement. �������������������5¡ج({n+ا�xnY8�[�+� d- They have broken off the negotiations. 7د�7ت¡دQ3+ا�اX_wأو�[�+� (pp. 53-54) [Emphasis in original].
As far as the exercises are concerned, unlike Goodale (1994) who provides a variety
of exercises, El-Nagar (1998) offers only one type of exercises, that is fill-in-the-
blank type, where a number of sentences are listed each of which has a gap needs to
be filled with a PV from the three alternatives provided.
Another drawback is, unlike Goodale who utilizes authentic example sentences taken
from COBUILD database, El-Nagar makes up most of her examples in such a way
that they sound unreal or, to use Kharma and Hajjaj's word, "idealised" which are far
from representing the communicative situations students need to learn. To provide
only a few examples:
He just kept on hitting the boy although I told him to stop (p. 60) [Emphasis in original]. Even if you fail in the examination again you must try to keep on until you pass (p. 60) [Emphasis in original]. The coat should keep out the cold (p. 71) [Emphasis in original].
Some of the given examples have grammatical mistakes, such as:
Nothing will be done until someone have [sic] the courage to speak out (p. 77) [Emphasis in original].
Time move [sic] on slowly (p. 61) [Emphasis in original].
195
Furthermore, there exist a number of translational pitfalls. For instance: The garden is
coming on nicely is translated as: ����K&-3�1&8�5&%�{�&]م��[Q+إن�ا (The garden is in progressing
nicely) (p. 61), and I was surprised at how well you all get on is literally mistranslated
as: ��5&(-W�4'F&w2E�%�0/�7آ�4هNه[./�x.آ�[�+ (I was surprised at how good your relationship is)
(p. 63), while I must brush up my French before I go to Paris is translated as: أن���[&\M
%F-YP,8�0Eا+�)7ر���_Pأ (I must dust off my French) (p. 135).
Having known all these facts, one can conclude that the methods of teaching EPVs to
Arab learners is, to a great extent, inadequate in comparison with the methods of
teaching them to learners of English from non-Arabic backgrounds. The lacking of
rich pedagogical materials and utilizing old fashioned teaching methods are the main
two reasons behind such inadequacy. For this problem to be solved two things need to
be done: first, owing to the fact that the phenomenon of PVs constitutes one of the
most important features of English grammar and vocabulary, and to the fact that
underestimating, overlooking or ignoring them can lead to a major difficulty in
learning, using and mastering the language, they must be included as an integral part
of the learning and training process, and of the interpreting and translating courses
undertaking by Arabs. Second, Arab teachers, curriculum designers and material
developers need to make use of up-to-date teaching methods of EPVs (some of which
are mentioned above) to provide Arab learners of English, interpreters and translators
with systematically presented patterns along with sufficiently rich pedagogical
materials that can help them overcome the difficulties EPVs cause, and in turn
enhance their ability to receive/understand and produce/translate EPVs into Arabic.
196
2.11 PVs in translation studies This section will be devoted to address the essential issue of how the phenomenon of
IEPVs has been dealt with in translation studies, and, most importantly, how it has
been explored in translation theory.
Given that the phenomenon of PVs is regarded as one type of the English idiomatic
expressions, and constitutes an integral part of many idioms, proverbs and fixed
expressions, it has been investigated by linguists who studied the question of
translating English idioms into other languages.
The available relevant literature, in this regard, can be categorized into two distinct
types: studies dedicated to translating EPVs into other languages; and studies devoted
to translating English idioms as a whole into other languages. In what follows the two
types will be taken up respectively.
2.11.1 Translating EPVs into other languages
In his paper On the Semantic of Certain English Phrasal Verbs and Their Rendering
into Spanish, Bernstein (1974) looks at some EPVs from their semantic standpoint.
By focusing on idiomatic kind of EPVs whose meaning "cannot be rendered by a
literal translation into Spanish" (p. 59), he attempts to highlight the idea of "how
diverse the translations into Spanish may be when a phrasal verb family has many
members" (p. 59). Bernstein (1974) divides PVs into families according to their
proper verbs. He takes up two families as specimens, they are: 'come' plus
197
prepositions family, and 'get' plus prepositions family along with the Spanish
translation of each meaning of the combinations listed under each family. The
diversity of translation of such IEPVs into Spanish made him to indicate that "[t]here
is no overlap between Spanish and English" (p. 61). However, he suggests a "simpler
means" for translating the listed EPVs into Spanish. Such a means is applicable only
to certain cases where "Spanish families of compound verbs with an invariant root
and varying prefixes may be of use" (p. 61).
Due to the fact that Spanish and English languages share "a considerable etymological
debt to Latin" (p. 62), Bernstein (1974) claims that "it will often be convenient to
translate a cognate by a cognate" (p. 62).
Yet, the parallel pair of families of EPVs and Spanish cognates is not available in
EPVs families where numerous members are included, as in the 'get' plus prepositions
family (p. 62).
He concludes, however, that English and Spanish "do share a common SAE [Standard
Average European] characteristic" (p. 64), where "a vast array of actions and relations
may be generated by application of a relatively small number of prepositions/adverbs
to basic verbs" (p. 64). Also, a number of Latin prepositions "passed down to Spanish
through Vulgar Latin […such prepositions] form a productive sub-class that can
generate new verbs or create new verbal meanings by being prefixed to basic verbs
much as English […] may do with its phrases" (p. 64). Like English, he adds, which
"can multiply its verbal lexicon to suit needs as they arise" (p. 65), Spanish can do the
same but "to a much more limited extent" (p. 65).
198
In considering such a crucial issue, Heliel (1994), in his paper Verb-Particle
Combinations in English and Arabic: Problems for Arab Lexicographers and
Translators, enumerates a number of syntactic and semantic problems that Arabic
translators may encounter when dealing with the phenomenon of EPVs. These
problems occur as a result of the differences between English and Arabic with regard
to such a phenomenon, and include: 1) the Arabic translator finds it difficult to
envisage the effect of the particle on the meaning of the verb in an English idiomatic
combination. Whereas, unlike English, The Arabic verb is "a fair guide to the
meaning of the combination" (p. 146); 2) a lot of verbs in English verb-particle
combinations are employed idiomatically with certain particles, "which makes their
meanings unstable and indistinct" (p. 147); 3) some verbs, such as 'get', can combine
with almost every particle. Others, such as 'make' and 'do' "are more selective but still
quite versatile" (p. 147). Many combinations, such as 'pig out = overeat' are
productive; 4) a lot of idiomatic usages are exclusive to a single language, "where
they may sound natural to native speakers but strange to non-native speakers" (p.
147). This is appropriate to English verb-particle combinations where "the verb by
itself would have a radically separate interpretation" (p. 147) as in: the audience
cracked up at every joke versus the vendor cracked the coconut with a machete (p.
147); 5) an English verb may have a range of different meanings in various
combinations, which "may be wider and more idiomatic or even opaque in English
than in Arabic" (p. 147). Write off, for instance, has the following different meanings:
to send off a letter, to clear from the records, to judge to be a failure, and to reject as
beyond repair (p. 147); 6) English verb-particle combinations "in which a normally
intransitive verb takes a direct object puzzle the Arabic translator, who finds nothing
similar in Arabic" (p. 147) as in: the students laughed versus the students laughed off
199
their failing grades (p. 147); 7) some English verb-particle combinations are
employed in a specialized meaning in particular fields. Such a meaning "is usually
definite and its metaphorical motivation has faded, leaving it stylistically and
emotionally neutral, e.g. 'pull out' (military), 'blast off' (aerospace), 'lock down'
(computer science)" (p. 148); hence, the extent to which a register may affect the
meanings assigned to EPVs need to be assessed (p. 148); 8) some intransitive English
verb-particle combinations "may be hard to understand without further clues from the
text" (p. 148). For example, I don't know how the story got about, the opposition was
digging in, and they are still hanging around (p. 148); 9) while many English verb-
particle combinations can be employed both intransitively and transitively keeping the
same meaning, as in: they help out at the church sale, and they helped us out, some of
them can be employed both intransitively and transitively but in different meanings as
in: the engine cut out, and I cut out some photographs from magazines (p. 148); 10)
the meaning of transitive English verb-particle combination "may differ according to
whether the object is a person or a thing" (p. 148). For instance: take someone in, and
take something in (p. 148); 11) the verb + particle, in three-word combinations of
prepositional PVs, "may be much harder to render than the preposition" (p. 148) as in:
look up to (someone), put (someone) on to (a good idea), and come up against (a
problem) (p. 148); 12) the Arabic equivalents of English verb-particle combinations
vary according to their collocations with other words (p. 148). The Arabic equivalent
of the PV break off, for instance, is �]&{w if the following word is (negotiations),
whereas it is �§Y&8 if the following word is (an engagement), and the Arabic equivalent
of the PV bring about is ث�[&Zأ when the following word is (a change), while it is ��&)y
when the following word is (an opportunity) (p. 148); 13) the figurative combinations
of verb + particle are "hard to translate when they are culture-bound" (p. 149). For
200
example, the literal use of lagged behind in the tired boy lagged behind the group,
versus the figurative use of it in prices are rising sharply while incomes are lagging
behind (p. 149).
Heliel (1994), however, concludes that "Arab[ic] translators are likely to encounter
problems finding Arabic equivalents that respect idiomatic meanings, syntactic
structures, lexical collocations and the specialized fields of discourse" (149). He
further says that such problems "should be treated in bilingual dictionaries and
translator training programmes [… and we] must work to develop both our linguistic
approaches for describing them and our strategies for teaching them" (p. 149). This is
the aim of the present thesis.
In the same manner, in his article Some Ways of Translating English Phrasal Verbs
into Russian, Yatskovich (1999) casts a light on "the essence of some semantic
correspondences in the English and Russian verbal systems" (p. 1). Since EPVs are
deemed to be idiomatic combinations of two elements (a verb and an adverbial
particle), and the latter element gives the whole combination the "ability to describe
actions or states more precisely, vividly and emotionally" (p. 1), he concentrates on
the semantic functions of the English adverbial particles in comparison with Russian
verbal prefixes, claiming that "[i]n addition to their function that is analogous to that
of English prefixes, Russian verbal prefixes resemble English adverbial particles in
their semantic functions, also indicating various qualities of actions and states" (p. 2).
Such an overlap, according to him, influences the process of translating EPVs into
Russian in the sense that "[…] the meaning of the English adverbial component of the
201
phrasal verb is mostly conveyed by using the Russian prefix that reflects the character
of the described action or state most accurately" (p. 2).
Yatskovich (1999), on the other hand, admits that "it seems almost impossible to
create a consistent rigid system of lexical correspondences between English adverbial
particles and Russian prefixes, without encountering numerous debatable problems"
(p. 2). One of such debatable problems, he elaborates, is the polysemic nature of
EPVs, which has to be always kept in the mind of translator when dealing with EPVs.
He, all in all, concludes that "[…] understanding of semantic correspondences in
English and Russian verbal systems can be quite a powerful tool in the translator's
arsenal" (p. 3).
2.11.2 Translating English idioms into other languages
Idiomatic expressions, as a whole, still constitute a serious challenge for translators in
spite of latest developments in the field of translation theory and application (Awwad,
1990). The difficulty of translating idioms, particularly from English into Arabic, has
been, to a certain degree, overlooked in translation studies. The vast majority of the
relevant literature has been limited to lexicology and applied linguistics, concentrating
on the translation of metaphor and metaphorical language, "[b]ut idioms as they are
traditionally known and classified have been yet to receive the due attention"
(Ghazala, 2003, p. 203). Consequently, "[…] the translation of English idioms into
Arabic has not been adequately investigated, which has resulted in a gap in the field
of translation that needs further study" (Bataineh &Bataineh, 2002, p. 34).
202
IEPVs, however, have been amongst the types of English idioms investigated by a
number of Arab researchers. Mohammad Awwad (1990), for instance, incorporates
IEPVs as one type of English idioms in his paper Equivalence and Translatability of
English and Arabic Idioms. He attributes the difficulty of translating English idioms
to two main reasons: 1) misinterpreting the intention of the original writer or speaker.
The Arabic expression ا+)&7ب����F&8, for instance, has literal and idiomatic/metaphorical
meanings. Therefore it is translated into English literally as (he opened the door),
whereas it is translated idiomatically as (he established a precedent) (p. 58); and 2)
cultural differences. For example, in English if someone dies they say (he kicked the
bucket), while in Arabic they say ��5&P7/9�4ا)&H (he handed over/delivered what he was
entrusted with, which is a reference to the soul leaving the body) (p. 59).
Moreover, Awwad (1990) arrives at a theoretical framework for handling the
translatability of idioms. Such a framework is based on the fact that an idiom may fall
into one of the following four categories of correspondence between English and
Arabic idioms:
a- Idioms with no correspondence between expression[s] and functions, i.e. expressions and functions are language specific.
b- Idioms with corresponding functions in both languages but with completely different expressions.
c- Idioms with corresponding functions in both languages, but with slightly different expressions.
d- Idioms with corresponding functions and expressions in both languages (p. 66)
The first category is illustrated by the IEPVs turn in and turn down, which are
translated by Awwad (1990) as: م/��1وي�+(_,اش�X.)+ (to go to bed / to sleep) and ��8,&1 (to
refuse) respectively (p. 65). Translating this category of idioms, however, requires not
only "almost complete mastery of both SL [Source Language] and TL [Target
203
Language] linguistic system but also a deep understanding and awareness of the SL
and TL culture and way of life" (p. 63).
The second category, on the other hand, is illustrated by the English idioms to hold
the reins, and he was the scape-goat, which are translated into Arabic as 7م���&/�\�SY&31
he was the ram of the) آ&7ن�آ&)��ا+_&]اء��� and ,(to hold the reins of the things) اX&/9ر�
sacrifice) in that order (p. 62). What's more, translating this kind of idioms requires
"the translator to pay special attention to the areas of difference in expression between
SL and TL" (p. 62).
With regard to the third category, the translator "must either find the right idiom in
TL, or render a translation of the meaning of the idiom as best as he can" (p. 61). It is
exemplified by the IEPV trade in, which is translated as �17�1 (to exchange something
for something else) (p. 61).
As far as the fourth category is concerned, where both expressions and functions
correspond, the resulting translation is typically correct and idiomatic in both SL and
TL provided that "the translator is a native speaker of one language and has native-
like competence in the other" (p. 59). This category is illustrated by the following
English idioms where PVs are included: turn over a new leaf, and to hold out the olive
branch, which are translated by Awwad (1990) into Arabic as: ��5]1]ةQ_`1)]أ� (to start a
new page), and نXF1�+�0اUG�]8,1 (to raise the branch of the olive tree) (p. 60).
Along the same lines, Baker (1992), in her attempt to account for the difficulties
translators encounter when translating idioms and fixed expressions, utilizes IEPVs,
204
as inherent idioms or part of idioms and fixed expressions, to illustrate such
difficulties. She uses, for instance, the IEPV go out with (to have a romantic or sexual
relationship with someone) and the IEPV take for in take someone for a ride (to
deceive or cheat someone in someway) to clarify the point that how misleading the
idioms can be when they carry both literal and idiomatic meanings and "seem
transparent because they offer a reasonable literal interpretation and their idiomatic
meanings are not necessarily signaled in the surrounding text" (p. 66). Such idioms,
according to Baker, can be easily manipulated by speakers and writers. This may
confuse a translator who is not familiar with such idioms and may make him/her
"easily accept the literal interpretation and miss the play on idiom" (p. 66).
Baker (1992), however, lists four difficulties involved in translating idioms and fixed
expressions as follows;
(a) An idiom or fixed expression may have no equivalent in the target language. [They] may be cultural-specific […].
(b) [They] may have a similar counterpart in the target language, but its context of use may be different: the two expressions may have different connotations […].
(c) An idiom may be used in the source text in both its literal and idiomatic senses at the same time […]. Unless the target-language idiom corresponds to the source-language idiom both in form and meaning, the play on idiom cannot be successfully reproduced in the target text […].
(d) The very convention of using idioms in written discourse […] and their frequency of use may be different in the source and target languages […]. Using idioms in English is very much a matter of style. Languages such as Arabic and Chinese which make a sharp distinction between written and spoken discourse and where the written mode is associated with a high level of formality tend, on the whole, to avoid using idioms in written texts (pp. 68-71).
Moreover, Baker (1992) provides the following strategies for translating idioms:
1. [Translation by] [u]sing an idiom of similar meaning and form […]. 2. [Translation by] [u]sing an idiom of similar meaning but dissimilar form
[…]. 3. Translation by paraphrase […].
205
4. Translation by omission […]. 5. [Translation by] compensation [which] means that one may either omit or
play down a feature such as idiomaticity at the point where it occurs in the source text and introduce it elsewhere in the target text (pp. 74-78).
In the light of the above difficulties and the strategies proposed to deal with them,
Ruba Bataineh and Rula Bataineh (2002), in their article The difficulties Jordanian
Graduate Learners of English as a Second Language Face When Translating English
idioms into Arabic, investigate the problems graduate students of translation at two
Jordanian universities (Yarmouk University and the University of Jordan) encounter
when translating idiomatic English expressions into Arabic. They analyse
"translations produced by forty-five subjects of a forty-five-item test that consists of
sentences each of which contains an idiom" (p. 33). Bataineh and Bataineh (2002),
however, take IEPVs into their account when they set up their test sentences.
Therefore, in their attempt to examine the translatability of IEPVs along with the
other types of idiomatic English expressions, they incorporated seven sentences, each
of which contains an IEPV. Four of them were from the verb + particle category of
EPVs (act up, let out, do without, and lay up), while the other three were from the
verb + particle + preposition category (be in for, get up to, and add up to).
Bataineh and Bataineh (2002) come up with the following findings with regard to the
translatability of EPVs: precisely 60.6% of the examined subjects translated correctly
the PVs from the first category, whereas 56.7% of them were able to correctly
translate the PVs of the second category (p. 75). Despite the fact that PVs have come
at the end of the list of "Degree of Problematicity of Idiom Types" (pp. 75-76), which
is arranged in descending order, Bataineh and Bataineh (2002) outline the strategies
used by the subjects in translating these PVs. The subjects made use of four strategies
206
when translating PVs of the first category: paraphrase, literal translation, not
translating the sentences, and omission, while they made use of only the first three
strategies when translating PVs of the second category (pp. 66-68). Using these
strategies resulted in producing incorrect translation of the listed IEPVs by a number
of the examined subjects. Bataineh and Bataineh (2002) summarize the problems of
translating English idiomatic expressions that arise from the subjects' translations in
four points as follows:
1. the loss of some shades of meaning when omitting an idiom from the sentence; 2. misunderstanding the meaning of the sentence through the incorrect
rendition of the idiom; 3. disrupting the coherence of a text when omitting or incorrectly translating
the idiom; and 4. unintelligibility through the use of literal translation (p. 77).
Also, they attribute such problems to the following six reasons:
1. some idioms are culture-bound; 2. some idioms may have counterparts similar in form but different in
meaning; 3. students may not be able to determine whether or not the expression at
hand is an idiom; 4. students lack the competence to translate the idiom into Arabic; 5. students lack the familiarity with the presence of idiomatic expressions;
and 6. students may be hindered by factors of carelessness and time pressure
(p. 77).
In his paper Idiomaticity Between Evasion and Invasion in Translation: Stylistic,
Aesthetic and Connotative Conditions, Ghazala (2003) identifies evasion and invasion
as the main two translation procedures of idiomaticity. By the former he means "the
elimination of the idiomaticity of the SL idiom when translating it into the TL with no
compensation of any kind" (p. 209), while by the latter he means "a translator's
deliberate use in the TL of an idiom that matches, if not supersedes, the original" (p.
217). Ghazala (2003) argues that both procedures are valid "on the right occasion for
207
the right reason(s)" (p. 209). Nonetheless, he goes strongly for invasion procedure "as
more creative, convincing and faithful procedure than the former [evasion] which is at
worst an escape from translating properly, and at best an inclination to practicality"
(p. 209).
Ghazala (2003) comes across the issue of translating EPVs, as an essential type of
English idiomatic expressions, into Arabic in his attempt to justify the adoption of the
evasion procedure. He provides two sub-procedures for evasion: 1) dissuasion from
idiomaticity; and 2) preference of insensible sense. The first sub-procedure, in turn, is
justified by the following three reasons: a) the translator's incompetence; b) zero
Language equivalence in TL; and c) avoidance of taboos (pp. 209-217). In elaborating
on the second reason (zero language equivalence in TL), Ghazala indicates that
"[t]here are many English idioms, including the majority of phrasal verbs, that have
no idiomatic equivalence in Arabic" (p. 211). In this case the Arabic translator is not
to blame for non-idiomatic Arabic translation of the idiomatic English expression,
still, "[…] he has to provide a satisfactory version of sense, with idiomaticity dropped
unwillingly, in which case a considerable amount of loss will take place with a little
chance to compensate" (p. 211).
Furthermore, Ghazala (2003) makes the point that although IEPVs have no
straightforward Arabic equivalents, "they all can be translated comfortably into their
precise literal sense, provided the translator understands them properly in their
English contexts before translating them into Arabic" (p. 213). He further emphasizes
that they should not be confused with prepositional verbs which, owing to the fact that
208
their verbs retain their common meanings, "can be understood and translated literally
and directly" (p. 312).
Ghazala (2003) concludes that the complexity of EPVs, which stems from the fact
that there are thousands of them, with tens of thousands of their different meanings in
existence, "may naturally make the task of translation extremely difficult so that a
non-idiomatic translation is often chosen in translation into Arabic, where such
phrasal combinations are infrequent" (p. 213).
To sum up, the phenomenon of IEPVs has been the focus of a number of translation
studies. The treatment of such a phenomenon has varied considerably from one
researcher to another depending upon the standpoint from which it has been
accounted for. Yet, one can infer a number of insights: firstly, translating IEPVs into
languages where there are a number of correspondences between them and the
English language, such as Spanish and Russian, being a task achieved relatively
easily. Such correspondences play a significant role, as a common ground, in
negotiating the idiomatic meaning of EPVs and, in turn, in finding the appropriate
equivalents to them. Secondly, translating IEPVs into Arabic, however, where there
exist no much correspondences neither syntactically nor semantically, is far more
complicated task and subject to numerous debatable difficulties. Thirdly, such
difficulties have constituted the basis upon which Arab researchers warrant the
employment of such strategies as evasion, omitting and paraphrasing IEPVs when
translating them into Arabic. Such strategies, as it will be manifested from the results
of this study, are not theoretically based and lack of a systematic approach that may
help tackle the difficulties encountered when translating IEPVs into Arabic. Last but
209
not least, I am strongly in favour of the fact (as confirmed by Awwad, 1999; Bataineh
& Bataineh, 2002; Ghazala, 2003) that the question of translating English idioms into
Arabic has not been comprehensively taken up. More insightful efforts are needed to
describe the difficulties encountered by Arabic translators when dealing with such a
problematic phenomenon, and more practical strategies are needed to be suggested,
examined and applied.
2.12 Conclusion This Chapter was entirely devoted to address the first set of the research questions
outlined in the previous Chapter (see 1.3 above). The main purpose was to extensively
scrutinize the key points of the phenomenon of idiomatic PVs in both the English and
Arabic languages, and to highlight scholarly works which have previously been done
by a wide range of scholars in such domains as linguistics, lexicography and
pedagogy, to establish a theoretical platform from which one can proceed to
investigate the main question of this study - that is, the difficulties Arabic professional
translators and Arabic translation students encounter when translating IEPVs into
Arabic.
The enormous bulk of information outlined throughout the Chapter revealed that the
phenomenon of IEPVs has attracted the attention of many researchers in different
fields. It has been insightfully dealt with from a variety of perspectives. Grammarians,
semanticists, lexicographers and pedagogues found that structural oddity, semantic
ambiguity, high productivity, and the amount of challenge IEPVs constitute to a non-
native speaker necessitate a deep and careful investigation. Therefore, they devoted a
210
great deal of their scholarly efforts accounting for their syntactic features, semantic
properties, and other related peculiarities to agree upon some and disagree upon
others.
In the next Chapter a theoretical rationale for the experimental part of this study will
be established and a practical model for the analysis and translation of IEPVs into
Arabic will be devised.
211
CHAPTER THREE
LINGUISTIC CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS��
��
3.1 Introduction��
As has been previously mentioned, the principal aim of this study is to investigate the
difficulties encountered by Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students
when tackling the phenomenon of IEPVs, and to propose some recommendations based
on the results of the study.
In the last Chapter an ample and exhaustive literature review of the notion of PVs and its
peculiarities was provided in both the English and Arabic languages. This Chapter
constitutes a link between the theoretical part of the study (the literature review) and the
practical part of it (the forthcoming experimental research). In this Chapter I am going to
establish a theoretical rationale for my experiments by reviewing main and influential
approaches of contrastive analysis to see their appropriateness/inappropriateness to my
topic, so as to formulate a practical and scientific model for the analysis and translation of
IEPVs into Arabic.
3.2 Contrastive analysis
Contrastive analysis basically means "a linguistic study of two languages aiming to
identify differences between them in general selected areas" (Hoey & Houghton, 2001, p.
46). Or, as James (1980) puts it, "a linguistic enterprise aimed at producing inverted (i.e.
212
contrastive not comparative) two valued typologies […], founded on the assumption that
languages can be compared" (p. 3).
The discipline of contrastive analysis, following Hoey & Houghton (2001), is more or
less a modern one. It was developed in the United States of America during and after
World War Two, "in the context of second and foreign language teaching" (p. 46). It
became quite popular in Europe throughout the 1970s, when "several large contrastive
projects were set up, contrasting English with, for example, Polish and Finish among
others" (p. 46).
Fisiak (1981) indicates that since the forties the task of comparing two languages or more
to determine the differences and similarities between them has been termed contrastive
analysis or contrastive study.
In his book Contrastive Analysis, Carl James (1980) characterises contrastive analysis as
a form of interlingual study, and, as such, "has much in common with the study of
bilingualism" (p. 8). Further, modern contrastive analysis, according to him, "starts with
Lado's Linguistics across cultures (1957)" (p. 8) [Emphasis in original].
3.3 Contrastive analysis and translation
Hoey & Houghton (2001, p. 47) address the issue of the relevance of contrastive analysis
to translation. They argue that "[a]t a practical level, it [contrastive analysis] is probably
most useful in pointing out areas where direct translation of a term or phrase will not
convey accurately in the second language the intended meaning of the first" (p. 47). In
213
addition, contrastive analysis, at a global level, "leads the translator to look at broader
issues such as whether the structure of the discourse for a given text-type is the same in
both languages" (p. 47). �
�
Furthermore, Hoey & Houghton (2001) indicate that there is a bidirectional relationship
between contrastive analysis and translation in that the latter may provide the data for the
former, while the former "may provide explanations of difficulties encountered in
translation" (p. 49). They exemplify the first relationship in the works of Gleason (1965),
Krzeszowski (1990), and James (1980), and illustrate the second relationship in the works
of Nida (1964), Beekman and Callow (1974), Yebra (1982), Enkvist (1978) and Baker
(1992).
Following Catford (1965) and James (1980), Chakhachiro (1997) indicates that
contrastive analysis
exercises an analysis on a pair of languages in order to: 1) detect any linguistic changes in conveying certain messages (messages pertain here to genre and style of texts), then suggest these changes as the translation equivalence […]; 2) find the gap or 'imbalance', to use James' word, between both languages and attempt to fill this gap in the target language (p. 107).
Chesterman (1998), however, argues that although translation theory and contrastive
analysis are "neighbouring disciplines, it is nevertheless often appears that theoretical
developments in one field are overlooked in the other, and that both would benefit from
each other's insights" (p. 6). Moreover, he indicates that "[b]oth translation theorists and
contrastivists have expanded their focus of attention towards each other, and some
scholars have openly sought to establish conceptual bridges between the two disciplines"
(pp. 27-28).
214
Hoey and Houghton (2001, p. 47) consider that a number of theoretical and practical
problems do occur in the course of application of contrastive analysis. Such problems are
"related to specific difficulties of identifying a common ground for comparison,
comparing descriptions of different languages, taking account of psycholinguistic and
sociocultural factors, and taking into account of extratextual and intertextual factors" (p.
47).
Further, Chakhachiro (1997) properly sums up the contribution of contrastive analysis to
translation theory as follows:
[Contrastive analysis] can provide translation theory with comprehensive, flexible and credible strategies. It encompasses macro as well as micro features of texts, it can accommodate translation across any pairs of languages and lastly, it furnishes the theory of translation with a logical, systematic and practical approach (pp. 106-107).
It is common knowledge that there are a variety of contrastive analysis models proposed
and applied to translation studies. The origin of the methodological diversity, according to
Chakhachiro (1997) is the adoption or adaptation of contrastive or comparative linguistic
models by modern translation theorists in their endeavour to provide strategies to analyse
a given pair of languages and, in turn, to propose recommendations for translation
equivalence.
��
Along these lines and in order to determine the linguistic contrastive analysis model
best relevant to the topic at hand, I am going to conduct a short review on the main and
influential approaches of contrastive analysis. The aim here is to provide a clear picture
as to which approach is relevant and which one is not.
215
3.4 Review of contrastive analysis approaches ��
Mason (2001) sketches the stands of thinking that influenced the perspective of
translation in three main stands: 1) the functionalist views of the British tradition in
linguistics; 2) the notion of communicative competence; and 3) the purpose (skopos)
theory. The first stand, Mason points out, is represented by the works of Firth, Catford,
Gregory, Halliday and others. The second was "developed originally by Dell Hymes in
response to Chomskyan view of language competence" (p. 29). The third is represented
by the works of Karl Buhler and Reiss and Vermeer (p. 29).
Campbell (1998), however, emphasizes that "[t]here is a dichotomy of standpoints in
the linguistic theories from which models of translation may be derived – the functional
standpoint that concerns the relationship among the writer, the text and the real world –
and the neo-Cartesian standpoint that is concerned with mental processes" (p. 158).
More about such stands of thinking and linguists standpoints is outlined in what
follows.
3.4.1 Juliane House
In her paper Translation Quality Assessment: Linguistic Description versus Social
Evaluation, House (2001) reports on the main three approaches to translation quality
evaluation, namely: 1) Mentalist Views; 2) Response-based Approaches (Behavioristic
Views, and Functionalistic, "Skopos"-Related Approach); and 3) Text and Discourse
Based Approaches (Literature-oriented Approaches: Descriptive Translation Studies,
216
Post-modernist and Deconstructionist Thinking, and Linguistically-oriented
Approaches). House (2001) makes the point that "translation is essentially an operation
in which the meaning of linguistic units is to be kept equivalent across languages
[therefore] one can distinguish at least three different views of meaning, each of which
leads to different conceptions of translation evaluation" (p. 243). Hence, before
proceeding to present her own approach, House (2001) elaborates briefly on each of the
abovementioned approaches, rejecting, as a result, the first two of them and going
strongly for the third. Her argument, for and against, was driven by the following facts:
1) the "Mentalists Views" are very much subjective and intuitive and their "relativising
stance, and especially the relativisation of 'content' and 'meaning' is particularly
inappropriate for the evaluation business of making argued statements about when, how
and why a translation is good" (p. 244); 2) the "Behavioristic Views", which are
"influenced by American structuralism and behaviorism, [and] most famously
associated with Nida's (1964) pioneering work", cannot be postulated as criteria for
translation evaluation since by no means the views can be measured (p. 244); 3) the
"Functionalistic, 'Skopos'-Related Approach", which was developed by Reiss and
Vermeer, "cannot be said to be an adequate theory when it comes to tackling the
evaluation of translation in its fundamental bidirectionality". This is owing to the fact
that "[...] any translation is simultaneously bound to its source text and to the
presuppositions and conditions governing its reception in the new environment", while
this theory gives rise to the purpose "Skopos" of a translation as a yardstick in the
process of evaluation (p. 245); 4) the "Literature-oriented Approaches: Descriptive
Translation Studies", as well, fail to provide criteria for judging merits and weaknesses.
As how can one judge "whether one text is a translation and another one not? And what
are the criteria for judging merits and weaknesses of a given 'translation text'?" (p. 246);
217
5) the "Post-modernist and Deconstructionist Thinking" approach is also rejected due to
the plausible wondering of "how one can ever differentiate between a translation and
any other text that may result from a textual operation which can no longer claim to be a
translation relationship with an original text" (p. 246); and 6) the "Linguistically-
oriented Approaches", which date back to the pioneering works of Catford (1965)2,
Reiss (1971)3, Wilss (1974)4 among others, and the scope of which has been widened
by such scholars as Baker (1992), Doherty (1993)5, Hatim and Mason (1997), Hickey
(1998)6 and others, are the most promising approaches, since they "take the relationship
between source and translation text seriously". The most promising ones are those
"which explicitly take account of the interconnectedness of context and text because the
inextricable link between language and the real world is both definitive in meaning and
in translation" (p. 247).
In line with the" Linguistically-oriented Approaches", House formulates her own
approach under the name of Functional-Pragmatic Model of Translation Evaluation,
which she developed more than 30 years ago and revised in 1981 and 1997. The model
is
[…] based on Hallidyan systematic-functional theory, but also draws eclectically on Prague school ideas, speech act theory, pragmatics, discourse analysis and corpus-based distinction between spoken and written language. It provides for the analysis and comparison of an original and its translation on three different levels: the levels of Language/Text, register (Field, Mode and Tenor) and Genre" (p. 247).
House's main concern in this model is the functional-pragmatic equivalence, which is
"related to the preservation of 'meaning' across two different languages and cultures" (p.
2 Cited in House (2001) 3 Cited in House (2001) 4 Cited in House (2001) 5 Cited in House (2001) 6 Cited in House (2001)
218
247). Moreover, she asserts that the concept of functional-pragmatic equivalence has
been accepted in contrastive linguistics for a long time and it is "the type of equivalence
which is most appropriate for describing relations between original and translation. And
it is this type of equivalence which is used in the functional pragmatic model suggested
by House (1997)" (House, 2001, p. 247).
As for register, or "context of situation", House (2001) indicates that the broad notion of
"context of situation" has been broken down "into manageable parts, i.e., particular
features of the context of situation or 'situational dimension': for instance 'Field'
'Mode' and 'Tenor' " (p. 248) [Emphasis in original]. Where field "captures social
activity, subject matter or topic, including differentiations of degrees of generality,
specificity or 'granularity' in lexical items according to rubrics of specialized, general
and popular" (p. 248). Whereas tenor "refers to the nature of the participants, the
addresser and the addressees, and the relationship between them in terms of social
power and social distance, as well as degree of emotional charge" (p. 248). In addition,
tenor "captures 'social attitude', i.e., different styles (formal, consultative and informal)"
(p. 247). Mode "refers to both the channel – spoken or written […], and the degree to
which potential or real participation is allowed for between writer and reader" (p. 248).
'Text' and 'context of situation', House (2001) explaines "should not be viewed as
separate entities, rather the context of situation in which the text unfolds is encapsulated
in the text through a systematic relationship between the social environment on the one
hand and the functional organization of language on the other" (p. 248).
219
Moreover, the category of genre, which "enables one to refer any single textual
exemplar to the class of texts with which it shares a common purpose", is useful for the
process of analysis and evaluation because "although Register (Field, Tenor, Mode)
descriptions are useful for accessing the relationship between text and context, they are
basically limited to capturing individual features on the linguistic surface" (House,
2001, p. 248). That is, "[w]hile register captures the connection between texts and their
'microcontext', Genre connects texts with the 'macrocontext' of the linguistic and
cultural community in which texts are embedded" (p. 248).
Such a model, as it has been previously stated, is a revised version of House's model
proposed in her doctoral dissertation (1977) titled A Model for Translation Quality
Assessment. Given the importance of this model in both theory and practice of
translation, I am going to sum it up in what follows.
The essence of translation, according to House (1977), "lies in the preservation of
'meaning' across two different languages" (p. 25). Hence, she asserts that the concept of
'meaning' is of three aspects, namely: a semantic aspect, a pragmatic aspect and a
textual aspect. The semantic aspect of meaning is the referential one, which "consists of
relationship of reference or denotative, i.e. the relationship of linguistics units or
symbols to their referents in some possible world" (p. 25). This aspect of meaning is,
for House (1977), "(a) most readily accessible, and for which (b) equivalence in
translation can most easily be seen to be present or absent" (p. 26). The pragmatic
aspect of meaning, on the other hand, is manifested by the difference between
pragmatics and semantics, as pragmatics "relates to the correlation between linguistic
units and the user(s) of these units in a given communicative situation" (House, 1977, p.
220
27). It is this distinction which underlies the theory of speech acts introduced by Austin
(1962) and Searle (1969) where pragmatic meaning is "referred to as the illocutionary
force that an utterance is said to have, i.e. the particular use of an expression on a
specific occasion" (House, 1977, p. 27).
As for the third aspect of meaning, textual aspect, House (1977) indicates that since
"[t]ranslation is a textual phenomenon", the various ways of text constitution, which
account for the textual meaning, such as: occurrences of pro-forms, substitutions, co-
references, ellipses and anaphora, have to be kept equivalent in translation (pp. 28-29).
With the above three aspects of meaning in mind, House (1977) asserts that "an
adequate translation text is a semantically and pragmatically equivalent one [and] as a
first requirement for semantic-pragmatic equivalence we posit that the translation text
have a function equivalent to that of its source text" (p. 30) [Emphasis in original].
In order to sharpen her own notion of function, House (1977) reviews different views of
the function of language proposed by such scholars as Ogden and Richards (1946)7,
Karl Buhler (1965)8, Jakobson (1960)9 and Halliday (1970 a, 1970 b, 1971, 1973)10.
Having done this, she adopts Halliday's terms of function, i.e. ideational and
interpersonal, to refer to the traditional dichotomy of the two types of functions. The
first term, ideational function, refers to the referential functional component, or content-
oriented function, where, following Halliday, "language expresses content: the speaker's
vision of the external world as well as the experience of the internal world of his own
consciousness" (House, 1977, p. 34). The second term, interpersonal function, refers to
7 Cited in House (1977) 8 Cited in House (1977) 9 Cited in House (1977) 10 Cited in House (1977)
221
the non-referential functional component where "language serves as a means for
conveying the speaker's relationship with interlocutor(s), and for expressing social roles
including communication roles such as questioner and respondent" (House, 1977, p.
34).
House (1977) uses these two types of function for choosing and grouping her sample
texts and "for labeling the two components of the textual function discovered in the
individual texts" (p. 37). Under the ideational function category she groups the
following texts: scientific text, commercial text, journalistic article and tourist
information booklet, while under the interpersonal function category she groups the
following texts: religious sermon, political speech, moral anecdote and comedy
dialogue.
Function of a text, as defined by House (1977), is "the application […] or use which the
text has in the particular context of a situation. [Therefore,] in order to characterize the
function of a text precisely, we must analyze the text in detail" (p. 37).
In her endeavour to provide "explicit practical guidelines for a coherent analysis and
evaluation of a translation", House (1977) developed this model as an eclectic one "for
characterizing the linguistic–situational peculiarities of the source text, comparing
source and translation texts, and making objective statement about the relative match of
the two texts" (p. 2). The model is essentially based on such pragmatic theories of
language use as speech act theory, functional and contextual views of language, and text
linguistics confederations (p. 3). The basic requirement for equivalence of a given
source text and its translation text, according to House (1977), is that the latter "should
222
have a function – consisting of two functional components, the ideational and the
interpersonal – which is equivalent to ST's [Source Text] function, and that TT
[Translation Text] should employ equivalent pragmatic means for achieving that
function" (p. 244).
In order to determine the function of a text, House adapts the model of Crystal and
Davy (1969)11 "situational constraints", and breaks down the notion of situation into
eight manageable elements, calling them "situational dimensions". Such dimensions are
of two categories, namely: 1) dimension of language user, which consists of three
parameters: Geographical Origin, Social Class and Time; and 2) dimension of language
use, which consists of five parameters: Medium, Participation, Social Role
Relationship, Social Attitude and Province. House establishes some linguistic correlates
for these situational dimensions (pp. 37-50).
She, as well, employs the distinctions between different combinations of spoken and
written modes suggested by Gregory (1967)12. In such a distinction, the written mode
has three categories, namely: 1) to be spoken as if not written; 2) to be spoken; and 3)
not necessarily to be spoken. The last category has a subcategory which is "to be read as
if heard" (p. 43).
House's method of operation of the model starts with depicting a textual profile for
source text by analyising it according to the set of eight situational dimensions to
characterise its function. The resultant textual profile of source text is taken as a
yardstick against which translation text is measured to depict its own textual profile.
11 Cited in House (1977) 12 Cited in House (1977)
223
The two resultant textual profiles, source text and its translation text profiles, which
characterise their function, are compared to explore the matches and mismatches
between them, and to provide a statement of the relative match of the ideational and
interpersonal function.
Further, House (1977) makes a distinction between two types of mismatches or errors,
"covertly erroneous errors" and "overtly erroneous errors". By the former she means the
dimensional mismatches, i.e. the mismatch of any one of the situational dimensions,
and by the latter she means the non-dimensional mismatches which comprise "both
mismatches of the denotative meanings of ST [Source Text] and TT [Translation Text]
elements and breaches of the target language system" (p. 245).
It is quite useful, however, to end this subsection with the following remark made by
Peter Fawcett (2001):
One of the earliest applications of the concept of register to translation was provided by House (1981), who showed how the two major text functions (ideational: conveying ideas, and interpersonal: relating author, text and reader) are supported by register parameters such as medium and social role relationship, and how on this basis a translation can be judged not on semantic match but the degree of register match or mismatch" (pp. 123-124). [Emphasis in original].
It is plausible to declare here that there are many relevant elements in this model to the
topic of this study, namely, the notions of functional-pragmatic equivalence, context of
situation (situational dimensions), and speech acts. Relevant to my study, as well, is the
distinction made by House (1977, pp. 56-57) between the two types of errors, namely:
covertly erroneous errors and overtly erroneous errors.
224
3.4.2 Carl James
In his book Contrastive analysis, James (1980) distinguishes between two approaches
to contrastive analysis, namely: microlinguistics and macrolinguistics. The former,
which was adopted by a great deal of modern 20th century linguists and contrastivists,
aims at "the description of the linguistic code, without making reference to the uses to
which the code is put, or how messages carried by this code are modified by the context
in which they occur" (p. 27). The latter, however, which has been attracting an
increasing attention, aims at the "contextual determination of messages and their
interpretation" (p. 27). These two approaches have been ably outlined in length by
James (1980) as to how to make use of them to execute contrastive analysis. His
profound insights are summarised in what follows.
3.4.2.1 Microlinguistics
This approach, also named by James as 'code–oriented', can be conducted on the three
levels of language, i.e. phonology, lexis, and grammar, by employing the two principal
steps of contrastive analysis procedure, i.e. description and comparison respectively.
The main concern of linguists using this approach is the formal system of language,
which has been given different labels by different scholars. Saussure calls it 'langue',
Chomsky 'competence', others 'code' and James refers to it as microlinguistics or 'code–
linguistics' (p. 98). Language, in the view of such linguists, is "self–contained calculus,
a mechanism for the production of sentences" (p. 98). Yet, this view of language "has
given to linguistics the appearance of a discipline closely akin to mathematics or formal
logic, which are likewise concerned with abstract formal system" (p. 98). Moreover,
225
such linguists claim that in order to obtain the code underlying a language one has to
disregard many aspects of that language which are considered to be irrelevant or
complicating factors (p. 98). Such a disregarding process has been called by James,
following Lyons (1972)13, the "idealisation of data", which in turn can be conducted in
three distinct ways: 1) Regularisation, where such thing as false starts, hesitations,
backtracking, mixed constructions and others, which occur in spontaneous speech, have
to be "regularised out of the data for linguistic analysis" (p. 98). James quoted
Chomsky's (1965)14 attribution of these thing to "such grammatically irrelevant
conditions as memory limitations, distraction, shift of attention and interest" (p. 89); 2)
Standardisation, which is of two senses: "the selection of the Standard dialect for
description" and "the homogeneity of the data: since the task of linguistic description
would be complicated by having to cope with data taken from speakers with mixture of
regional or social backgrounds, informants are selected who speak the same, standard,
variety" (p. 99); and 3) Decontextualisation, which in turn can be done by two ways:
"either by [a sentence] being removed from the company of the sentences that precede
or follow it in a text (its context), or by being separated off from the real–world
situation in which it is used (its context of situation)" (p. 99).
3.4.2.2 Macrolinguistics
James (1980) indicates that this approach "represents a relatively new departure in 'pure'
and Applied Linguistics, and offers considerable scope for new work in CA
[Contrastive Analysis]" (p. 61). Unlike the goal of microlinguistics, which is "to specify
the universal and particular properties of human languages" (p. 100), the goal of
13 Cited in James (1980) 14 Cited in James (1980)
226
macrolinguistics is "to achieve a scientific understanding of how people communicate"
(Yngve, 1975 as cited in James, 1980, p. 100). Hence, "[a]ttention has shifted from the
code to a process: the process of communication" (p. 100).
James adopts six situational constraints proposed by Hymes (1974) "sensitivity to
which […] determines a speaker's communicative competence" (p. 101). Such
constraints are "socio–cultural variables that in part determine the form of successful
utterances [and] the ethnographer of speaking must refer to in characterizing any
particular speech event" (p. 100). They are: 1) Setting, i.e. time and place of speech; 2)
Participant, i.e. addressor, speaker, addressee and audience; 3) Purpose, i.e. persuasion,
command, advice, greeting, or even phatic communion; 4) Key, i.e. tone, manner or
spirit in which a speech act may be carried out; 5) Content, i.e. the topic; and 6)
Channel, i.e. speech and writing. James put the six variables in this simple formula:
"who says what to whom, where and when, how and why" [Emphasis in original] (pp.
100-101).
Further, James characterises macrolinguistics in three points, being:
i) A concern for communicative competence rather than for 'linguistic' competence in Chomsky's sense. �� ii) An attempt to describe linguistic events within their extra linguistic settings. iii) The research for units of linguistic organization larger than the singular sentence (pp. 101-102).
�
Such a broadening of scope, according to James, is "aimed at, both 'vertically' in terms
of large linguistic units and horizontally, to incorporate socio–cultural linguistics" (p.
102). There are two ways by which such a broadening scope is achieved: 1) Text
analysis, which focuses "on the formal level and addresses the question of how
227
sentences are organized into larger, suprasentential units or texts; 2) Discourse analysis,
which is "the functional one, and looks at the ways in which people put language to
use" (p. 102) [Emphasis in original]. Text analysis, James elaborates, "starts with
linguistic forms and asks in which contexts they are appropriate", while discourse
analysis starts “with the outer frame of situations and working inwards to find the
formal linguistic correlates to the situational variables" (p. 102). Moreover, James links
this distinction to that sketched by Widdowson (1978)15 between usage and use, where
the former is related to form and the later to function (p. 102). Therefore, formal
devices such as: grammatical, lexical or intonational, which "signal the exact nature of
the relationships holding between successive sentences" in terms of cohesion and
coherence, are properties of text analysis, along with "Functional Sentence
Perspective", which means that such successive sentences must be informative, i.e.
presenting 'new' information, and relevant, i.e. associating this 'new' information with
the 'given' one (p. 109). In addition, James (1980) suggests three approaches by which
contrastive analysis might be conducted, they are: textual characterization, text
typology, and translated texts (pp. 113-118).
Discourse analysis, on the other hand, has very much to do with functionality of
language. It addresses the issue of use rather than usage or form in order to answer such
questions as: "what is the speaker (or writer) hoping to achieve? And what does he in
fact achieve, with this particular bit of language?" (p. 118).
In his attempt to account for the area of discourse analysis comprehensively, James
(1980) sheds light on it from different perspectives. He ably outlines the crucial notions
15 Cited in James (1980)
228
that may contribute in performing contrastive analysis on the ground of discourse
linguistics. In so doing, James draws on Austin's (1962)16 Speech Acts Theory, Grice's
(1967)17 Principles of cooperation, or Maxims of Conversation, Lakoff's (1973)18 Rules
of Politeness, and Laver's (1975)19 Phatic Communion among others.
In a nutshell, although, the macrolinguistics model is, following Chakhachiro (1997),
"highly theoretical and offers few practical examples for translation" (p. 104), it is,
however, an ambitious one "for translation problems that arise in any natural language
text type, particularly those texts that are ambiguous or have double meanings" (p. 104).
��
Given this, it is macrolinguistics rather than a microlinguistics notion which seems to be
more relevant to the issue of analysing and translating IEPVs into Arabic. This is
mainly due the fact that syntactic and lexical properties of IEPVs (their codes) by
themselves, as presented in the previous Chapter (see 2.4 above), are not enough to
account for their functional meaning and, in turn, determine their Arabic functional-
pragmatic equivalence. They need to be looked at within their communicative situations
and real-world context.
Before proceeding to set up a linguistic contrastive analysis model for the analysis and
translation of IEPVs into Arabic, it is quite significant to consider the crucial and
pertinent notions of equivalence, theory of sense, theory of speech acts and
communicative competence as understood and implemented by various authorities.
16 Cited in James (1980) 17 Cited in James (1980) 18 Cited in James (1980) 19 Cited in James (1980)
229
3.4.3 Equivalence
Equivalence constitutes "a central concept in translation theory, but it is also a
controversial one" (Kenny, 2001, p. 77). Theorists differ, Kenny (2001) elaborates, to a
great extent, as to how to approach the question of equivalence, in that some of them
(such as: Catford, 1965; Nida & Taber, 1969; Toury, 1980; Pym, 1992a 1995; Koller,
1995)20 "defined translation in terms of equivalence relations" (p. 77). Whereas others
(such as: Snell-Hornby, 1988; Gentzler, 1993)21 "reject the theoretical notion of
equivalence, claming it is either irrelevant […] or damaging […] to translation studies"
(p. 77). Other theorists (such as: Baker, 1992) "steer a middle course" and use
equivalence as "a useful category for describing translations" (Kenny, 2001, p. 77).
Moreover, House (2001, p. 247) points out that "[o]ver and above its role as a concept
constitutive of translation, 'equivalence' is the fundamental criterion of translation
quality". And translation for her is "[…] viewed as the recontextualization of a text in L1
by a semantically and pragmatically equivalent text in L2" (House, 2001, p. 247).
Equivalence has been defined as "the relationship between a source text (ST) and a target
text (TT) that allows the TT to be considered as a translation of the ST in the first place"
(Kenny, 2001, p. 77).
Equivalence in both translation theory and contrastive analysis, Chesterman (1998)
argues, has traditionally emerged from the notion of 'similarity' and gained "a wide
variety of interpretations in these two fields" (p. 16). In his attempt to examine such
20 Cited in Kenny (2001) 21 Cited in Kenny (2001)
230
interpretations, on the one hand, and assess the extent to which they may overlap on the
other, he explores the concept of equivalence in both translation theory and contrastive
analysis as in what follows:
Chesterman (1998) investigates three approaches to account for the concept of
equivalence in translation theory, namely: the equative view, the taxonomic view, and the
relativist view (pp. 18-27).
Following Kelly (1979)22 and Rener (1989)23, he considers the equative view as the oldest
approach, and it is "based on the original mathematical definition of equivalence,
denoting a reversible relation: A is B and B is A" (p. 18).
As for the second approach, i.e. the taxonomic view, Chesterman (1998) explores the
taxonomies of Nida (1964), Catford (1965) and Koller (1979) to illustrate the crux of this
approach, which is "equivalence is not a unitary concept but consists of several types.
Different types of equivalence are argued to be appropriate in the translation of different
kinds of texts. […] the concept of equivalence is argued to be context-sensitive" (p. 21).
Nida's taxonomy of equivalence, as briefly outlined by Chesterman (1998), shows that
equivalence is of two distinct types: formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. "[t]he
binary division here is between the form-and-meaning of a message on the one hand, and
the effect of a message on the other" (p. 21). Translators are urged by Nida to "give a
higher priority to dynamic equivalence, so that the target text would have the same effect
on its readers as the source text did on the original readers" (p. 21). Further, by
22 Cited in Chesterrman (1998) 23 Cited in Chesterrman (1998)
231
emphasizing the factor of naturalness in the target text, Chesterman (1998) elaborates,
"Nida helped to shift theoretical attention away from texts-as-such to texts-as-people-use
them; semiotically, this meant a shift towards pragmatics, towards users and interpreters
of signs" (p. 21). Or, as Hatim and Mason (1990) put it, "Nida shifts attention away from
sterile debate of free versus literal towards the effects of different translation strategies"
(p. 7).
Catford's taxonomy of equivalence, on the other hand, is far much different. It is framed
by Chesterman (1998) as follows: "[w]e have three potential kinds of equivalence: formal
equivalence, which can only be approximate; semantic equivalence, which is theoretically
impossible; and situational equivalence, which is the basis for translation" (p. 22). Hatim
(2001) makes the point that "Equivalence [in Catford's taxonomy] is taken to be the base
on which source language (SL) textual material is replaced by target language (TL)
textual material" (p. 14) [Emphasis in original].
The third taxonomy of equivalence in translation theory is Koller's taxonomy, which
consists of five types. They are:
(i) Denotative equivalence (otherwise known as invariance of content, semantic equivalence);
(ii) Connotative equivalence (including equivalence of style, register, and frequency);
(iii) Text-normative equivalence (concerning text-type usage norms); (iv) Pragmatic equivalence (receiver-oriented, equivalence of effect); (v) Formal equivalence (including aesthetic and poetic features) (Chesterman,
1998, p. 23).
Yet, Chesterman (1998) criticizes the abovemantioned taxonomic approach, claiming that
some kinds of equivalence need to be appropriately defined. And, in terms of
dynamic/pragmatic equivalence of effect "it is not clear whether 'effect' can be defined and
232
measured at all, let alone how this might be done; nor is it clear whether we can determine
the recipients on whom some effect might be measured; or what the relation should be
between actual effect and another's intended effect; and so on" (p. 23) [Emphasis in
original].
Along these lines, Fawcett (2001) criticizes the theory of dynamic equivalence introduced
by Eugene Nida, claiming that it is "nothing less than a sociolinguistics of translation. By
focusing the translation process on the target-text receiver, who differs from the source-text
receiver in language, culture, world knowledge and text expectations in the same way that a
northern blue collar worker differs from a southern stockbroker compatriot" (p. 121).
Moving on to the third approach, i.e. the relativist view, Chesterman (1998) indicates that
the idea of identity assumption have been rejected altogether along with the concept of
equivalence in numerous recent contributions to translation theory. He elaborates, "[f]or
Snell-Hornby (1988), for instance, equivalence is no more than an illusion" (p. 24).
Away from taxonomies of equivalence in translation theory, Chesterman (1998)
investigates taxonomies of equivalence in contrastive analysis by elaborating on the seven
types proposed by Krzeszowski (1990)24, namely: statistical equivalence, translation
equivalence, system equivalence, semanto-syntactic equivalence, rule equivalence,
substantive equivalence, and pragmatic equivalence (pp. 31-35). Chesterman comes up
with the fact that there is a similarity between Krzeszowski's kinds of equivalence and
those of translation theory, and both fields (contrastive analysis and translation theory)
"are talking about the same phenomena in different words" (p. 37).
24 Cited in Chesterrman (1998)
233
In short, Chesterman (1998) indicates that "equivalence-as-identity [absolute equivalence]
is an exception, often […] impossible" (p. 57). Such a conclusion echoes that of Ivir
(1996) who considers equivalence as a "relative and not absolute, […] it emerges from
the context of situation as defined by the interplay of (many different factors) and has no
existence outside the context, and in particular it is not stipulated in advance by an
algorithm for the conversion of linguistic units of L1 into linguistic units of L2". (Ivir,
1996, p. 155 as cited in House, 2001, p. 247).
Relevant to the study at hand is the notion of functional-pragmatic equivalence adopted
by House (1977, 1981, 1997 and 2001), which has very much in common with Nida's
(1964) dynamic equivalence and Koller's (1979) fourth type of equivalence, i.e. pragmatic
equivalence.
3.4.4 Theory of sense (Interpretive Approach to Translation)
This theory was initially developed in the late 1960s by a number of researchers of the
Paris School who were studying "conference interpreting in real situations, with
particular emphasis on the mental and cognitive processes involved" (Salama-Carr,
2001, p. 112). Relying on their own experience in such fields as psychology,
neuropsychology and linguistics, the Paris School scholars concentrate on the process
of translation, and "particularly on the nature of meaning as sense – as oppose to
linguistic or verbal meaning – and the nature of ambiguities" (Salama-Carr, 2001, pp.
112-113) [Emphasis in original]. Danica Seleskovitch is considered as the leading
scholar of the Paris School. Other scholars, however, include M. Lederer, F. Herbulot,
J. Delisle and M. Pergnier (Salama-Carr, 2001). Being an experienced professional
234
conference interpreter, Seleskovitch (1977)25 developed the theory of sense and
distinguished between "linguistic meaning and non-verbal sense, where non-verbal
sense is defined in relation to a translation process which consists of three stages:
interpretation or exegesis of discourse, de-verbalization, and reformulation" (Salama-
Carr, 2001, p. 112) [Emphasis in original].
According to this theory, sense is composed of both implicitness and explicitness,
where the former means "what the writer or speaker intends to say or mean" (Salama-
Carr, 2001, p. 113), while the later means "what is actually said or written" (Salama-
Carr, 2001, p. 113). Having said that, the full understanding of sense "depends on the
existence of a sufficient level of shared knowledge between interlocutors, without
which the confrontation between text and cognitive structures does not lead to the
emergence of sense" (Salama-Carr, 2001, p. 113). It is crucial to say that cognitive
structures in this respect include both cognitive baggage and cognitive context, i.e. "real
word knowledge, […] and the knowledge acquired through the specific and immediate
reading of the text to be translated or interpreted" (Salama-Carr, 2001, p. 113).
Ambiguity, according to this theory, means "a direct result of lack of relevant cognitive
'complements' to verbal meaning" (Salama-Carr, 2001, p. 113). It is, as further
explained by Salama-Carr (2001):
The possibility of multiple interpretation [that] arises in situations in which only the surface or verbal meaning of the text is available and the translator does not have at his/her disposal all the cognitive elements and complementary information needed to extract sense (p. 113).
25 Cited in Salama-Carr (2001)
235
A more detailed version of this approach was developed by the Canadian scholar Jean
Delsile (1980, 1988 and 1993)26, who "focuses on the intellectual process involved in
translation, the cognitive process of interlingual transfer, and stresses of the non-verbal
stage of conceptualization" (Salama-Carr, 2001, p. 113). Translation in Delsile's view is
"a heuristic process of intelligent discourse analysis" (Salama-Carr, 2001, p. 113). It
involves three stages, namely: comprehension, reformulation and verification (Salama-
Carr, 2001, p. 113). The first stage of translation, according to Delsile, "requires
decoding the source-text linguistic signs with reference to the language system […] and
defining the conceptual content of an utterance by drawing on the referential context in
which it is embedded" (Salama-Carr, 2001, p. 113). Whereas the second stage "involves
reverbalizing the concepts of the source utterance by means of the signifiers of another
language" (Salama-Carr, 2001, p. 113). While the third stage of translation "can be
described as a process of back-translation which allows the translator to apply a
qualitative analysis of selected solutions and equivalents. Its purpose is to confirm the
accuracy of the final translation" (Salama-Carr, 2001, pp. 113-114).
What makes this theory so relevant to the topic of translating IEPVs into Arabic is the
fact that it is the 'non-verbal sense', not the mere linguistic meaning, of any given IEPV
that has to be taken into account when rendering it into Arabic.
Targeting the 'non-verbal sense' will be considered as a key factor when analysing the
data, which will be collected from the subjects of this study to assess the quality of their
translation. This is driven by the fact that the abovementioned polysemous nature of
IEPVs along with their informal use in every day English renders their linguistic
26 Cited in Salama-Carr (2001)
236
meaning redundant. Non-verbal sense is, then, deemed appropriate for the discussion of
functional-pragmatic equivalence in focus for these highly productive, metaphorical and
complex expressions.
In order to achieve the required functional-pragmatic equivalence of any IEPV,
translators have to appreciate what a given speaker/writer intends to say rather than
what he or she is actually saying.
In analysing the data of this study, targeting the mere linguistic meaning by subjects
will be classified as incorrect translation as it will be considered, to use House's (1977)
terms, as a dimensional mismatch and in turn as a covertly erroneous error.
3.4.5 Theory of speech acts
This theory was first introduced by Austin (1962) in his book How to do Things with
Words and developed by Searle (1969) in his book Speech Acts: An Essay in the
Philosophy of Language. Austin (1975) defines speech acts as "[…] the total situation in
which the utterance is issued" (p. 52). He distinguishes between two types of utterances,
namely: constative and performative utterances. The constative utterances are statements
that may be judged true or false (p. 3), while the performative utterances, on the contrary,
cannot be judged true or false (pp. 4-7). He recapitulates that most utterances are
performative in nature, that is, "[…] the issuing of the utterances is the performing of an
action – it is not normally thought of as just saying something" (pp. 6-7), hence, "[…] in
saying something, we do something" (p. 91). In addition, Austin characterises three acts
of statements: 1) locutionary acts, which denote the act of doing something in the "full
237
normal sense" (p. 94). In other words, it is "roughly equivalent to uttering a certain
sentence with a certain sense and reference, which again is roughly equivalent to
‘meaning´ in the traditional sense" (p. 109); 2) illocutionary acts, which signify "[…]
performance of an act in saying something as opposed to performance of an act of saying
something" (pp. 99-100) [Emphasis in original], for instance "informing, ordering,
warning, undertaking, & c., i.e. utterances which have a certain (conventional) force" (p.
109); and 3) perlocutionary acts, which indicates "what we bring about or achieve by
saying something, such as convincing, persuading, deterring, and even, say, surprising or
misleading" (p. 109) [Emphasis in original].
Further, Hatim (2001) defines speech acts as "the acts we perform when, for example, we
make a complaint or a request, apologize or pay someone a compliment" (p. 179). Speech
acts, on the other hand, vary as to frequency from one culture to another, yet the
"common ones will include ask, refuse, praise, describe, excuse, [and] explain while rarer
ones are commiserate, condemn, [and] blaspheme" (James, 1980, p. 119) [Emphasis in
original].
Following Searle, Bell (1991) indicates that speech acts consist of two parts, being:
(a) Propositional content: the conceptual content; the nucleus; what the act is about; what is referred to; the ideational macrofunction realized as a preposition; the literal meaning (also locutionary act/meaning); the semantic sense of the act. (b) Illocutionary force: the communicative value the speaker intends the act to have; the function it is intended to serve; the intentionality of the text. Mirroring this there is, inevitably, the value the hearer puts on the act; the perlocutionary force; part of the acceptability of the text (p. 174) [Emphasis in original]. �����
Thus, "a speech act is a combination of three simultaneous acts: a locutionary act,
which is the utterance itself, an illocutionary act, which is the communicative act, the
238
intended meaning behind the utterance, and the perlocutionary act, which is the reaction
the utterance produce on the listener" (Hale, 2004, p. 6).
Speech acts theory "was developed primarily for the analysis of spoken language"
(Fawcett, 2001, p. 124), and then became "the central focus of pragmatic analysis"
(Hale, 1996, p. 62). Hatim (2001) indicates that "[t]he pragmatic analysis of speech acts
sees all utterances in terms of the dual functions of 'stating' and 'doing things', of having
a meaning and a force" (p. 179). Along these lines, Austin's (1962) three aspects of
utterance 'locution', 'illocution', and 'perlocution' have been explained by Hatim as
'sense', 'force', and 'effect' respectively (p. 179).
The illocutionary force of an utterance, House (1977) elaborates, "is to be differentiated
from the propositional content, i.e. the semantic information that an utterance contains"
(p. 27) [Emphasis in original]. Such grammatical features as word order, mood of the
verb, stress, intonation, or the presence of performative verbs, may often indicate the
illocutionary force of an utterance. Yet "[i]n actual speech situation, it is, however, the
context which makes unambiguously clear what the illocutionary force of an utterance
is " (p. 27).
Taking pragmatic meaning or illocutionary force into consideration is of great
importance for translation, since it is concerned with instances of acts of speech (House,
1977, p. 27). House recapitulates this crucial point as follows:
In effect, translation operates not with sentences but with utterances, i.e. units of discourse characterized by their use-value in communication. In translation, it is always necessary to aim at equivalence of pragmatic meaning, if necessary at the expense of semantic equivalence. Pragmatic meaning thus overrides semantic meaning. We may therefore consider a translation to be
239
primarily a pragmatic reconstruction of its source text (p. 28) [Emphasis in original].
Hence, translating an utterance literally means matching the locutionary act only, but not
the illocutionary and perlocutionay acts (Hale, 1996, p. 63).
The notion of speech acts is, to a great extent, relevant to the issue of translating IEPVs
into Arabic. The relevance of the notion is threefold: 1) the common use of IEPVs is
more prevalent in spoken English, which entails employing them in many different kinds
of speech acts. The fact remains, however, that written and spoken forms of IEPVs have
to be looked at within their communicative contexts in order to determine their intended
communicative values; 2) focusing on the locutionary/semantic meanings rather than the
illocutionary/pragmatic meanings when IEPVs are translated into Arabic would result in
providing unintended meanings of given utterances; and 3) Bearing in mind that many
IEPVs are polysemous in nature, in that they may occur in many different meanings
according to the contexts in which they are used (see 2.5.2 and 2.8.2 above).
It may well be useful to say, at this point, that the notion of 'conversational maxims',
also known as the 'co-operative principles', is quite pertinent to the theory of speech acts
(Baker 1992, p. 259), and in turn needs to be taken into consideration.
These maxims were first proposed by Grice (1967) (James 1980, p. 128; Bell 1991, p.
181; Baker 1992, p. 259). They are as follows:
1) Quantity: Be as informative as is required but no more than that – avoid redundancy. 2) Quality: Say only what you believe to be true or what you have evidence for. 3) Relevance: Be to the point. 4) Manner: Be clear and succinct: avoid obscurity (James 1980, p. 128).
240
What makes these maxims so important and different from, say, grammatical rules,
according to James (1980), is that speakers almost always flout them and intend hearers
to notice flouts and draw conclusions. Thus, "[w]hen hearers notice these infringements
they continue to assume that the speaker is making infringements for a good reason.
These conclusions are referred to by Grice as conversational implicatures" (p. 128)
[Emphasis in original]. Hence, the concept of implicature, Fawcett (2001) writes, "is
based on the assumption that conversation is guided by a set of principles such as: be
polite, do not say more or less than you have to, and so on. When one of the principles
is violated, something is implied above and beyond the normal routines of
conversation" (p. 124).
The knowledge of conversational maxims and conversational implicatures, according to
Fawcett (2001), should constitute part of the translator's competence since "[…]
different languages will apply the principles in different ways in different situations" (p.
124).
What makes the theory of conversational maxims and conversational implicatures
relevant to the topic at hand is that they assist in the reception of idiomaticity of IEPVs.
Such a notion will be considered when the responses of the subjects of the study will be
analysed. In communication, different languages may flout or violate different maxims
according to their stylistic, idiomatic, cultural and linguistic norm. IEPVs have double
meanings, namely, literal/non idiomatic and metaphorical/idiomatic meaning. In other
words, they have direct and indirect meanings. Violation of maxims is about
indirectness, and translators have to appreciate the idiomatic/indirect meaning of a
241
given EPV if they are to achieve its functional-pragmatic equivalence. To take only one
example, the IEPV to sex up violates two maxims, namely, the maxim of quantity, as
the speaker/writer is not making their contribution as informative as required, and the
maxim of relevance. Hence this newly coined IEPV, which emerged in the 1990s in the
context of the war on Iraq and political corruption, implies a journalistic criticism
related to the fabrication of motivated evidence by some Western countries to attack
Iraq. Therefore, delivering its literal/direct meaning in translation will not convey the
intended implicature. Committing translational pitfalls of this kind will be seen as a
dimensional mismatch and in turn will be classified as a covertly erroneous error.
3.4.6 Communicative Competence
Developed originally by Hymes (1971)27, the notion of communicative competence "sees
the translator as a social being and considers his/her competence as a receiver and
producer of texts" (Mason, 2001, p. 31).
Hymes (1971) defines the communicative competence as: "the knowledge and ability
possessed by the translator which permits him/her to create communicative acts –
discourse – which are not only (and not necessarily) grammatical but … socially
appropriate" (p. 23 as cited in Bell, 1991, p. 42).
Such a knowledge has been divided by Johnson and Whitlock (1987) into five distinct
kinds, namely: "target language (TL) knowledge; text-type knowledge; source language
(SL) knowledge; subject area ('real-world') knowledge; and contrastive knowledge" (p.
137 as cited in Bell, 1991, p. 36).
27 Cited in Mason (2001)
242
Bell (1991, p. 36) adds to the above "the decoding skills of reading and encoding skills
of writing". Further, Bell (1991) makes the point that translators must know three
things:
(a) how propositions are structured (semantic knowledge), (b) how clauses can be synthesized to carry propositional content and analysed to retrieve the content embedded in them (syntactic knowledge), and (c) how the clause can be realized as information-bearing text and the text decomposed into the clause (pragmatic knowledge). Lack of knowledge or control in any of the three cases would mean that the translator could not translate (pp. 36-37).
On the other hand, Canale (1983 as cited in Mason, 2001, p. 31) proposes four-part
classification for communicative competence: 1) Grammatical competence; 2)
Sociolinguistic competence; 3) Discourse competence; and 4) Strategic competence.
The first one means "knowledge of the rules of the code, including vocabulary and
word-formation pronunciation/spelling and sentence structure" (Bell, 1991, p. 41). It
entails, in the translator's case "passive command of one and active command of
another language system, in the sense of possessing the knowledge and skill required
to understand and express accurately the literal meaning of utterances" (Mason, 2001,
p. 31). The second classification means "knowledge of and ability to produce and
understand utterances appropriately in context" (Bell, 1991, p. 41). Discourse
competence, however, means "the translator's ability to perceive and produce
cohesive and coherent text in different genres and discourses" (Mason, 2001, p. 31)
(cf. Bell, 1991; Hatim & Mason, 1990). Whereas the strategic competence means "the
mastery of communication strategies which may be used to improve communication
or to compensate for breakdowns" (Bell, 1991, p. 41).
Bell (1991) asserts that "the translator must possess linguistic competence in both
languages and communicative competence in both cultures" (p. 42) [Italics in
original].
243
Using such proposals about translator competence has constituted the foundation
stone upon which Bell (1991) developed his model of translation (Campbell, 1998, p.
4).
Moreover, translation quality assessment approach, Campbell (1998) writes, can be
taken as a perspective from which the issue of translation competence can be
addressed. In spite of the fact that the textual product is the core and the key feature of
translation quality assessment and the individual translator is backgrounded, "[t]he
superficial relevance [of translation quality assessment] to translation competence is
that the quality of a translated text is a reflection of the translator's competence"
(Campbell, 1998, p. 8).
Along these lines, translation competence as it has been characterised by Bell (1991)
"is variable from individual to individual and is, in principle at least, measurable
against agreed objective criteria" (p. 14).
Given this and since my intention is to compare the performance of Arabic
professional translators with that of Arabic translation students, it is therefore
inevitable to include a parameter which can make such a comparison systematic,
practical and, most importantly, theoretically grounded.
244
3.5 A linguistic contrastive analysis model for the analysis and translation of IEPVs into Arabic
Having outlined the major influential approaches of contrastive analysis along with
the pertinent notions, it is time now to set up a linguistic contrastive
analysis model for the analysis and translation of IEPVs into Arabic.
��
The aim of proposing the model is driven by three reasons: 1) to furnish a theoretical
foundation and set the ground for what is to follow; 2) to establish criteria upon which
the forthcoming translation tests can be devised; and 3) to create a yardstick by which
the quality of the translation of the subjects can be analysed, compared, measured and
evaluated.
Given the fact that "[…] models are complementary and often overlap and conflict"
(Hermans, 2001, p. 155), and the fact that any linguistic model has to be built on
existing models and theories (Chakhachiro, 1997, p. 113), in what follows, I will
develop a workable eclectic linguistic model based on the abovementioned models
and theories highlighting elements and parameters which are relevant to my topic.
To begin with, it is plausible to announce that there is, for the best of my knowledge
and research, no linguistic model that has been proposed so far for the analysis and
translation of IEPVs into Arabic. Given this, I am trying to devise a generic approach
in order to uncover those notions that may be used as a model for analysing and
translating IEPVs into Arabic. My contribution is to look scientifically into the
analysis and also into the translation of IEPVs into Arabic, and in turn to look into a
model that can be used for both. Yet, it is quite important to indicate here that due to
the fact that IEPVs, as it has been proven in Chapter Two, are highly productive in
245
nature and a tremendous number of them have been already established and stated in
general and specialized dictionaries, a qualitative rather than quantitative contrastive
analysis is carried out in this study.
I strongly agree with Fawcett (2001) on his claim that "[w]ord and phrase level
taxonomies, even where they are context-sensitive, are inadequate for dealing with all
the problems faced by translators" (p. 123). Hence, the scope of analysis has been
broadened by such researchers as Hatim and Mason (1990, 1997), Bell (1991) and
Baker (1992) to comprise "the TEXT LINGUISTICS level of register analysis (tenor,
mode, domain), DISCOURSE ANALYSIS (thematic structure, coherence, cohesion)
and PRAGMATIC analysis (speech acts, Gricean principles, language and text
functions)" (Fawcett, 2001, p.123) [Emphasis in original].
Discourse analysis, according to Hatim (2001), has been used in different ways to
indicate that it means different things to different people since it was first introduced
by Zelling Harris in 1952. But "the study of language beyond the level of the sentence
may in fact be just about the only thing that unites a broad array of disparate
approaches" (p. 67). Campbell (1998), however, indicates that text linguistics,
discourse analysis and the study of genre are, in fact, all the same in the sense that
they all mean organization of language above the level of sentence.
With this point in mind, my model for the analysis and translation of IEPVs into
Arabic will draw on the following pertinent and relevant parameters: context of
situation/register (field, mode and tenor); speech acts (locutionary and illocutionary
acts); covertly/overtly erroneous errors; functional-pragmatic equivalence and
translation communicative competence.
246
As a result of the above review of models and notions, one can come up with a
conclusion that most of the relevant parameters and pertinent elements to the topic at
hand are covered in House's A model for Translation Quality Assessment (1977, 1981,
1997, and 2001). House's model is quite comprehensive in the sense that it brings
together the most appropriate notions to my topic, i.e. macrolinguistics (text and
discourse analysis), context of situation (situational dimensions), speech acts,
pragmatics, overtly erroneous errors, covertly erroneous errors, and above all the
model's ultimate goal of the functional-pragmatic equivalence. However, it stops short
of including the pertinent notion of translation communicative competence.
Therefore, the model for the analysis and translation of IEPVs into Arabic will be
mainly based on House's model, but it will also draw on the theory of communicative
competence. The model is outlined in what follows:
247
Analysis and Translation Model
Figure 3.1 A model for the analysis and translation of IEPVs into Arabic
My main concern in this model is to see whether or not the Arabic functional-pragmatic
equivalence of IEPVs is achieved. Hence, each utterance, as a linguistic unit embedded
in a certain type of contextual situation, will be scrutinized from two perspectives. Such
perspectives constitute the key parameters of the model, namely: context of
situation/register (mode, field and tenor) and speech acts (locutionary, illocutionary and
perlocutionary acts). As far as the first parameter (register) is concerned, IEPVs cannot
be understood, analysed and translated without taking into account their context of
situation or, to use House's term, situational dimensions. The issue of formality and
Speech acts (locutionary,
illocutionary and perlocutionary
acts )
Functional-pragmatic
equivalence
Covertly/overtly erroneous errors
Context of situation/Register
(Mode-field-tenor)
Translation communicative
competence
248
informality of IEPVs constitutes the cornerstone in this regard. As has been previously
pointed out in Chapter Two, IEPVs are mainly used informally in everyday spoken
English. But they also appear in formal documents and used formally in such contexts
as politics, academic, religion, legal, and literature (see 2.5.5 above). Therefore, such
register variations need to be kept in check when translating IEPVs into Arabic.
With regard to the second parameter (speech acts), as it has been outlined above (see
3.4.4), the polysemous nature of IEPVs and their typical use in everyday spoken
English require translators to target their illocutionary/pragmatic meanings rather than
locutionary/semantic meanings if they are to deliver their functional-pragmatic
equivalents.
As for, the parameter of overtly/covertly erroneous errors, introduced and implemented
by House (1977, 1981, 1997 and 2001), mismatches or errors made by the subjects of
the study will be divided into two types: overtly and covertly erroneous errors. Such a
process of division will help not only in pinpointing the reasons behind the translational
pitfalls of IEPVs but also in evaluating the subjects' translation communicative
competence from their performance, so as to highlight the areas in which they have a
shortage of knowledge and/or skill. Furthermore, I believe that, in order to deliver the
functional-pragmatic equivalents of IEPVs, translators have to pay a great deal of
attention to these two types of errors in order to avoid them. While covertly erroneous
errors are typically caused by the dimensional mismatches, i.e. the failure to take such
parameters as mode, field, tenor and illocutionary act into consideration when
translating IEPVs into Arabic, the idiomaticity of EPVs plays a significant role in
249
making the overtly erroneous errors. Such an idiomatic nature makes it hard for
translators to capture the denotative meanings of IEPVs.
Finally, with regard to the last component of the model, i.e. translation communicative
competence, by which I mean theoretical as well as practical knowledge of translators, I
will exploit this component as a final goal to compare the inputs of the subjects of the
study (Arabic professional translators and Arab students of translation). As it has been
diagrammatically placed in the above model, all the relevant parameters have to be
taken into account when examining the translation communicative competence of the
subject, since all of such parameters have something to do with the translator's
knowledge, ability and awareness in that missing or ignoring any parameter would
mean a given subject has no, or a shortage of, theoretical/practical knowledge, and
hence, a lack of translation communicative competence.
3.6 Conclusion
This Chapter was primarily intended to serve as a link between the previous theoretical
part of the thesis and the forthcoming practical part of it. In order to establish a theoretical
ground for the empirical research, a review of the main and influential approaches of
contrastive analysis was conducted. Then a scientific and workable model for analysis
and translation of IEPVs into Arabic was devised. The model is designed to be used as a
yardstick against which the adequacy and inadequacy of the translation of the subjects of
the study will be measured and evaluated.
250
The discrepancy in achieving the accurate functional-pragmatic equivalents and in the
level of translation communicative competence amongst Arabic professional translators
and Arabic translation students will be clearly manifested in the forthcoming
experimental part of the study. The next Chapter, however, will be devoted to the research
methodology of the study, where such points as research questions, research design, and
data collection will be attended to.
251
CHAPTER FOUR
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.1 Introduction
As it has been previously mentioned, the primary objective of this study is to investigate
the difficulties encountered by Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation
students when tackling the phenomenon of IEPVs, and to propose a number of
recommendations based on the results of the study. In the present Chapter the
methodology employed in this study to conduct the investigation will be outlined by
elaborating on the research design, participants, data collection and data analysis.
4.2 Research design
4.2.1 Research questions
The previous theoretical part of the thesis was dedicated to answer the following
significant questions:
1) What is the notion of idioms and idiomaticity in both English and Arabic?
2) What are the syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic criteria of IEPVs?
3) Are there structures in Arabic similar to that of the IEPVs?
4) What are the similarities and dissimilarities between idiomatic PVs in English
and Arabic?
5) What are the difficulties of learning IEPVs by non-native speakers of English
in general and by Arab learners of English in particular?
252
6) To what extent have English and Arabic lexicographers been successful in
covering, explaining and providing the appropriate equivalents for IEPVs in
their general and specialized dictionaries? And what are the gaps that need to be
closed in this respect?
7) To what extent the methods and materials employed by English and Arabic
pedagogues can help in solving the learning, teaching and translating difficulties
of IEPVs? And what are the gaps that need to be bridged in this difficult area of
pedagogy?
8) How has the phenomenon of IEPVs been dealt with in translation studies?
In the following practical part of this study, however, translation tests were carried out to
pinpoint the translational errors made by Arabic professional translators and Arabic
translation students, and to identify the types of difficulties they encountered when
tackling the problematic features of IEPVs to suggest a range of recommendations for
Arabic professional translators, Arabic lexicographers, and Arabic pedagogues.
The translation tests were designed to address the following pertinent pragmatic, semantic
and syntactic research questions:
1) To what extent were Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation
students successful in providing the Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents of
IEPVs?
2) To what extent does the issue of complex idioms pose a difficulty for
Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students, when
translating IEPVs into Arabic?
253
3) Do syntactic forms of IEPVs pose difficulty to Arabic professional translators
and Arabic translation students when dealing with IEPVs?
4) To what extent do the derivational forms of IEPVs affect the process of
translating them into Arabic?
5) It is well known that English is a very productive in coining IEPVs. Many of
them pop up on a regular basis. Such newly coined PVs are occasionally
emerging in both written and spoken modes of the English language where there
are no readily Arabic equivalents for them. Hence, how did the Arabic subjects
deal with such a phenomenon?
6) What are the types of translational errors made by Arabic professional
translators and Arabic translation students?
7) Is there any difference as to translation communicative competence between
the two groups of Arabic subjects: The professional Arabic translators and
Arabic translation students? If so, what are the major areas in which their
competence varies?
4.3 Participants
The translation tests were distributed to two groups of participants, namely: Arabic
professional translators and Arabic translation students.
4.3.1 Arabic professional translators
Twelve Arabic professional translators responded to the translation tests. For the sake of
confidentiality, the participants were given code numbers (P1, P2, P3, etc.) to refer to
254
them throughout the study. Six (50%) of the professional subjects were females while the
other six (50%) were males. The professional subjects were aged between 33 and 67
years, and their period of living in Australia varied between 4 months and 36 years. Ten
(83.3%) of the professional subjects are accredited by NAATI (National Accreditation
Authority for Translators and Interpreters) level three, while the other two (16.6%) had
their accreditations from overseas (one from Iraq and the other one from Morocco). All
professional subjects (100%) participated in this study use Arabic as a language spoken at
home. All of them (100%) have academic qualifications in translation and/or interpreting,
two (16.6%) have BAs in translation and interpreting, two (16.6%) have Graduate
Diplomas in translation and interpreting, five (41.6%) have MAs in translation and
interpreting, one (8.3%) has an MA in translation and linguistics and two (16.6%) have
PhDs in translation and linguistics.
Arabic professional translators participated in this study varied in their years of
experience in the field of translation. Table 4.1 below outlines their experience:
Subjects code number
P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12
Years of experience
49 4 4 15 7 9 6 4 7 10 6 7
Table 4.1 Years of experience of the Arabic professional translators
From the above Table and the academic qualifications details previously sketched out one
can say that Arabic professional translators participated in the study have the relevant
academic qualifications along with good translation practical experience. All of them are
well qualified, accredited, and have actively worked in the field of translation for at least
255
four years. In other words, they have the required theoretical knowledge and practical
experience to insure the validity of the data collected from them.
4.3.2 Arabic translation students
Twelve Arabic translation students in the College of Arts, School of Humanities and
Languages at the University of Western Sydney responded to the translation tests. Half of
them (50%) were undergraduate students doing the BA in translation and interpreting
programs (two (16.6%) in year one, two (16.6%) in year two and two (16.6%) in year
three). The other half (50%) of the Arabic translation students were postgraduate students.
Two (16.6%) of them were doing Graduate diploma in translation and interpreting, two
(16.6%) were doing MA in translation and interpreting and two (16.6%) were doing PhD
in translation and linguistics.
Six (50%) of the Arabic translation students subjects were females while the other six
(50%) were males.
The Arabic translation students were aged between 19 and 40 years, and their period of
living in Australia varied between 7 months and 17 years. Most of the Arabic translation
students (91.6%) that participated in this study use Arabic as a language spoken at home.
One (8.3%) subject only mixes Arabic with Turkish at home. All of the postgraduate
students (50%) have academic qualifications. Two (16.6%) have MA in translation and
interpreting. One (8.3%) has MA in applied linguistics, two (16.6%) have BA of Arts,
and one (8.3%) has Graduate certificate in translation and interpreting.
256
For the sake of confidentiality participants were given code numbers (S1, S2, S3, etc.) to
refer to them throughout the study.
The aim of targeting Arabic translation students is to experiment their knowledge and
ability of translating IEPVs into Arabic from their performance by analysing their
responses to the translation tests, and to compare such knowledge and ability with the
professional translators' knowledge and ability. Such a comparison will enable the present
researcher to explore the level of translation communicative competence each group has.
It will also cast light on types of difficulties encountered by each group when handling
IEPVs. The ultimate aim is to propose a number of recommendations to professional
translators, lexicographers and pedagogues based on the results of the empirical research.
4. 4 Data collection
4.4.1 Instrument
In order to achieve the principal objectives of this thesis, and to address the crucial
research questions outlined above, translation tests of one hundred items were designed as
an empirical instrument and distributed to the two abovementioned groups of Arabic
subjects. Each item of the translation tests contains an IEPV.
A variety of text types has been exploited in these translation tests. The purpose was to
challenge the subjects' abilities in terms of appreciating the register variations and
illocutionary acts when translating IEPVs into Arabic. Short contextual information was
given between square brackets after each item (see Appendix 1). The text types used in
257
the translation tests along with the items represent each text type are outlined in the
following Table:
Items Text types 1,6,7,10, 18, 23, 47, 48, 59, 80, 91, 95, 98
Fiction novel - Conversation between friends
2, 97 Fiction novel – Conversation between school teachers 5,13, 60, 77 Fiction novel - Conversation between classmates 94 Fiction novel - Conversation at a restaurant 8, 31, 51, 66, 68, 96 Fiction novel - Conversation between a wife and husband 9,12, 14, 20, 24, 25, 55, 67, 70
Fiction novel - Conversation between fellow-workers
90 Fiction novel - Conversation between a daughter and her parents
11, 26, 28, 65 Fiction novel - Conversation between parents 85 Fiction novel - Conversation between a patient and a
doctor 16, 21, 52 Fiction novel - Conversation between neighbours 84 Fiction novel - Conversation between shoppers 74 Fiction novel - Conversation between two sisters 72 Fiction novel - Advice from parents to their children 71 Fiction novel - Advice from a school teacher to a student 56 Fiction novel - Conversation between townsfolk 29 Fiction novel - Conversation between commuters 30 Fiction novel - Advice from a factory manager to his
deputy 32 Fiction novel - Advice from friend to friend 41 Fiction novel - Announcement at a meeting 38 Fiction novel - Conversation between a father and his son 36 Fiction novel - Mother's advice to her daughter 22 Fiction novel - Recount on a job interview 37 Email - Advice from a businessman to his colleague 33, 58 Biography 34 Letter – union leader to members 35 Horoscope 3, 39, 53, 75, 79, 89 News report 42, 64, 93 News headline 4, 40, 54, 81, 83, 100 Diary entry 99 Medical brochure 92 An internet advertisement for mobile phone screen savers 15 Article on an Art exhibition 88 Article on stress 19 Art review - article 86 Police interview 76 A cross examination in court 17 Parent-teacher interview
258
82 An advertisement for a weight loss product 73 Advice from a doctor to parents in an article in a coffee
table magazine 69 Article on death penalty 63 Transcription of a public speech in the Opening of Law
Term Dinner 62 Background feature article - Conversation between
political figures 61 Article on Ash Wednesday 43 Question in a chat-room 50, 78 Joke 44 Notice on a shop 87 A note written on a flower stall 57 Advice in an article on well-being in a coffee table
magazine 49 Advice from a trade union official to a trader 46 Disclaimer - Medical brochure 27 Women’s magazine article
Table 4.2 Text types used in the translation tests and the items representing each type
As it can be noticed in the above Table, the data of the translation tests were taken from
many resources, they include: news articles, editorials, ads, court verdicts and judgments,
news satellite channels, internet web sites, textbooks, brochures, official letters,
magazine, jokes, among others.
Due to the complexity of the topic at hand, and for the sake of reliability and validity of
the empirical instrument, the items of the translation tests were grouped in a way that they
covered all the syntactic and semantic categories of IEPVs to see how each category is
dealt with by each groups of the subject. The categories are: complex idioms, syntactic
forms (verb + adverb, verb + preposition, and verb + adverb + preposition), derivational
forms (adjectives with suffix –en, adjectives without suffix –en, PVs derived from nouns
and nouns derived from PVs) and productive (newly coined) PVs. The categories and
subcategories of IEPVs covered in the translation tests and the items representing each
category/subcategory are presented in the following Table:
259
Categories Subcategories Items Complex idioms 1-25 Syntactic forms
Verb + adverb 73, 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89 and 90
Verb + preposition 76, 83 and 87
Verb + adverb + preposition 57- 72 Derivational forms
Adjectives with suffix –en 47- 51 Adjectives without suffix –en 52- 56 PVs derived from nouns 26-35
Nouns derived from PVs 36 – 46 Productive (newly coined) PVs
91-100
Table 4.3 Categories/subcategories covered in the translation tests and the items representing each category
Since the study is all about translation not interpreting, I advised my subjects to adhere to
acceptable written Arabic and avoid delivering colloquial equivalents for IEPVs itemised
in the translation tests (see Appendix 1).
4.4.2 Data collection procedures
As for Arabic professional translators, a list of their names, addresses and contact details
was made by referring to the translators' directory on the website of NAATI (National
Accreditation Authority for Translators and Interpreters). Initial phone contacts, then,
were made with them to brief them of the main aims of the study and to invite them to
take part in it. The contacted professionals were reassured that their names would not
appear in the study as they would be given code numbers for the sake of confidentiality.
They were also reassured that the information collected from them would be safely stored
at the University of Western Sydney. Such information would not be used by anyone
260
except the investigator and it will be destroyed after five years. In addition, they were
informed that they have the right to withdraw from the test at any time without having to
give the investigator any reason.
Interest and willingness were expressed by twelve Arabic professional translators. Copies
of the translation tests were posted to the interested subjects along with postage paid and
self-addressed envelopes to return the answered/unanswered materials.
With regard to Arabic translation students, subjects from the first group (undergraduate
students) were the researcher's students undertaking the Arabic Advanced Language and
Grammar Unit at the University of Western Sydney. They were approached directly by
the researcher in their class, given a brief account of the study and its main objectives and
invited to participate in it. All their questions were clearly answered. Interest and
willingness were expressed by six of them. Copies of the translation tests were handed to
the interested students along with postage paid and self-addressed envelopes to return the
answered/unanswered materials.
Subjects from the second group (postgraduate students) were the chair supervisor's
students undertaking the Graduate diploma in translation and interpreting, the MA in
translation and interpreting or translation and linguistics programs. The researcher with
the help of the chair supervisor arranged a visit to their class. A quick presentation was
given to highlight the main idea of the study and its primary goals. Interest and
willingness were expressed by four of them. Copies of the translation tests were
distributed to the interested postgraduate students along with postage paid and self-
addressed envelopes to return the answered/unanswered materials.
261
The other two subjects (PhD students) were the researcher's close friends. They were
approached directly by the researcher, given a brief account of the study and its main
aims and invited to take part in it. All their questions were manifestly answered. Interest
and willingness were expressed by both of them. Copies of the translation tests were
handed out along with postage paid and self-addressed envelopes to return the
answered/unanswered materials.
As was done with the Arabic professional translators, Arabic translation students were
reassured that they would be given code numbers for the sake of confidentiality so that
their names would not appear in the study. The information collected from them would be
safely stored at the University of Western Sydney and would not be used by anyone
except the researcher, who will destroy it after five years. They also were informed that
they have the right to withdraw from the test at any time without having to give the
researcher any reason.
4.5 Data analysis
In order to address the abovementioned research questions, the analysis and translation
model devised in Chapter Three (see 3.5 above) was utilised so as to produce my
suggested translations to items of the translation tests (see Appendix 2).
To ensure the validity and reliability of my suggested translations, the supervisory panel
of the thesis, who are specialists in the fields of translation, the Arabic language and
linguistics, have carefully checked them and gave me the appropriate feedback as to the
probability of the translations, based on the model discussed and adopted in Chapter
262
Three. However, allowance will be given for other possibilities of acceptable translations
if they meet the criteria adopted in the proposed model.
Such a model-based translation has been used as a yardstick to measure, analyse and
discuss the answers of the subjects participated in the study. Accordingly, the answers
were categorized as correct and incorrect answers. The incorrect ones (translational
errors) were divided into two types, namely: "overtly erroneous errors" and "covertly
erroneous errors". On the other hand, the correct answers were divided into two types,
being: "very good" and "satisfactory" answers. By "very good" I mean the correct
answers that meet all the criteria previously set up to achieve functional-pragmatic
equivalents of the listed IEPVs. Whereas, "satisfactory" means acceptable answers,
which may be semantically understood yet they have less currency. In other words, I set
up a model-based scale to determine the level of correctness of each answer. On the one
hand I have "very good" answers, which are current and extremely acceptable
translations of the listed IEPVs, and on the other hand I have "satisfactory" answers,
which are still acceptable and used but not as current as the previous ones. Illustrative
examples of satisfactory answers are listed in the following Table:
Item IEPVs Satisfactory answers 33 He was shopping around رX/9ازن�اX1آ7ن� 35 Don't let anyone egg you on *8[1ا�[Zع�أ[}MS 40 while I had to make do with her
cast-offs 5)3*FY3+�7اOY\23\�%_Fأن�أآ�%)E�73آ7ن�.-\
47 The party brightened up رX^Q+ا�¥OF\ا 88 because he doesn't tidy up 7ء-o91,{|�اM��P9 91 I'm partied out 2ت_Q+ة�ا,� {*)�x/�0آ96 I'm really shopped out *8�7PقأXYF+�2/,ه��0/�5ا
Table 4.4 Examples of satisfactory answers (for suggested Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents see Appendix 2)
263
Satisfactory answers also include answers which have been reduced to sense, and, as a
result, lost the required features of the idiomatic expressions. That is, they delivered
meanings but they stopped short from delivering the crucial factor of idiomaticity.
Examples and discussion of such answers will be given in the next Chapter (see
5.3.6.1.3 below).
I have to make a disclaimer here that I also classified as "satisfactory" the answers that
have delivered the correct translation of the listed IEPVs but contained some
grammatical, spelling and even semantic mistakes in the surrounding words i.e. in the
part of the sentence that does not contain the PV. Thus, I accepted them as correct
answers on the basis of the possibility as discussing spelling, grammatical and semantic
mistakes of the surrounding words is not my concern in this study. Examples of such
answers are listed in the following Table:
Item IEPVs Mistakes in the surrounding words 32 He won't cotton on �4ا9/,�أو�ادراآ�O8�p)E7درا�w�0'1�4+ 54 My hopes of a better job damped
down اw�K/9]�{)]د
73 to use up sugar 51ار,Q+ات�ا,*Y+ا�اXw,Q-+ Table 4.5 Examples of mistakes in the surrounding words (for suggested Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents see Appendix 2) It is worth mentioning that when a given subject provided more than one answer, I have
endeavoured to choose the correct and the most appropriate one in my data analysis.
Back translation, however, is provided when it is required.
A concluding statement will be made to account for the level of translation
communicative competence of each group based on the theory of communicative
competence (knowledge and ability) introduced by Hymes (1971) and improved by such
scholars as Bell (1991) and Campbell (1998). The aim of such a statement is to compare
264
the competence of the two groups judged by their performance (their answers) so as to
highlight the areas in which they have a shortage of knowledge and/or ability. This
statement will help in proposing recommendations in Chapter Six.
Finally, taking up the issue of translating IEPVs into Arabic from many perspectives
required me to deal with the data in a qualitative rather than in a quantitative manner. A
number of illustrative examples will be discussed to highlight the matches and
mismatches of functional-pragmatic equivalents of the listed IEPVs.
In the next Chapter, the results of the translation tests will be collected, classified,
analysed, interpreted and carefully compared against the parameters set up above to
explore the types of difficulties encountered by the Arabic subjects when tackling the
phenomenon of IEPVs, and the reasons behind such difficulties.
265
CHAPTER FIVE
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS OF THE TRANSLATION TESTS
5.1 Introduction
This Chapter is of two distinct sections. The first section is devoted to present a general
overview of the results of the translation tests conducted by the two groups contributed in
the present study: the Arabic professional translators' group and the Arabic translation
students' group.
The second section of this Chapter, however, concerns itself with analysing and
discussing the subjects' performance in light of the second set of the research questions
previously outlined in Chapter One (see 1.3 above).
5.2 General overview of the results of the translation tests
The results of the translation tests of the two groups involved will be generally presented
in this section. As has been mentioned, the translation tests conducted by the two groups
participated in this study was designed to address the abovementioned seven research
questions. For the tests to be more reliable and valid, the questions were set up in a way
that they covered all the syntactic and semantic categories of EPVs, namely: complex
idioms (henceforth c), syntactic forms (henceforth s), derivational forms (henceforth d)
and productive (newly coined) EPVs (henceforth p). The syntactic forms (s) are of three
subcategories, being: verb + adverb (henceforth sva), verb + preposition (henceforth svp)
266
and verb + adverb + preposition (henceforth svap). The derivational forms (d), in
addition, are of four subcategories, they are: adjectives with suffix –en (henceforth den),
adjectives without suffix –en (henceforth de), PVs derived from nouns (henceforth dpn)
and nouns derived from PVs (henceforth dnp). The categories of IEPVs covered in the
translation tests are presented in the following Table:
Complex idioms (c) Syntactic forms (s)
Verb + adverb (sva) Verb + preposition (svp)
Verb + adverb + preposition (svap) Derivational forms (d)
Adjectives with suffix –en (den) Adjectives without suffix –en (de) PVs derived from nouns (dpn)
Nouns derived from PVs (dnp) Productive PVs (p) Table 5.1 Categories of IEPVs covered in the translation tests
The general overview of results of the translation tests of the two groups involved is
presented below.
5.2.1 General overview of the results of the Arabic professional translators' group
Table 5.2 below summarizes the average of the correct answers (i.e. both the very good
and the satisfactory answers) of the Arabic professional translators' group. For full details
see Appendix 4.
267
Total average 58% c 50.66% s 63.48%
sva 59.44% svp 33.33%
svap 72.91% d 65.32%
den 71.66% de 75% dpn 58.33%
dnp 64.39% p 32.50%
Table 5.2 Average of the correct answers of the Arabic professional translators' group
As it is outlined in the above Table, the results of the translation tests showed that the
total average of the correct answers of the Arabic professional translators' group (58%)
was low, which clearly indicates the fact that the IEPVs listed in the translation tests
posed great deal of difficulties to this group of the subjects in that they failed to score a
higher average of correct answers.
In order to measure the amount of variation within the answers of participants, standard
deviation statistics have been carried out. Such a means of statistic casts more light on the
subjects' behavior and it will be a quite useful tool in elaborating on the translation
communicative competence in the forthcoming section 5.3.7.
Table 5.3 below summarizes the standard deviation of the Arabic professional translators'
group. For full details see Appendix 4.
Total standard deviation 0.275812 c 0.256748 s 0.281305 d 0.24216 p 0.27902
Table 5.3 Standard deviation of the Arabic professional translators' group
268
Interestingly, the results of the Arabic professional translators' group showed that the
total standard deviation (0.275812) demonstrates that the amount of variation within the
answers of the subjects of this group was a bit high or at least higher than that of the
other group as we will see later on.
Since the principal aim of this study is to investigate the difficulties encountered by
Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students when tackling the
phenomenon of IEPVs, it is quite essential to determine the level of difficulty each
category of the IEPVs poses the Arabic professional translators and the Arabic
translation students participated in the study. In order to do so, I ranked the items
according to their percentages of the correct answers in a descending order (see
Appendix 5). The aim of conducting such a statistical method is not only to measure the
level of difficulty each category of the tests poses but also to investigate the reasons
behind such difficulties. And, eventually, this method aims to better falicitate
addressing the research questions in the forthcoming section.
Table 5.4 below outlines the ranking of the categories and subcategories according to
the averages of the correct answers of the Arabic professional translators' group:
Category Subcategory Average of correct p 32.50% c 50.66% s 63.48%
svp 33.33% sva 59.44%
svap 72.91% d 65.32%
dpn 58.33% dnp 64.39% den 71.66
de 75% Table 5.4 Ranking the categories and their subcategories - Arabic professional translators' group
269
5.2.2 General overview of the results of the Arabic translation students' group
Table 5.5 below summarizes the average of the correct answers (i.e. both the very good
and the satisfactory answers) of the Arabic translation students' group. For full details see
Appendix 4.
Total average 48% c 47% s 52.20%
sva 60% svp 27.77%
svap 49.47% d 51.88%
den 56.66% de 58.33%
dpn 51.66%
dnp 46.97% p 24.16% Table 5.5 Average of the correct answers of the Arabic translation students' group
The results of the translation tests outlined in the above Table showed that the total
average of the correct answers of the Arabic translation students' group (48%) was also
low.
Apart from the average of the correct answers, the statistics of standard deviation of the
Arabic translation students' group are presented in Table 5.3 below. For full details see
Appendix 4.
Total standard deviation 0.24421 c 0.208157 s 0.25891 d 0.198036 p 0.297737
Table 5.6 Standard deviation of the Arabic translation students' group
270
As it can be observed from the Table above, the amount of variation within the answers
of the subjects of this group was rather low, which demonstrates that they were more
consistent in their answers than the Arabic professional translators' group (see Table 5.3
above).
Table 5.7 below sketches the ranking of the categories and subcategories according to
the averages of the correct answers of the Arabic translation students' group:
Category Subcategory Average of correct p 24.16% c 47% d 51.88%
dnp 46.97% dpn 51.66% den 56.66%
de 58. 33% s 52.20%
svp 27.77% svap 49.47%
sva 60% Table 5.7 Ranking the categories and their subcategories – Arabic translation students' group
5.2.3 Summary and comparison
Before proceeding to the next section, it is quite fruitful to draw a conclusion here in
terms of the difficulties categories of IEPVs posed to the whole group of subjects
involved in this study (i.e. both the Arabic professional translators' group and the Arabic
translation students' group).
Table 5.8 below summarizes the differences of the averages of the correct answers (the
very good and the satisfactory answers) of both groups:
271
Category Subcategory Professionals Students Difference Total average 58% 48% 10% p 32.50% 24.16% 8.33% c 50.66% 47% 3.67% d 65.32% 51.88% 13.44%
dpn 58.33% 51.66% 6.67% dnp 64.39% 49.97% 17.42% den 71.66% 56.66% 15%
de 75% 58.33% 16.67% s 63.48% 52.20% 11.29%
sva 59.44% 60% -0.55% svap 72.91% 49.47% 23.44%
svp 33.33% 27.77% 5.55% Table 5.8 Differences of the averages of the correct answers
From the abovementioned overview of the results and the differences of the averages of
the correct answers outlined in the Table above one can come up with the following
general findings:
1. Despite the differences between the two groups, the overall performance of the
subjects in general was poor. Such a poor performance demonstrates the fact that the
IEPVs listed in the translation tests posed a great deal of difficulty to both groups of
the subjects.
2. The overall performance of the Arabic professional translators' group, who scored an
average of 58%, is better than that of the Arabic translation students' group, who
scored an average of 48%, with a difference of 10% between the two groups (Table
5.8).
3. The (p) category constituted the most difficult category for both groups (Table 5.8).
4. The (c) category constituted the second hardest category for both groups (Table 5.8).
272
5. The (s) category constitutes the easiest category for the Arabic translation students'
group, while the (d) category represents the easiest category for the Arabic
professional translators' group (Table 5.8).
6. In spite of the abovementioned similarity in terms of ranking the levels of the
difficulty each category posed, the results revealed that the Arabic professional
translators' group performed much better in all of the categories and most of the
subcategories. (Table 5.8).
7. With the categories that are easier (s and d), the Arabic professional translators' group
performed much better than the Arabic translation students' group, while in the
categories that are more difficult (p and c) there was no major difference. This seems
to suggest that training and experience gained by professional translators improved
their performance only in the more teachable and learnable (s and d) categories, but
not in (p and c) categories where the sense of stylistic competence is required (Table
5.8).
8. The ranking of the subcategories of the (s) and (d) categories, according to their levels
of the difficulty, was not the same for the two groups of the study (Table 5.8).
9. Unlike the Arabic professional translators' group, who found the subcategory (dpn)
the most difficult subcategory of the (d) category (58.33%), the results of the Arabic
translation students' group showed that the subcategory (dnp) was the hardest
subcategory of the (d) category (46.97%) (Table 5.8).
273
10. The (de) subcategory constituted the easiest subcategory of the (d) category for both
groups involved. However, the Arabic professional translators' group, who scored an
average of 75%, did much better than the Arabic professional translators' group, who
scored an average of 58.33%, with a difference of 16.67% between the two groups
(Table 5.8).
11. While the (den) subcategory constituted the second easiest for the two groups, the
Arabic professional translators' group, who scored an average of 71.66%, performed
much better than the Arabic translation students' group, who scored an average of
56.66%, with a difference of 15% between the two groups (Table 5.8).
12. Surprisingly, with the (sva) subcategory, the Arabic translation students' group, who
scored an average of 60%, performed slightly better than the Arabic professional
translators' group, who scored an average of 59.44%, with a difference of -0.55%
between the two groups (Table 5.8).
13. With the (svap) subcategory the Arabic professional translators' group, who scored an
average of 72.91%, performed much better than the Arabic translation students' group
who scored an average of 49.47%, with a difference of 23.44% between the two
groups (Table 5.8).
14. The results showed that there were more variations within the answers of Arabic
professional translators' group than that of the Arabic translation students' group with
a difference of 0.031602 between the two groups in the standard derivations (see
Table 5.9 below).
274
15. With the (p) category the Arabic professional translators were more consistent in their
answers. Their standard deviations were lower than those of the Arabic translation
students with a difference of -0.01872 between the two groups (see Table 5.9 below).
16. With the (s) category there was no major difference between the two groups in terms
of the standard deviations. The difference was only 0.022395 between the two groups
(see Table 5.9 below).
17. With (c) and (d) categories the Arabic translation students were more consistent in
their answers than the Arabic professional translators, where the latter had higher
standard deviations than the former. With (c) category the difference was 0.048591,
and with (d) category the difference was 0.044124 (see Table 5.9 below).
Category Professionals Students Difference Total 0.275812 0.24421 0.031602
c 0.256748 0.208157 0.048591 s 0.281305 0.25891 0.022395 d 0.24216 0.198036 0.044124 p 0.27902 0.297737 -0.01872
Table 5.9 Differences of the standard deviation
5.3 Subjects' performance in light of the research questions
Having given a general overview of the results of the translation tests, it is time now to
explore critical features of such results. In this section I will investigate the performance
of each group of the subjects in relation to the seven research question outlined above.
The aim here is to approach the data collected from the participants from several
different perspectives in an attempt to answer these pertinent research questions.
275
5.3.1 Subjects' performance in light of the first research question
In this subsection the following research question will be tackled:
To what extent were Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation
students successful in providing the Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents of
IEPVs?
I will start with the performance of the Arabic professional translators' group. Table
5.10 below summarizes the performance of this group. For full details of the raw data
see Appendix 3.
Correct Incorrect Subject Code
Number Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
Unanswered
P1 50 14 26 10 0 P2 27 19 46 8 0 P3 32 12 48 8 0 P4 43 13 36 8 0 P5 36 15 36 13 0 P6 38 17 37 7 1 P7 44 15 33 7 1 P8 52 14 26 8 0 P9 40 18 36 6 0 P10 49 14 32 4 1 P11 63 14 18 5 0 P12 29 25 37 6 3
Table 5.10 Summary of the performance of the Arabic professional translators' group
As it has been indicated above, the results of the Arabic professional translators' group
showed that the total average of the correct answers (i.e. both the very good and the
satisfactory answers) of this group was 58% (see Table 5.2 above). Given the fact that
only the answers that labeled as "very good" are considered the perfect functional-
276
pragmatic equivalents of the listed IEPVs, the total average of the answers of the Arabic
professional translators' group that achieved the functional-pragmatic equivalents (very
good answers) was 43.35%. Such answers represented the right matches of the listed
IEPVs according to the criteria set up in the model devised in Chapter Three (see 3.5
above). The other answers, however, were either satisfactory (15.39%) which are not an
ideal translation, overtly erroneous errors (33%), covertly erroneous errors (8%), or
unanswered (0.58%) (see Table 5.11 below).
Category Very good Satisfactory Overtly erroneous
errors
Covertly erroneous
errors
unanswered
Total Average
43.35% 15.39% 33% 8% 0.58%
p 19.17% 13.33% 56% 10% 1.67% c 34% 17% 39% 10% 0% s 49% 14% 29% 8% 0%
sva 52% 7.22% 32% 8.89% 0% svap 51% 22% 24% 3% 1% svp 27.77% 5.55% 39% 27.78% 0% d 47.85% 17.47% 29% 5% 1% de 48.33% 26.66% 22% 3% 0% den 58% 13% 27% 2% 0% dnp 53.03% 11.36% 30% 4.54% 2% dpn 36.66% 21.66% 34% 7% 0%
Table 5.11 Summary of results of the Arabic professional translators' group
The results of Arabic translation students' group, on the other hand, showed that they
also varied considerably in achieving the functional-pragmatic equivalents of the listed
IEPVs. The highest percentage was 50% scored by subject number four (S4) and the
lowest percentage was 9% scored by subject number one (S1) (see Table 5.12 below.
For full details of the raw data see Appendix 3).
277
Subject Code
Number
Correct Incorrect Unanswered
Very good Satisfactory Overtly erroneous
error
Covertly erroneous
error
S1 9 14 73 4 0 S2 18 11 35 2 34 S3 41 24 32 2 1 S4 50 14 30 6 0 S5 39 19 40 2 0 S6 23 20 31 7 19 S7 27 21 43 6 3 S8 24 20 52 4 0 S9 20 15 49 4 12 S10 46 15 34 5 0 S11 27 14 47 12 0 S12 41 23 33 3 0
Table 5.12 Summary of the performance of the Arabic translation students' group
As previously outlined, the total average of the correct answers of the Arabic
translation students' group was 48% (see Table 5.4 above). Yet, the total average of the
answer of the Arabic translation students' group that achieved the functional-pragmatic
equivalents (very good answers) was only 32%. Such answers characterized the right
matches of the listed IEPVs in line with the criteria set up in the model devised in
Chapter Three (see 3.5 above). The other answers, however, were either satisfactory
(16%), overtly erroneous errors (40%), covertly erroneous errors (6%) or unanswered
(6%) (see Table 5.13 below).
Category Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous errors
Covertly erroneous
errors
unanswered
Total Average
32% 16% 40% 6% 6%
p 12% 12% 55% 5.83% 15% c 19% 28% 48% 3% 2% s 39% 13.23% 37% 6.62% 5%
sva 49% 11.11% 32% 5% 3% svap 34% 16% 39.58% 5% 6.25% svp 17% 11.11% 42% 25% 6%
278
d 36% 16% 38% 3% 7% de 38% 18% 32% 8% 3% den 37% 20% 31.66% 3.33% 8.33% dnp 37.88% 9% 42.42% 1% 10% dpn 32.50% 19.16% 39% 4% 5%
Table 5.13 Summary of results of the Arabic translation students' group
5.3.1.1 Summary and comparison
Table 5.14 below summarizes the differences in achieving functional-pragmatic
equivalents of both groups:
Category Percentage of
functional-pragmatic
equivalent / Professionals
Percentage of
functional-pragmatic equivalent/ Students
Difference
Total Average
43.35% 32% 11.35%
p 19.17% 12% 7.17% c 34% 19% 15% d 47.85% 36% 11.58% s 49% 39% 10%
Table 5.14 Differences in achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents
Table 5.15 below summarizes the differences of the average of the unanswered items of
both groups:
Category Percentage of
unanswered items /
Professionals
Percentage of
unanswered items /
Students
Difference
Total Average
0.58% 6% -5.42%
p 1.67% 15% -13.33% c 0% 2% -2% s 0% 5% -5%
sva 0% 3% -3%
279
svap 1% 6.25% -5.25% svp 0% 6% -6% d 1% 7% -6% de 0% 3% -3% den 0% 8.33% -8.33% dnp 2% 10% -8% dpn 0% 5% -5%
Table 5.15 Differences of the average of the unanswered items
From the facts outlined in the Tables above, one can deduce that the overall
achievement of functional-pragmatic equivalents of the listed IEPVs was quite
demanding for both groups who have scored low percentages of very good answers.
However, the Arabic professional translators' group performed better in achieving
functional-pragmatic equivalents (43.35%) than the Arabic translation students' group
(32%) with a difference of 11.35 between the two groups (Table 5.14). In addition, the
Arabic professional translators answered the vast majority of the translation tests in that
the total average of their unanswered questions was pretty low (0.58%), while the
Arabic translation students left 69 (6%) items unanswered, with a difference of -5.42%
between the two groups (Table 5.15).
Moreover, the Arabic professional translators' group made less overtly erroneous errors
(the total average was 33%. See Table 5.11 above) than the Arabic translation students
(the total average was 40%. See Table 5.13 above) with a difference of -7% between the
two groups. The former group, however, made slightly more covertly erroneous errors
(the total average was 8%. See Table 5.11 above) than the later group (the total average
was 6%. See Table 5.13 above) with a difference of 2% between the two groups. Such a
minor difference in the total average of the covertly erroneous errors can be justified by
the major difference in the total average of the unanswered items stated above. That is,
280
if we take the major difference in the total average of the unanswered items into our
consideration, the 2% difference of the average of the covertly erroneous errors will not
mean that the Arabic professional translators are less competent than the Arabic
translation students. They are in fact, to use Campbell's (1998) terms, risk takers, while
the Arabic translation students are more or less prudent.
Finally, the differences between the two groups in terms of achieving the functional-
pragmatic equivalents are not significant and this probably means that the training and
experience the professionals gained did not assist much in translating IEPVs into
Arabic. Given the difference between them and the students who presumably lack that
amount of training and experience was very small (11.35%).
5.3.2 Subjects' performance in light of the second research question
In this subsection the following research question will be dealt with:
To what extent does the issue of complex idioms pose a difficulty for Arabic
professional translators and Arabic translation students when translating
IEPVs into Arabic?
It is well known that tackling English idioms in general cause translators a great deal of
difficulties. Therefore, it is an inescapable fact that dealing with complex idioms, where
IEPVs constitute integral parts of such expressions, involves more difficulties due to the
doubly complex nature of such idioms. The question of complex idioms has been
tackled by a number of lexicographers in such dictionaries as: Longman Dictionary of
281
Phrasal Verbs, Oxford Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs, Cambridge International
Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and the Oxford Phrasal Verbs Dictionary for Learners of
English (see 2.8.2 above).
The results of the present study revealed that complex idioms (c) category (represented
by items 1-25 of the translation tests) pose a large amount of difficulty to both Arabic
professional translators' group and Arabic translation students' group. This category
constituted the second hardest one for both groups (see Tables 5.4 and 5.7 above). The
percentage of functional-pragmatic equivalents (very good answers) of this category
scored by the Arabic professional translators' group was 34%, while that scored by the
Arabic translation students' was 19%, with a difference of 15% between the two groups
(see Table 5.14 above).
Table 5.16 below presents the differences in achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents
(very good answers) of the (c) category:
Question Number
Category
Percentage of functional-pragmatic
equivalent / Professionals
Percentage of functional-pragmatic equivalent/ Students
Difference
1 c 0% 0% 0%
2 c 50% 41.66% 8.34% 3 c 50% 8.33% 41.67% 4 c 16.66% 25% -8.34% 5 c 41.66% 25% 16.66% 6 c 16.66% 8.33% 8.33% 7 c 25% 25% 0% 8 c 83.33% 50% 33.33% 9 c 16.66% 8.33% 8.33% 10 c 33.33% 25% 8.33% 11 c 50% 16.66% 33.34% 12 c 41.66% 8.33% 33.33%
282
13 c 8.33% 0% 8.33% 14 c 41.66% 8.33% 33.33% 15 c 16.66% 25% -8.34% 16 c 16.66% 16.66% 0% 17 c 33.33% 8.33% 25.00% 18 c 75% 25% 50% 19 c 16.66% 25% -8.34% 20 c 58.33% 16.66% 41.67% 21 c 25% 33.33% -8.33% 22 c 25% 41.66% -16.66% 23 c 58.33% 0% 58.33% 24 c 25% 16.66% 8.34% 25 c 16.66% 25% -8.34%
Table 5.16 Differences in achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents of the Complex idioms category
It must be pointed out that the items of this category, as it can be observed from the
above Table, varied in terms of their difficulties. Item one, for instance, constituted the
most difficult one for the subjects surveyed where no one was able to achieve its
functional-pragmatic equivalent. While item eight of this category was relatively easy
as ten (83.33%) of the twelve Arabic professional translators and six (50%) of the
Arabic translation students surveyed were able to answer it perfectly (see Table 5.16
above).
In spite of the fact that the performance of the Arabic professional translators' group in
general was slightly better than that of the Arabic translation students, there were six
items in which the performance of the latter was better than that of the former. And
there were two items in which the performance of both groups was equal (see table 5.16
above). This entails a haphazard strategy by both groups to dealing with IEPVs and
highlights the need for a systematic approach to translating these devices.
In addition, the Arabic professional translators' group abandoned only one item of the (c)
category, leaving it unanswered (the total average of the unanswered items was 0%),
283
whereas the Arabic translation students left six items unanswered where the total average
of the unanswered items was 2% with a difference of -2% between the two groups (see
Table 5.15 above).
��Lastly, the Arabic professional translators performed much better than the Arabic
translation students with regard to the (c) category with a difference of 15% between the
two groups (see Table 5.14 above).
5.3.3 Subjects' performance in light of the third research question
In this subsection the following research question will be addressed:
Do syntactic forms of IEPVs pose difficulty to Arabic professional translators
and Arabic translation students when dealing with IEPVs?
As has been previously mentioned (see 2.4.2 above) IEPVs are of three syntactic forms,
namely: verb + adverb, verb + preposition and verb + adverb + preposition.
The results of the Arabic professional translators surveyed in this study showed that the
average of the correct answers (both the very good and the satisfactory answers) of the
items containing IEPVs of the verb + adverb form (sva) was 59.44%, while the average of
correct answers of the items containing IEPVs of the verb + preposition form (svp) was
33.33%. And the average of correct answers of the items containing IEPVs of the verb +
adverb + preposition form (svap) was 72.91%. Such percentages obviously indicate that
for the Arabic professional translators surveyed the (svp) form constitutes the most
284
difficult grammatical form, followed by the (sva) form and (svap) form (see Tables 5.2
and 5.4 above).
On the other hand, the results of Arabic translation students surveyed showed that the
average of the correct answers of the (sva) form was 60%, while the average of correct
answers of the (svp) form was 27.77% and the average of correct answers of the (svap)
form was 49. 47%. Therefore, for the Arabic translation students' group, the (svp) form
constitutes the most difficult grammatical form followed by the (svap) form and (sva)
form (see Tables 5.5 and 5.7 above).
Table 5.17 below summarizes the differences in achieving functional-pragmatic
equivalents (the very good answers) of the syntactic forms (s) category:
Category
Average of functional-pragmatic
equivalent / Professionals
Average of functional-pragmatic equivalent/ Students
Difference
s 49% 39% 10% svp 27.77% 17% 10.77% svap 51% 34% 17% sva 52% 49% 3%
Table 5.17 Differences in achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents of the syntactic forms (s) category
The Table above indicates the following: firstly, even though the (s) category, as a whole,
constituted the easiest category for both groups (see Table 5.14 above), the subjects
encountered considerable difficulties when tackling the items containing such forms
judging from the low averages of the functional-pragmatic equivalents achieved (see
Table 5.17 above).
285
Secondly, the difference in achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents of the
subcategories was relatively large in the (svp) and (svap) subcategories, whilst it was
minimal in the (sva) subcategory (see Table 5.17 above).
Thirdly, the (svp) subcategory represented the most difficult one for both groups followed
by the (svap) subcategory, which constituted the second hardest one and the (sva)
subcategory, which was the easiest subcategory for both groups.
Fourthly, the Arabic professional translators' group left only one item of the (s) category
unanswered (the total average of the unanswered was 0%), whereas the Arabic translation
students left nineteen items unanswered, where the total average of the unanswered was
5% with a difference of -5% between the two groups (see Table 5.15 above).
Finally, overall, the Arabic professional translators perform better than the Arabic
translation students with regard to this category with a difference of 10% between the two
groups (see Table 5.14 above).
5.3.4 Subjects' performance in light of the fourth research question
The phenomenon of derivation in general and derivation of IEPVs in particular has been
exclusively accounted for in Chapter Two (see 2.7.3 above). In this subsection the
following research question will be dealt with:
To what extent do the derivational forms of IEPVs affect the process of
translating them into Arabic?
286
The results of the Arabic professional translators' group revealed that the average of the
correct answers (i.e. both the very good and the satisfactory answers) of the items
containing IEPVs derived from adjectives with suffix –en (den) was 71.66%. The
average of the correct answers of the items containing IEPVs derived from adjectives
without suffix -en (de) was 75%. The average of the correct answers of the items
containing IEPVs derived from nouns (dpn) was 58.33%. The average of the correct
answers of the items containing nouns derived from IEPVs (dnp) was 64.39%. Such
percentages indicate that for the Arabic professional translators surveyed the (dpn) form
constituted the most difficult derivational form, followed by the (dnp) from, (den) form
and (de) form.
On the other hand, the results of the Arabic translation students surveyed revealed that
the average of the correct answers of the (den) was 56.66%. The average of the correct
answers of the (de) was 52%. The average of the (dpn) was 51.66%. The average of the
correct answers of the (dnp) was 46.97%. Such percentages indicate that for the Arabic
translation students surveyed the (dnp) form constituted the most difficult derivational
form, followed by the (dpn) form, (den) form and (de) form.
Moving on to the functional-pragmatic equivalents (the very good answers) achieved by
each group in respect to this category, Table 5.18 below summarizes the differences in
achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents of the derivational forms category:
287
Category
Average of functional-pragmatic
equivalent / Professionals
Average of functional-pragmatic equivalent/ Students
Difference
d 47.85% 36% 11.83% de 48.33% 38% 10% den 58% 37% 21% dnp 53.03% 37.88% 15.157% dpn 36.66% 32.50% 4.17%
Table 5.18 Differences of achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents of the Derivational forms category
The results revealed that the (dpn) subcategory represented the most difficult one for both
the Arabic professional translators (with the average of 36.66%) and the Arabic
translation students (with the average of 32.50%) with the difference of 4.17% between
the two groups (see Table 5.18 above). Whereas the two groups differ in terms of the
easiest subcategory as it was the (den) for the Arabic professional translators 58% and the
(de) for the Arabic translation students 38% (see Table 5.18 above).
However, in spite of the previously stated fact that this category posed less difficulty than
(p) and (c) categories for both groups (see Table 5.14 above), it does not mean that it
caused no problems for the subjects surveyed. They seem to have encountered a great
deal of difficulties when translating the items containing the derivational forms of IEPVs
and this is particularly evident from the low averages of the functional-pragmatic
equivalents achieved (see Table 5.18 above). The main reason behind such difficulties, in
my view, is the differences in derivational mechanisms between the English and Arabic
languages (see Chapter Two, section 2.7 above) which made the derivational forms of
IEPVs odd and unusual for the Arabic subjects.
288
As for the unanswered items, the Arabic professional translators' group left only two
items of the (d) category unanswered (the total average of the unanswered was 1%),
whereas the Arabic translation students left sixteen items unanswered, where the total
average of the unanswered was 7% with a difference of -6% between the two groups
(see Table 5.15 above).
The Arabic professional translators clearly perform better than the Arabic translation
students concerning this category with a difference of 11.83% between the two groups
(Table 5.18 above).
5.3.5 Subjects' performance in light of the fifth research question
In this subsection the following research question will be tackled:
It is well known that English is a very productive in coining idiomatic PVs.
Many of them pop up on a regular basis. Such newly coined EPVs are
occasionally emerging in both written and spoken modes of the English
language where there are no readily Arabic equivalents for them. Hence, how
did the Arabic subjects deal with such a phenomenon?
The items of this category (number 91-100 in the translation tests. See Appendix 1)
were carefully selected to insure that they were not listed in any of the published
monolingual or bilingual dictionaries.
289
The results of this study revealed that the (p) category poses a great deal of difficulty to
both the Arabic professional translators' group and Arabic translation students' group. The
category constituted the most difficult category for both groups (see Tables 5.8 and 5.14
above). The results of the Arabic professional translators showed that the average of
correct answers (i.e. both very good and satisfactory answers) of this category was
32.50%. And the results of the Arabic translation students revealed that the average of the
correct answers was 24.61%. With a difference of 8.33% between the two groups (see
Table 5.8 above).
However, the percentage of functional-pragmatic equivalents (the very good answers)
of this category scored by the Arabic professional translators' group was 19.17%, while
that scored by the Arabic translation students was 12%, with a difference of 7.17%
between the two groups (see Table 5.14 above).
Table 5.19 below summarizes the differences in achieving functional-pragmatic
equivalents of the (p) category:
Question Number
Category
Percentage of functional-pragmatic
equivalent / Professionals
Percentage of functional-pragmatic equivalent/ Students
Difference
91 p 8.33% 0% 8.33% 92 p 50% 33.33% 16.67% 93 p 8.33% 0% 8.33% 94 p 25% 16.66% 8.34% 95 p 50% 50% 0% 96 p 25% 16.66% 8.34% 97 p 0% 0% 0% 98 p 0% 0% 0% 99 p 25% 0% 25% 100 p 0% 0% 0%
Table 5.19 Differences in achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents of the Productive PVs category
290
It is crucial to indicate that the items of this category varied as to their difficulties. Items
97, 98 and 100, for instance, constituted the most difficult items for the subjects
surveyed where no one of them was able to achieve their functional-pragmatic
equivalents. While item 95 of this category was more or less easier as six (50%) of the
twelve Arabic professional translators and six (50%) of the Arabic translation students
surveyed were able to answer it perfectly (see Table 5.19 above).
The Arabic professional translators' group left only two items of the (p) category
unanswered (the total average of the unanswered items was 1.67%), whereas the Arabic
translation students left eighteen items unanswered, where the total average of the
unanswered items was 15% with a difference of -13.33% between the two groups (Table
5.15 above).
Moreover, despite the fact that the performance of the Arabic professional translators'
group in general was rather better than that of the Arabic translation students with
regards to this category with a difference of 7.17% between the two groups, the
performance of both groups was extremely poor (Table 5.19 above).
There are two reasons behind such a poor performance of the subjects. Firstly, the
previously mentioned fact (see Chapter Two, section 2.8 above) that the productive
nature of IEPVs makes it harder for lexicographers to have them listed into their
dictionaries. As a result, even the specialized dictionaries are far from being
comprehensive enough in their coverage of such verbs. The gaps left in coverage result
in missing a number of newly coined EPVs, leaving translators with no choice but to
291
work them out individually and intuitively in an attempt to create Arabic functional-
pragmatic equivalents for them, which may or may not be accurate.
Another reason, secondly, is the ineffective and old-fashioned teaching methods and
materials employed by Arab pedagogues in teaching IEPVs. In other words, there are
no practical teaching methods and materials that may assist the Arabic translators and
translation students to acquire the competence to tackle the phenomenon of newly
coined IEPVs. As has been argued in Chapter Two, EPVs are not random combinations
of verbs and particles. There are, however, patterns underlying them. Pedagogues such
as Side (1990), Hannan (1998), Sawyer (2000), and Sansome (2000) are totally
persuaded that EPVs have to be taught by knowing the patterns underlying them so as
to pinpoint the system and the logic by which they work. Arab pedagogues, regrettably,
still believe that EPVs are random combinations of verbs and particles, which must be
memorized by heart (see 2.10.2 above). As a result, they did not try to investigate the
patterns underling EPVs to provide Arabic translators and Arab learners of English with
reliable pedagogical materials and a systematic approach that can help overcome the
dilemma of translating the newly coined IEPVs.
5.3.6 Subjects' performance in light of the sixth research question
In this subsection the data collected from both groups of the subjects will be closely
looked into from one particular perspective, namely: the types of translational errors
made by them. The aim here is to address the following research question:
292
What are the types of translational errors made by Arabic professional
translators and Arabic translation students?
����
As has been earlier pointed out in Chapter Three (see 3.5 above), the model I devised
for analysis and translation of IEPVs into Arabic contains the parameter of
overtly/covertly erroneous errors, introduced and implemented by House (1977, 1981,
1997 and 2001). Accordingly, the mismatches or errors made by the two groups of the
subjects of the study were divided into two types: overtly erroneous errors and covertly
erroneous errors. Such a process of division well helped not only in determining the
reasons behind the translational pitfalls made by the subjects surveyed but also in
evaluating the subjects' translation communicative competence from their performance
(see 5.3.7 below). Moreover, I strongly believe that translators have to take these two
types of errors into consideration in order to avoid them when tackling the phenomenon
of IEPVs.
More details on the overtly erroneous errors and covertly erroneous errors made by both
the Arabic professional translators and the Arabic translation students are detailed
below.
5.3.6.1 Overtly erroneous errors
As presented in Tables 5.11 and 5.13 above, the total average of the overtly erroneous
errors made by the Arabic professional translators was 33% and that made by the
Arabic translation students was 40% with a difference of -7% between the two groups.
293
The idiomaticity of EPVs constitutes the main reason behind the overtly erroneous
errors made by the subjects involved. Such an idiomatic nature played a significant role
in hindering the subjects from obtaining the denotative meanings of the listed IEPVs.
The overtly erroneous errors made by the Arabic professional translators and the Arabic
translation students surveyed in this study were of four types, namely:
5.3.6.1.1 Literal translation
Literal translation or, as it is termed by Newmark (1988), "Translationese", is a word-for-
word translation of a text which "does not produce the appropriate sense" (p. 285).
IEPVs, as argued in Chapter Two (see 2.5.2 above) carry two types of meanings,
literal/non-idiomatic meanings and metaphorical/idiomatic meanings. Their idiomatic
nature (especially the examples utilized in the translation tests given to the subjects of this
study) makes them non-transparent and hard to be understood from their separate parts.
That is, their communicative meanings are utterly different from the total sum of the
meanings of their individual components. Some of the Arabic professional translators and
the Arabic translation students surveyed in this study perceived the listed IEPVs literally
and dealt with the two parts of the combination separately, rather than appreciating their
metaphorical/idiomatic meaning and looking at each combination as one semantic unit.
Illustrative examples of this type of translational errors from the two groups are presented
below:
Item IEPVs Literal translations 58 She always looks up to her parents 7O1[+وا�p+وإ�p)E9ا�p+�73{.�,�إLه%�دا 84 to take in old ladies 0Y+وا�ا+.7س�8%�آ)-,�ا~y�1أن� 47 The party brightened up �K_Q+ه¢¥�اX}\7ء�Rأ�\K*Foا� 87 but they will grow on you in the end ,/9ا�,y��%8�S-)E�X3.1ف�XH
294
83 I ran into my wife /[{`ا%Fو��\�x 68 I'm tied up with something urgent 7ريءWء�%N\��(},/�7P7ريء\أWء�%N\�[-�/�7Pأ� 61 what are you giving up for Lent? ,-('+م�اXU)+�%{*}7ذا�/ 18 will bring him down to earth. ا9رض�p+1.�ل�إ��)*I1 20 he'll come down on you like a ton of
bricks XHف�1.�ل��S-)Eآ�W.7ن�/�0ا+}Xب
28 Why are the children all dolled up? 7ل�آ97`.7م_W9���1�4ا+ 6 You're going to drive me around the
bend! XHف�{�XدXZ�%Pل�ا+3.*}�
7 My eyes popped out xQF_Pا�%PX-E\7ي�.-E�x*�_Pا�\%.-E�7Fw[Z�x*Y}ا� 3 put back the clock راءX)+�5E7Y+1^[�ا 4 I could have bitten my tongue off %P7Y+�x3^w 22 he got down to brass tacks �)3*\م�X�1�73آ7ن�.-\�]wو+'.��و 86 will be taken down ~y�1ف�XH 33 He was shopping around 8,ةXF3+�5واR7ء�ا+3*,و-o9آ7ن�1,ى�ا 79 I've cleaned up my act %8,U}ت�,OW�[w 74 to build up skills S}7راO/7ء�.(+ 91 I'm partied out ,y7ر�8�7%�/'7ن��y�x)_FZا 89 chilling out at the beach �W7N+ا�p)Eا�ا+),د�XP7*1 50 I want to fatten it up as fast as possible XU�+�5اE,Y+7\�7.-3Hه~ا��K*ىأر1]�أن�أ� 93 Latham sexed up Iraq brief 7ر�8%�ا+*,اق(y97/[�اI1�4�1M
Table 5.20 Examples of literal translations (for the suggested Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents see Appendix 2)
In the first example (item 58) in the Table above, the IEPV look up was wrongly
literally translated as p)E9ا p+إ�,�.}. Similarly, in the second example (item 84) the IEPV
take in was translated as �%&8 �~&y�1 where both the verb and the particle were literally
translated into Arabic.
In some examples, however, the first components of the listed IEPVs (the verb) were
literally translated, while the second components (the adverb and/or the preposition)
were overlooked. The verb brightened in the third example (item 47), for instance, was
erroneously translated literally as ¢هX}�¥\7ء�Rأ�\K*Foا� while the particle up was ignored. In
the same way, the first part of the IEPV sex up in the last example (item 93) was
literally translated as �]/7&I1 and the particle up was disregarded. The same is applicable
to the rest of the examples presented in that Table where either the two components of
the IEPVs were taken literally or only the first one while the other one left untranslated.
295
There are several apparent reasons for such distorted translations. Firstly, interference
of the L1 of the subjects (Arabic) with the L2 (English). That is to say, the syntactic
structure of IEPVs is totally odd for the Arabic subjects who are all Arabic native
speakers. As it has been explained in Chapter Two (see 2.6 above), unlike English,
Arabic does not allow proper verbs to collocate with adverbs. And the only type of PVs
in Arabic is that of verb + preposition structure. Therefore, the subjects considered the
literal meaning of the second parts of the listed IEPVs and either translated them as
prepositions or ignored them. Lindstormberg (1991) indicates that "wrong
understanding of preposition is the main source of difficulties that so-called phrasal
verb present to learners of English as a second or foreign language" (p. 47).
Secondly, the deceptive appearance of EPVs in general, Khalaili (1979) writes that they
"look deceptively easy to the foreigners at first sight, but their meanings can be
radically different from what one might expect" (p. 5). Such a deceptive appearance
may tempt translators to provide rushed literal translations without carefully taking into
account the idiomatic nature of this kind of verb.
Thirdly, great deals of IEPVs are not covered by bilingual English-Arabic general and
even specialized dictionaries. This is particularly due to the productive nature of IEPVs
which makes them hard to be captured and listed in dictionaries. This point implies that
the subjects understood or suspected the existence of the IEPVs, but failed to find the
appropriate resources that explain these verbs or provide Arabic equivalents, which
suggests a lack of translation skills.
296
Finally, the decotextualization way of dealing with the IEPVs covered in dictionaries,
especially the bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries which provide out of context,
decontextualized and idealised equivalents for IEPVs listed in them. Such a
decontextualization phenomenon appeared not only in the bilingual English-Arabic
dictionaries but also in the textbooks devoted to teach EPVs to Arab students (see
Chapter Two, section 2.10.2 above) which are, to some extent, to blame for producing
literal translations for IEPVs. Side (1990) makes the point that PVs ought to be learned
in contexts rather than in lists of unrelated words. He labels such an issue as
"contextualization" and elaborates that "single examples [of EPVs] should never be
taught in isolation", therefore, connections always have to "be made in order to
establish their context within the language, to show they are meaningfully idiomatic
rather than meaninglessly random" (pp. 150-151). Moreover, the majority of
researchers (see 2.10 above) advocate the necessity of teaching PVs in context as
presenting them in contexts enhances greatly their learnability and considered far better
than presenting them as unrelated elements.
Along these lines, Newmark (1988) attributes producing a literal translation to two
reasons, being: interference "if the TL [target language] is not the translator's language
of habitual use, or to automatic acceptance of dictionary meanings" (p. 285).
5.3.6.1.2 Mistranslating
Most IEPVs are polysemic, i.e. they have more than one meaning (see 2.5.2 above). To
use the words of McArthur and Atkins (1974), "they have so many shades of meanings"
(p. 5). Some of the Arabic professional translators surveyed in this study were not able
to appreciate such a polysemic nature of the IEPVs listed in the translation tests when
297
rendering them into Arabic. Examples of this type of translational errors from the two
groups are presented below:
Item IEPVs Mistranslations 17 but there are two other students
breathing down his neck �P7Y87.1 / � 7Q1ذو
9 I'm fed up to my back teeth with work
�K3*+�0ا/�,I^F/�7Pا\�K3*+�0ا/�xزه��
11 goes over her head فXأ���L7Q\م�[{U1 21 but he fell down on the job. �)3E�%8�,¢Uw�[�+ 27 I used to wolf my food down so
quickly )-,ةآ.�xأ{.7ول��5E,Y\�%/7*Wآ
36 It's going to be a walk-over ا,UPن�X'1ف�XH 37 It'll be a total wash-out. 7\ا,yن�X'1ف�XH 39 a political stand-off %H7-H7دل�*} 40 while I had to make do with her
cast-offs 7O}2^_\�%_Fأن�أآ
75 to work it out � 7IPJز90 The teacher told me off %.n¢\و 92 Funk up أ\]ل\زود�� 85 passed away �53ا�Zر�p+إ�K�FPا
Table 5.21 Examples of mistranslations (for suggested Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents see Appendix 2)
In the abovementioned examples the IEPVs were mistranslated and their functional-
pragmatic equivalents were mismatched. In the first example (item 17)� ��P7Y&87.1�was the
incorrect translation for the idiomatic expression breathing down his neck because such
a translation did not deliver the complete meaning of this expression, while �5Y87./��P7Y87.1
which not only covered ا+X&*_3ل�ا+o is the correct one for it has the root echoing ���&){3&]1]ة�
the required part of the meaning but also gives an air of idiomaticity to the Arabic
equivalent. The same argument applies to the second example (item 9) where ��,I^&F/�7Pأ
�K3*+�0ا/ was not the right mach of I'm fed up to my back teeth with work as semantically
and pragmatically there is something missing in this translation, that is, the sense of
exaggeration of the boredom. The Arabic fixed expression K-'+ا�%\��_W can be considered
the correct translation where both the denotative meaning and the idiomaticity flavor
298
are delivered. The same argument is applicable to the rest of the examples outlined in
that Table.
The reasons behind producing such mistaken translations are threefold: First, as
mentioned above, the polysemic nature of the IEPVs makes it difficult for the subjects
to choose the appropriate meaning from the variety of shades of meanings given to each
PV. In order to determine the accurate sense, a translator has to appreciate the
situational context in which a given PV is used.
Second, what makes the task of choosing the appropriate meaning more difficult is the
fact that IEPVs are very much confusing in their structure. That is, one proper verb can
collocate with a number of particles to form a range of PVs with many different
meanings. On the other hand, one particle may co-occur with a number of proper verbs
to form a variety of PVs of diverse meanings.
Third, the treatment of the phenomenon of PVs in general and specialized dictionaries
is insufficient. That is to say, in their dealing with PVs, lexicographers either bypass a
great deal of them or provide inadequate definitions for the listed ones (see Chapter
Two, sections 2.8 and 2.9 above).
5.3.6.1.3 Reducing the idioms to sense
This occurred when the subjects may have understood the functional meaning of a
given IEPV in the source language (English) but did not deliver it correctly,
stylistically, into the target language (Arabic). They instead produced a translation in
299
which the denotative meaning is captured but at the expense of the idiomaticity of the
given EPV. Such a type of translational pitfalls was manifested in the subjects' answers
to the complex idioms (c) category. Given the double complexity of these items, their
Arabic equivalents have to be of an idiomatic nature. That is, they have to be translated
by employing APVs, proverbs or fixed expressions, which may require a bit of research
and thinking. Consequently, if there is a one to one Arabic idiom and the translator did
not use it, this means that s/he lacks adequate competence to deal with these kinds of
complex idioms.
Answers of this type of translational pitfalls were considered "satisfactory answers". To
be precise, they are correct as far as they deliver the denotative meanings of the IEPVs.
The reason behind mentioning them here, however, is the fact that the subjects
committing this kind of pitfall have failed to provide the perfect translation (functional-
pragmatic equivalence) of these items. Therefore, it is quite crucial to highlight such a
pitfall in order to raise translators' awareness of maintaining both meaning and style
when translating idiomatic expressions.
Illustrative examples of this type of translational pitfalls are listed in the following
Table:
Item IEPVs Reducing the idioms to sense
3 put back the clock p^/�7/�[-*1 11 goes over her head �7O},1*(��8%�ذاآM\��7�-o�4O_}M 12 I'll have to pull up my socks �[OFان�ا��%)E\Hان�ا�%)EايXw�Kآ�]3IF 23 but I don't know if it will ever get
off the ground. 5�-�Z��(U-Hوع�,N3+أدري�/�7إذا�آ7ن�ه~ا�اM
25 to have it out with him �S+~\م�ا+�-7م�[E��./�|)Wوأ��Zأ{'(�4/*��وأ`7ر%*/\%)3*\�Ky[F+م�ا[E
Table 5.22 Examples of idioms reduced to sense (for suggested Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents see Appendix 2)
300
The translation given to the first example (item 3) in the above Table has the denotative
meaning of the complex idiom at hand, but it lacks the idiomaticity required to achieve
its functional-pragmatic equivalent. To give an air of idiomaticity to this sentence, the
subject has to resort to the Arabic one-to-one equivalent of the item, which is 7رب��E�[-*1
. ا+�5E7Yا+�pا+Xراء
In the second example (item 11) the Arabic fixed expressions �7/&,ور�ا+'&,ام����O.31&,�\&~ه or
seem to be the perfect functional-pragmatic equivalents, which deliver آ&W97,ش�8&%�ا+�8&���5
not only the denotative meaning of the expression but also the idiomatic flavor of it. In
addition, the currency of such equivalents and the frequency of their usage in both
written and spoken Arabic meet our criterion of the middle ground between the classic
and the colloquial Arabic. Such a criterion, as it has been previously explained in
Chapter Two (see 2.6 above), is very much required in translating IEPVs due to the fact
that they are commonly used in spoken and informal written English. The same
argument is valid to the rest of the examples listed in the above Table.
5.3.6.1.3 Breaching of the Arabic language system
House (1977) indicates that overtly erroneous errors mean the non-dimensional
mismatches which include "both mismatches of the denotative meanings of ST and TT
elements and breaches of the target language system" (p. 245). Having covered the
mismatches of the denotative meanings of the IEPVs listed in the translation tests, it is
time to move on to the second kind of the overtly erroneous errors, i.e. the breaches of
the target language (Arabic) system.
301
The data collected from the subjects involved in the present study revealed that some of
them have, to a great extent, breached the Arabic language system by producing
grammatically and/or morphologically incorrect translations.
Examples of this type of translational errors from the two groups are presented in the
following Table:
Item IEPVs Breaches to the Arabic language system 8 he was falling for her 7O\��)*F-H��()w�¢أن 18 will bring him down to earth �\اX`��+�[-*1 2 you've let the cat out of the bag ا¤ن�,Y+7\�xQ\أ 64 Net closes in on £50m robbers 0-w7رY+ا�p)E��(�+إ+�7ء�ا�p)Eا�X8,oأ 96 I'm really shopped out قXYF+�0ا/�S)O/�7Pأ
Table 5.23 Examples of breaches to the Arabic language system (for suggested Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents see Appendix 2) The first example in the above Table (item 8) illustrates a grammatically incorrect
translation. The sentence with the past continuous tense he was falling for her was
mistakenly translated into Arabic by a sentence of future tense �7O\��)*F-H��()w�¢أن (literally:
that his heart will be attached to her). In the second example (item 18), the Arabic
translation provided is incorrect because the wrong usage of the Arabic preposition.
Arabic native speakers would more likely use ��إ+X`�pا\�1*-] .
The third example (item 2) illustrates a morphologically incorrect translation, where the
form of the past tense of the Arabic verb 7ح\ was erroneously spelt as أ\7ح by adding to it
the consonant أ.
The rest of the examples (items 64 and 96) exemplify the wrong usage of the Arabic
verbs. The verb �X8,&oاأ in example 64 was used mistakenly because it delivers the wrong
meaning, which is to monitor, oversee, supervise etc, the correct Arabic verb which can
302
be used in such a context is ا�X87ر&oE���p&) or ��p&)Eا�X'&oأو (meaning: they are about to). The
same argument applies to S)O/�7Pأ in example 96 which has to be �SO./�7Pأ .
5.3.6.2 Covertly erroneous errors
The total average of the covertly erroneous errors made by the Arabic professional
translators was 8% (see Table 5.11 above), whereas the total average of the covertly
erroneous errors made by the Arabic translation students was 6% with a difference of
(2%) between the two groups in favour of students (see Table 5.13 above).
Covertly erroneous errors are typically caused by the dimensional mismatches, i.e. the
failure to take such parameters as field, mode, tenor and illocutionary act into
consideration when translating IEPVs into Arabic. The covertly erroneous errors of the
Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students surveyed in this study
were of five types, namely:
5.3.6.2.1 Wrong Arabic collocation
In his study Arabic Collocations: Implications for Translation, Brashi (2005) elaborates
on semantic and distributional patterns of Arabic collocations. He indicates that Arabic
collocations can be categorized as unique collocations, metaphorical collocations,
idiomatic extensions of collocations, strong collocations, acceptable collocations, weak
collocations and unacceptable collocations. The first three categories, according to
Brashi (2005), represent patterns of meaning, whereas the last four categories represent
the range of frequency. What is concerned us here are the unacceptable Arabic
303
collocations, which are illustrated by Baker (1992) in the Arabic translation ن��XP7&�+ا�,Y&آ
(literally: to break the law) provided to the English collocation break the law, as
opposed to the common Arabic collocation ن��XP7&�+7+��ا&y (literally: to contradict the law)
(cf. Baker, 1992; Brashi, 2005).
As it has been pointed out (see 5.3.6.1.3 above), the subjects may have understood the
functional-pragmatic meanings of IEPVs in the source language (English) but stopped
short from delivering them correctly into the target language (Arabic).
Some IEPVs can be translated into Arabic by APVs, Arabic collocations, Arabic fixed
expressions, Arabic idioms, Arabic proverbs etc. The data collected revealed that most of
the very good answers (at the functional-pragmatic equivalents level) were based on
finding the right Arabic collocation (see Appendix 2).
Yet, translating IEPVs by IAPVs (one to one) was quite rare in the data collected. To give
illustrative examples, the IEPV to calm him down (item 52) was perfectly translated into
Arabic by one of the subjects as ���&.E��&_yأ , and the IEPV put away a big piece of meat
(item 82) was rightly translated into Arabic as p)E�p}أ.
The main reason for the rarity of employing IAPVs when translating IEPVs is the fact
previously arrived at in Chapter Two (see 2.6 above), which is that APVs, unlike EPVs
which are typically used orally and colloquially by everyone in everyday contexts, are far
more formal and habitually used in a high register contexts due to their highly rhetorical
nature, which confines their use to educated people from a certain sector of society and
education.
304
Examples of translations of IEPVs by wrong Arabic collocations from the two groups are
presented below:
Item IEPVs Wrong Arabic collocations 73 to use up sugar ,'Y+2ك�اOFHM 98 dag out ر�وا+3,ح~O+8%�ا 33 He was shopping around �(.+آ7ن�1]وس�ا 5 cut her down to size 7ه[Z�[.E�7O*^1 6 You're going to drive me around the bend! %PX.��,-�}�S¢Pإ 7 My eyes popped out 5Nا+]ه�%.}~yأ 14 has never stopped throwing her weight around 7O},{-Hاض�,*FH�0اEأ\]ا���wXF}�4+ 74 to build up skills S}7راO/ن�X'}�pFZ 85 passed away pOFPا 87 but they will grow on you in the end ,/9�517اOP�%8�S\7IEإ�,-� XHف�{9 I'm fed up to my back teeth with work K3*+7\�%/[w��3yأ�pFZ7رق�G
Table 5.24 Examples of wrong Arabic collocations (for suggested Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents see Appendix 2)
In the abovementioned examples, the IEPVs were translated by wrong Arabic
collocations, hence the mismatch was in their functional-pragmatic equivalents. In the
first example (item 73), the IEPV to use up sugar was translated into Arabic as 2ك�OFHM
�,'Y&+ا (literally: to consume sugar) which is wrong due to the fact that consuming sugar
could take place in a house or anywhere else other than by the human body. The correct
Arabic expression which can be used as a translation to this IEPV in such a context is
,'Y+ق�ا,Q+ (to burn sugar).
In the second example (item 98), the IEPV dag out was erroneously translated into
Arabic as ر�وا+3&,ح���~&O+8&%�ا (literally: in prattle and joyfulness) these two words do not
collocate in the Arabic language. Arabic native speakers would more likely say ا+_&,ح��
should (to be happy and in joy) 1_&,ح�و31&,ح�� Therefore .(happiness and joyfulness) وا+3&,ح�
be used in this instance which is a derivative from the common Arabic collocationا+_,ح��
.(happiness and joyfulness)�وا+3,ح�
305
In the third example (item 33), the IEPV shopping around was inaccurately translated
into Arabic as ���(&.+1&]وس�ا (literally: to step on pulse) Arabic native speakers do not say
I1 (literally: to feel pulse). The same argument is&��ا+.&)��� they instead say 1&]وس�ا+.&)���
applicable to the rest of the examples listed in the above Table.
5.3.6.2.2 Shift of register
It was manifestly explained in Chapter Two that IEPVs are typically employed in
different kinds of discourses (see 2.5.5 above). It was also explained that albeit they are
often used formally in a variety of English written texts, their common use is informal in
everyday spoken English. In order to achieve the functional-pragmatic equivalents of
IEPVs, translators have to consider such a formality/informality variation of register.
Translating informal IEPVs by formal Arabic expressions and vice versa is an
unacceptable register shift which may result in distortion of the intended meaning by
conveying the wrong message (cf. Hale, 1997& 2002).
In order to challenge the subjects' abilities in terms of appreciating the register variations
when rendering IEPVs into Arabic, an array of text types was used in the translation tests,
and short contextual information was provided between square brackets following each
item (see Appendix 1).
The collected data showed that in producing their Arabic translations to the listed IEPVs a
number of the subjects surveyed were fully aware of, and did consider the register
variations in terms of field, mode and tenor in which the listed IEPVs were used, whereas
others have not considered the text type when providing their Arabic translations. They,
306
instead, delivered translations in which the given register was either shifted from informal
to formal or vice versa.
Examples of IEPVs translated by incorrect register shift from the two groups are listed in
Table 5.25 below:
Item IEPVs Register shift 7 My eyes popped out �x�*\�xNده�\x)ذه� 68 I'm tied up with something urgent at the
moment أ�K�7E�K3*\�S3O./�7Pا¤ن
100 we were slagged down �7.3�X53\هOF\�7.-/ر� 70 He flared up at me %)E�7(^G7ط�NFHا 79 I've cleaned up my act �-)E�x.�73آE�x*)wأ�[�+ 96 I'm really shopped out قXYF+7\��7Eذر�x�R�[�+�،7�Z
Table 5.25 Examples of register shift (for suggested Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents see Appendix 2)
The Arabic equivalents given to the IEPV My eyes popped out in the first example
above (item 7) were �x�*\�xNده�\x)ذه� (I was shocked / surprised / astonished) wherein
the register shift from informal to formal is evident. The situational context in which
this IEPV was used was an informal everyday conversation between friends, while the
Arabic equivalents provided were highly formal Arabic expressions. Such a high
formality of the Arabic equivalents is manifested in the usage of the passive voice
which cannot be used in any informal everyday Arabic friendly conversation as it is less
common in Arabic than it is in English (El-Yassin, 1996; Wightwich & Gaafar, 1998).
The same argument is valid for the second and third examples above (items 68 and 100)
where highly formal Arabic expressions of a passive voice were given as equivalents to
the informal IEPVs.
307
Apart from employing the passive voice, making use of high formal Arabic collocations
and producing them as equivalents for informally used IEPVs is also deemed as an
unacceptable register shift. Such a drawback is manifested in items 70, 79 and 96
above, where ��7(^&G7ط�N&FHا (to burst with anger), ���0&E�x&*)wأ�[&�+ (I have desisted from)
and����7&Eذر�x�&R (I have no patience with) were give as equivalents to the everyday
colloquially used IEPVs He flared up, I've cleaned up and I'm shopped out respectively.
The main reason behind this kind of loss of register, as it has been argued in Chapter
Two, is the sharp distinction in the Arabic language between written and spoken
discourse (Baker, 1992), where two varieties (formal high written variety and informal
low spoken variety) are interchangeably used (Al-Qinai, 2000). Consequently, in
translating such everyday colloquial expressions as IEPVs into formal written Arabic,
Arabic translators may cause a shift of register from informal/colloquial to formal/high
written expressions. The best strategy suggested to Arabic translators to tackle such a
problem is reducing the gap between the informal/colloquial Arabic and the formal/high
written Arabic by steering a middle course between them (Al-Qinai, 2000). Hence,
Arabic translators are best advised to employ Modern Standard Arabic which lays half-
way between highly formal classic Arabic and highly informal colloquial Arabic.
Another reason for performing such a translational error by the Arabic subjects is the
fact that unlike the majority of English lexicographers who have included fundamental
information about register variations of EPVs in their dictionaries (cf. Cambridge
international Dictionary of Phrasal verbs (1997); Oxford Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs
(1993); Oxford Phrasal verbs Dictionary for Learners of English (2001); Longman
Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs (1983) among others), Arabic lexicographers disregard
308
such essential information when dealing with the phenomenon of EPVs and confine
themselves to providing either literal or intuitive idealised Arabic equivalents for them
(for illustrative examples see Chapter Two, sections 2.8 and 2.9 above).
5.3.6.2.3 Incorrect delivery of speech acts
I regarded "speech acts" as the second parameter of the model for the analysis and
translation of IEPVs into Arabic devised in Chapter Three. I also outlined that the
polysemic nature of IEPVs and their common use in everyday spoken English
necessitate translators to target their illocutionary/pragmatic meanings rather than
locutionary/semantic meanings if they are to achieve functional-pragmatic equivalents
(see Chapter Three, sections 3.4.4 and 3.5 above).
In the translation tests in this study, a number of Arabic professional translators and
Arabic translation students have failed to deliver the appropriate illocutionary meaning of
these verbs. Such a failure was as a result of misunderstanding the speech acts performed
in the utterances in which IEPVs were used. Since speech acts denote "[…] the total
situation in which the utterance is issued" (Austin, 1975, p. 52), such a misunderstanding
was due to not taking into account the "real-world situational factors" which are,
according to Mason (2001), "prime determinants of meaning and interpretation of
meaning" (p. 29). Along these lines Hatim and Mason (1997) assert that "[i]n any attempt
to examine the communicative nature of the translating task, a number of assumptions
will have to be made about texts, their users and the context in which they occur" (p. 14).
Therefore, pragmatically speaking, a translator "should consider the communicative force
309
of [any given] SL [Source Language] utterance which goes far beyond the propositional
meaning of ST [Source Text]" (Al-Qinai, 2000, p. 510).
Illustrative examples of this kind of translational pitfalls are presented in Table 5.26
below:
Item IEPVs Incorrect delivery of speech acts 76 We are not going into that again,
are we? S+~�5أ+-��آ-P7ة��,/�S+ذ�p+د�إX*P�0+
94 And go easy on the salt, please �)3+ا�]R8�7%�وP7وOF/�0ر�7ء�آ 4 I could have bitten my tongue off %P7Y+�x3^w 6 You're going to drive me around the
bend! أ�xP{�p)E�SoXا+XZ�5w7-Yل�ا+3.*}��
91 I'm partied out ا�,y7ر�8�7%�/'7ن��y�x)_FZ Table 5.26 Examples of incorrect delivery of speech acts (for suggested Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents see Appendix 2)
With regard to the first example in the Table above, most of the subjects involved in
this study have produced functionally/pragmatically inaccurate translations for such an
utterance (see Appendix 3). The Arabic translation of this utterance presented in the
Table above (������S+~&�5أ+&-��آ&-P7ة��,&/�S&+ذ�p&+د�إX*P�0+) (literally: we will not return to that matter
again, are we?) is a striking example. In order to correctly translate such an utterance,
one has to embed it in its real-world context. This type of English structure (i.e. a
statement followed by a tag question) is habitually used in cross-examination in a court
context by prosecutors and solicitors to prompt defendants and/or witnesses with a
series of yes/no questions typically to discredit them (Hale, 2002 & 2004). The context
in which this utterance is embedded is "A cross-examination in court" (see Appendix1).
Pragmatically speaking, the utterance has a speech act of complaining, therefore, in
order to deliver its Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalent the illocutionary/pragmatic
meaning has to be taken into consideration rather than the locutionary/propositional
meaning such as the one in the above poor translation, and the performed speech act has
310
to be maintained. Hence, a possible functional-pragmatic equivalent for this utterance
could be:�������5&-P7ع�/&,ة��X&RX3)+د�X*.&H�7&.Pأ�%&+�K&�}�M (literally: don’t say to me that we are going
back to the subject again) (see Appendix 2).
In the second example in the Table above (item 94), The Arabic translation produced
was also pragmatically incorrect. The situational context whereby this utterance took
place was an informal conversation at a restaurant between a waitress and a customer. It
is evident from the context that, due to the social distance between the two participants
of the conversation, a speech act of order was performed. The Arabic translation
presented above has failed to spell out such a speech act. In order to achieve the Arabic
functional-pragmatic equivalent of such an utterance, the speech act performed has to
be articulated (see Appendix 2 for suggested Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents).
It is quite essential to indicate here that most of the examples of translational errors
categorized as (literal translation) (see 5.3.6.1.1 above) can well fit into the current type
of error, since providing the literal meanings of IEPVs not only delivers their distorted
denotative meanings but also mismatches the speech acts performed in the utterances in
which such PVs are embedded. Hale (1996) maintains that "[w]hen we translate an
utterance literally, we may be matching the locutionary act only, but not the other two
[illocutionary and perlocutionary acts]" (p. 63). The last three examples in the above
Table (items 4, 6 and 91) can be taken as illustrating instances whereby the subjects
produced literal translations of the utterances and failed not only in delivering their
locutionary act but also the speech acts of regret, complaint and exhaustion performed in
such utterances respectively.
311
Apart from the polysemic nature of IEPVs and their common informality, the major
reason behind making this type of translational errors, in my view, is that Arabic
equivalents given to IEPVs in bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries and in the available
textbooks on learning and translating EPVs are typically intuitive and not theoretically
based. Arabic lexicographers have totally overlooked such fundamental issues as
register variations, illocutionary acts, and functional-pragmatic equivalents. Arabic
translators, as a result, have no choice but to consult monolingual English-English
dictionaries to understand the pragmatic meaning of IEPVs and then to make up their
own Arabic equivalents, which can be functionally and pragmatically inaccurate.
5.3.6.2.4 Usage of paraphrasing
As I previously explained in Chapter Two (see 2.11 above), the translating by
paraphrasing strategy is a very common strategy and widely utilized by translators as one
of the attested strategies for dealing with the problem of non-equivalence (cf. Baker,
1992; Bataineh & Bataineh, 2002; Ghazala, 2003). However, this strategy has its
restrictive usage, especially in the case of translating IEPVs into Arabic, which have
Arabic equivalents that can deliver accurate functional-pragmatic equivalence.
Examples of this type of translational errors from the two groups are presented in Table
5.27 below:
Item IEPVs Paraphrasing 38 Where were you during the cave-
in? pEا[F1ء�%o�K�0\]أ�آ-Z�x.أ�01آ
43 a cooling-off period �K(w�,/97\�,'_1رأ��1أو���nN+�1-,�ا�%'+�p{*}ة�[/%3Hر�K'N\��\ا+�-7م�
312
60 she took up with Tim 4-}�]/�x�,yو�x8,*} 10 she got so carried away she began
to cry %8�xW,nP�4ا��x)*_P�7واO_WاXE�%8�4'QF}�4+ا+)'7ء�
79 I've cleaned up my act %-Eي�أو�و[oر�p+ت�إ[Eو�|�N+7ة�ا-Z�0E�x-)n}�[�+ 91 I'm partied out �%8�5(G,+ة��]ا�و+1�4*]�+]ي�ا,-�Q+�x�,y_2ت�آ
ا+�71دة�أو�8%�ا+1�3]Table 5.27 Examples of Paraphrasing (for suggested Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents see Appendix 2)
In their endeavour to translate the IEPVs at hand, the subjects glossed them in Arabic
instead of providing the appropriate Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents for them.
In item 38 in the Table above, the noun derived from PV cave-in was rendered as �Kأ�آ[\
���pEا[&F1ء�%&o (literally: everything started collapsing) where there is a one-word Arabic
equivalent for it which is: 7ر-OPMا (the collapsing).
Similarly, in item 43, the expression contains a noun derived from a PV a cooling-off
period which means a period to consider, was translated into Arabic as ��,&-�1�%'+�p{*}ة�[/
��%3&Hر�K'N\��\ا+�-7م��K(w�,/97\�,'_1رأ��1أو���nN+ا (literally: a period of time given to someone
in order to change his mind or think about the matter before carrying it out officially).
Such a long gloss is an obvious covertly erroneous error because it distorts the style of
the target language by employing a long sentence to express the meaning of one
expression. Suggested alternatives for such an expression are 7ل���&O/ة�إ,&F8\�'_}ة�,&F8���,&-\��5&)O/�
.E (see Appendix 2)]ول��0Eا+N,اء
Likewise, in item 60 the IEPV took up with was translated into Arabic as ���x&�,yو�x&8,*}
��]&/ (literally: she was introduced to and went out with) where there is a one-word
Arabic equivalent for it, which is:ت�,&o7E�(took him as a boyfriend). The same argument
is valid for the rest of the examples presented in Table 5.27 above.
313
5.3.6.2.5 Usage of Arabic colloquial and regional dialects
As it has been argued above (see shift of register 5.3.6.2.2 above), given the sharp
distinction between the two varieties of the Arabic language (formal high classical
written variety and informal low spoken variety), Arabic translators need to seek the
middle ground Arabic style by utilizing Modern Standard Arabic when tackling the
phenomenon of IEPVs. Therefore, producing highly classical Arabic expressions as
functional-pragmatic equivalents for IEPVs is unacceptable register shift, as well as
producing highly informal colloquial Arabic expressions or regional dialects as
functional-pragmatic equivalents in writing is unacceptable as well, except for in
limited text-types, for example newspaper commentary texts.
Despite the following note made at the beginning of the translation tests distributed to the
subjects: "Since the study is about translation only, please confine your answers to
Modern Standard Arabic and avoid colloquial equivalents for the idiomatic English
phrasal verbs itemized in the translation tests" (see Appendix 1), the data collected
revealed that a number of the subjects resorted to informal colloquial Arabic and regional
dialects when dealing with the listed IEPVs. Illustrative examples of this type of
translational error from the two groups are presented in Table 5.28 below:
Item IEPVs Arabic colloquial and regional
dialects 19 brought the house down 7-P[+ا�,Yآ 20 he'll come down on you like a ton of
bricks. SHرأ�,Y'-H
24 Bill must have got up on the wrong side of the bed today
1)]و�أن¢�/�اج�\-X'*/�Kر�ا+-Xم
25 to have it out with him �*/ر�X/99`_%�ا 30 You can't skirt round the matter عXRX3+�5ا_)_+�S.'31M 31 Did you notice the way he bossed his wife
around �,O��p)E�7(آ-��آ7ن�راآ�x�ZM�Kه
�Fزو�
314
66 to take it out on me ¢%8�S�)y��_} 84 to take in old ladies �L7I*+ا�p)E�SQ^1 92 Funk up 5RX3+ا�p)E�S-)y 100 we were slagged down 7Pء�O}إ 77 and make up اXR,F}M73ذا�+ 91 I'm partied out ي,W7y�x1,H 46 Handout �5/�)/ 78 Hard to figure out روا�Q1أن��|*`
Table 5.28 Examples of usage of Arabic colloquial and regional dialects (for suggested Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents see Appendix 2)
In items 19 and 20, the high informal Arabic expressions ��7-P[&+ا�,Y&آ (literally: broke the
world into pieces) and ��S&Hرأ�,Y&'-H (literally: he'll break your head into pieces) were
given as Arabic equivalents to the IEPVs brought the house down and he'll come down
on you like a ton of bricks respectively. Despite the fact that such translations have
delivered the denotative and the communicative meanings of the English expressions at
hand, and they may well be used by interpreters who typically rely on the spoken mode,
they cannot, however be given as written Arabic translations due to the readers'
expectations.
The same argument is applicable to most of the examples presented in the above Table
(items 24, 25, 30, 31, 66, 84, 100 and 77).
In addition, in items 91, 46 and 78, the Arabic regional dialect expressions �x1,&Hي��,W7&y
(I have had enough – Iraqi colloquial), 5/�)/ (A printed material – Moroccan colloquial)
and روا���&Q1أن��|*&` (hard to be guessed - Iraqi colloquial) were given as equivalents to
the IEPVs I'm partied out, Handout and Hard to figure out in that order. Again, even
though such Arabic translations have delivered the denotative and the communicative
meanings of the English expressions concerned, and they may well be used by
interpreters in the spoken mode, they cannot be provided as written Arabic translations
315
due to the fact that such Arabic expressions are both not lexicalized and not current in
that putting them in writing would also be considered odd and unacceptable by the
Arabic readership. Confining their usage to one Arabic country also makes them
unintelligible to Arabic native speakers of other Arabic countries.
5.3.7 Subjects' performance in light of the seventh research question
In the preceding sections I overviewed the results of the translation tests and discussed
the translation errors made by the two groups involved in the study. In this section I will
be considering the issue of translation communicative competence in relation to the
following last research question:
Is there any difference as to translation communicative competence between the
two groups of Arabic subjects: The professional Arabic translators and Arabic
translation students? If so, what are the major areas in which their competence
varies?
A statement will be made here to account for the level of competence of each group based
on the theory of communicative competence (knowledge and ability) discussed in
Chapter Three (see 3.4.5 above). The aim of such a statement is to compare the
translation communicative competence of the two groups judged by their performance
(their answers) in an attempt to pinpoint the areas in which they have a shortage of
knowledge and/or ability. This statement will be of a great benefit in suggesting
recommendations in the forthcoming Chapter.
316
In the model I devised for analysis and translation of IEPVs into Arabic (see 3.5 above),
I regarded translation communicative competence as the last component and I set it up
as a final stage to compare the inputs of the subjects of the study. Translation
communicative competence refers to theoretical and practical knowledge of translators.
As has been explained in Chapter Three (see 3.5 above), all the parameters of the model
(register, speech acts, functional-pragmatic equivalents and covertly/overtly erroneous
errors) have to be considered when evaluating the translation communicative
competence of the subjects, in view of the fact that all of such parameters relate to the
translators' knowledge and ability. Yet, paying no attention to any parameter would
mean a given subject has no, or a lack of, theoretical and/or practical knowledge.
It is quite evident from the above overview and discussion of the results of the
translation tests, that despite the differences between the two groups of the subjects
involved in this study, the overall performance of the subjects in general was poor,
which demonstrates the fact that the IEPVs listed in the translation tests posed
substantial difficulty to both groups of the subjects. This confirms the point argued in
Chapter Two (see 2.11 above), where I pointed out that due to the fact that the Arabic
language has few syntactic, semantic and pragmatic correspondences with the English
language in terms of the phenomenon of idiomatic PVs, the task of translating IEPVs
into Arabic is far more challenging and subject to a great deal of difficulties than
translating them into other languages.
Yet, the two groups vary in their level of translation communicative competence. Such
a variation is manifested in the fact that the overall performance of the Arabic
professional translators' group is better than that of the Arabic translation students'
317
group with a difference of 10% between the two groups in the average of the correct
answers, i.e. both the very good and the satisfactory answers (see Table 5.8 above) and
11.35% in the average of achieving functional-pragmatic equivalents that is, the very
good answers only (see Table 5.14 above). With this fact in mind, the differences
between the two groups in respect to achieving the functional-pragmatic equivalents
(which is the main concern of this study) are not distinct, which means that the years of
experience of the Arabic professional translators did not make a major difference when
translating IEPVs into Arabic. There were some items in which the performance of the
Arabic translation students' group was even better than that of the Arabic professional
translators' group. There were also other items in which the performance of both groups
was equal (see Table 5.16 above).
Bearing that in mind, all the Arabic professional translators who participated in this
study are academically qualified in the field of translation and/or interpreting. In
addition, they all have a good translation experience ranging from four to forty nine
years (see 4.3.1 above). They presumably have the required theoretical knowledge and
practical experience. On the other hand, the Arabic translation students involved in this
study have not, as yet, acquired such theoretical knowledge and practical experience
(see 4.3.2 above).
The variation in the level of translation communicative competence between the two
groups is also manifested in the fact that the Arabic professional translators answered
the vast majority of items of the translation tests, in that the total average of their
unanswered questions was very low (0.58%), while the Arabic translation students left
69 (6%) items unanswered, with a difference of -5.42% between the two groups (see
318
Table 5.15 above). Such a result demonstrates the fact that the Arabic professional
translators were more competent and have more sense of encouragement to take
initiative and risk-taking than the Arabic translation students, who opted for skipping
the items that were problematic to them.
Another aspect of variation in the level of translation communicative competence
between the two groups is observable from the fact that the Arabic professional
translators made less overtly erroneous errors than the Arabic translation students with a
difference of -7% between the two groups (see Tables 5.11 and 5.13 above). Such a
difference in performance indicates that the Arabic professional translators have been
more competent to the extent that they have avoided (more than the Arabic translation
students) being so close to the literal meanings of the listed idiomatic IEPVs, kept away
from being confused with their polysemic nature, and have not breached the Arabic
language system when providing Arabic equivalents.
The Arabic professional translators, however, made more covertly erroneous errors than
the Arabic translation students with a difference of 2% between the two groups (see
Tables 5.11 and 5.13above). As has been argued before (see 5.3.1.1 above), such a
minor difference does not mean that the Arabic professional translators are less
competent than the Arabic translation students. On the contrary, taking the major
difference in the total average of the unanswered items into account confirms the
abovementioned claim that the Arabic translation students were in fact more prudent,
while the Arabic professional translators were greatre risk-takers.
319
In addition, the results showed that there were more variations within the answers of
Arabic professional translators' group than that of the Arabic translation students' group
with a difference of 0.031602 between the two groups in the standard deviations (see
Table 5.9 above). Such a difference in the standard deviations confirms, again, the
abovementioned claim that the Arabic professional translators were freer and have more
sense of risk-taking than the Arabic translation students. The years of practical
experience and the higher level of academic qualifications the Arabic professional
translators have seem to be the factors for such ability.
Moreover, ranking the categories of IEPVs according to the average of achieving
functional-pragmatic equivalents revealed that in spite of the differences in the averages
of achieving the Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents between the two groups, both
groups have experienced the same level of difficulties, as the results showed that the (p)
category represented the most difficult one for both groups with the difference of 7.17%
in favour of the professionals. The (c) category constituted the second hardest one for
both groups with the difference of 15%. The (d) category was the third hardest with a
difference of 11.58%. And the easiest category was the (s) category with the difference
of 10% between the two groups (see Table 5.14 above). It is quite obvious that the
Arabic professional translators outperformed the Arabic translation students in all
categories (see Table 5.14 above).
Even though the (d) and (s) categories, as a whole, constituted the easiest categories for
both groups (see Table 5.14 above), this does not mean that the derivational and
grammatical forms of IEPVs posed no problems to the subjects surveyed. The low
320
averages of the functional-pragmatic equivalents achieved indicate that the subjects
encountered difficulties when tackling the items comprising such forms.
The difference in the average of the correct answers (i.e. both the very good and the
satisfactory answers) of the categories that are easier (s and d) was rather large, whereas
there was no such difference in the categories considered difficult (p and c). This entails
that training and experience gained by professional translators enhanced their
performance only in the categories which are more teachable and learnable (s and d
categories), but such training and experience did not improve their performance in the
categories where the sense of stylistic competence is required (p and c categories) (see
Table 5.8 above).
Translating IEPVs, like translating any other kinds of idiomatic expressions, requires a
high level of competence not only in the source language (English) but also in the target
language (Arabic). In her attempt to elaborate on the required types of competence,
Nord (1992) lists them as follows:
[…] competence of text reception and analysis, research competence, transfer competence, competence of text production, competence of translation quality assessment, and, of course, linguistic and cultural competence both on the source and the target side, which is the main prerequisite of translation activity (p. 47 as cited in Campbell, 1998, p. 5).
Having said that, in spite of the fact that both groups of the subjects involved in this
study have encountered the same problems as manifested in the types of translational
errors they made, the results of the present study reveal that the inadequate competence
of some subjects in correctly understanding the listed IEPVs caused them to make
"source text errors". Good examples of such kind of errors are found in the
321
abovementioned examples of literal translation, mistranslation, and incorrect delivery of
speech acts.
Other subjects did understand the listed IEPVs but they failed to put them in correct
Arabic, resulting in "target text errors". Good examples of this kind of error are found in
the abovementioned examples of shift of register, breaches to the Arabic language
system, wrong Arabic collocation, paraphrasing and employing Arabic colloquial and
regional dialects.
Before bringing this section to the end it seems appropriate here to compare the
performance of professionals among themselves and the performance of students
among themselves to see whether the years of experience, in the case of professionals,
and the stages of study, in the case of students, can make any difference as to translation
communicative competence of IEPVs. Table 5.29 below sketches the performance and
years of experience of the Arabic professional translators' group:
Correct Incorrect Subject Code
Number
Years Of
Experience Very good
Satisfactory Overtly erroneous
error
Covertly erroneous
error
Unanswered
P1 49 Years 50% 14% 26% 10% 0% P2 4 Years 27% 19% 46% 8% 0% P3 4 Years 32% 12% 48% 8% 0% P4 15 Years 43% 13% 36% 8% 0% P5 7 Years 36% 15% 36% 13% 0% P6 9 Years 38% 17% 37% 7% 1% P7 6 Years 44% 15% 33% 7% 1% P8 4 Years 52% 14% 26% 8% 0% P9 7 Years 40% 18% 36% 6% 0% P10 10 Years 49% 14% 32% 4% 1% P11 6 Years 63% 14% 18% 5% 0% P12 7 Years 29% 25% 37% 6% 3%
Table 5.29 Performance and years of experience of the Arabic professional translators' group
322
Interestingly, figures in the above Table reveal that the years of experience do not have
much effect on the performance of the professionals involved in this study. To take only
two instances, in achieving the functional-pragmatic equivalents of the listed IEPVs,
professionals with four and six years of experience were the best among their
colleagues. They performed a great deal better even than the professionals of fifteen and
forty nine years of experience. Turning our attention to the errors made by the subjects
of this group, the professional with fifteen years of experience made more overtly
erroneous errors than the professional with six years of experience. And the
professional with forty-nine years of experience made more covertly erroneous errors
than the professional with four years of experience. It seems that the reason behind such
differences in the performance, regardless the years of experience, is the lack of any
kind of theoretical fundamentals and systematic approach that can help these
professional translators to deal with this type of idiomatic constructions.
Table 5.30 below sketches the performance and the stages of study of the Arabic
translation students' group:
Correct Incorrect Subject Code
Number
Subject Stage
of Study Very good
Satisfactory Overtly erroneous
error
Covertly erroneous
error
Unanswered
S1 9% 14% 73% 4% 0% S2
Year one 18% 11% 35% 2% 34%
S3 41% 24% 32% 2% 1% S4
Year two 50% 14% 30% 6% 0%
S5 39% 19% 40% 2% 0% S6
Year Three 23% 20% 31% 7% 19%
S7 27% 21% 43% 6% 3% S8
Graduate Diploma 24% 20% 52% 4% 0%
S9 20% 15% 49% 4% 12% S10
MA 46% 15% 34% 5% 0%
S11 27% 14% 47% 12% 0% S12
PhD 41% 23% 33% 3% 0%
Table 5.30 Performance and stages of study of the Arabic translation students' group
323
By the same token, figures in the above Table show that the stages of study do not have
much impact on the performance of the students participated in this study. To take only
two instances, in achieving the functional-pragmatic equivalents of the listed IEPVs,
year two students were the best among their colleagues. They performed much better
even than the postgraduate students. As for the errors made by the subjects of this
group, MA Students made much more overtly erroneous errors than year two students,
and a PhD student made more covertly erroneous errors than the year one student. Such
results tell us that there is an acute problem at all levels of study. There are two main
reasons behind such a problem. First, the abovementioned lack of theoretical
fundamentals and systematic approach that can help in dealing with this type of
idiomatic construction. Second, and more important, the inadequacy of the teaching
process, i.e. the lack of any teaching methodology for teachers that can provide students
with solid background knowledge to enable them to understand the syntactic, semantic
and pragmatic properties of this type of problematic verbs, and in turn to translate them
correctly into Arabic. Moreover, the question of recruiting students in the programs of
translating needs to be addressed here. Nida (2001) makes the point that "In fact,
relatively few students entering programs in translating have the necessary language
competence to begin translating. This is not the students' fault, but the fault of the
educational system" (p. 2).
All in all, the translation communicative competence of both groups, according to the
findings of the present study, was rather inadequate. Their knowledge of syntactic,
semantic and pragmatic characteristics of IEPVs was deficient, and their ability in
understanding them and translating them into Arabic was limited. However, the Arabic
translation students seem to have an acute need to build up their knowledge of the
syntactic, semantic and pragmatic properties of IEPVs in order to increase their own skills
324
and ability in appreciating the metaphoric and polysemic nature of IEPVs, and in seeking
communicative meanings to convey them, by taking into consideration the "real-word
situational factors" in which they are employed in order to achieve their Arabic
functional-pragmatic equivalents.
5.4 Conclusion
In this Chapter the results of the translation tests given to the subjects participated in
this study were carefully overviewed and comprehensively discussed.
A general overview of results of the translation tests of the two groups involved in this
study was first provided to present the average of their correct answers (i.e. both the very
good and the satisfactory answers). In the second section of this Chapter, the results of the
translation tests of the two groups were analysed and discussed in light of the seven
research questions, with more focus on achieving the Arabic functional-pragmatic
equivalents (very good answers) by the subjects.
A number of crucial findings were arrived at. Such findings highlighted the types of
difficulties Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students encounter
when translating IEPVs into Arabic. The next Chapter will recapitulate these findings and
propose some recommendations for both groups as well as for lexicographers and
pedagogues.
325
CHAPTER SIX
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Conclusion
6.1.1 Summary of the study
The major objective of this study was to investigate the difficulties encountered by Arabic
professional translators and Arabic translation students when translating IEPVs into
Arabic. The other objective was to suggest a number of recommendations for Arabic
professional translators, Arabic lexicographers and Arabic pedagogues based on the
variety of findings arrived at from the empirical research conducted in the study.
The main hypothesis of the study was that there is a wide range of difficulties posed to
Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students when translating IEPVs
into Arabic.
There were two sets of research questions put forward in this study. The first set was
presented to address the theoretical part of the thesis. The second set of research
questions, however, was presented to analyse the data collected from pragmatic, semantic
and syntactic standpoints.
This study started with an introductory Chapter where a historical background of the
notion of EPVs was provided followed by the justification, the purpose, the hypothesis,
the layout and the limitations of the study.
326
Chapter Two was dedicated to address the first set of the research questions. The Chapter
demonstrated that IEPV is a combination of two or three items (verb + adverb, verb +
preposition, and verb + adverb + preposition) which functions as a single unit of meaning
in that its meaning cannot be figured out from the total sum of the meanings of its
separate components. The syntactic properties of such combinations include such features
as: the basic verbs which can be phrasalised are mostly monosyllabic, and the particles
that typically combine with them are either adverbial or prepositional. Many of such
particles are of dual functions, i.e., they can be both adverbs and prepositions due to the
fact that they are identical in form but different in function. The abovementioned three
types of PV can be transitive or intransitive. The former may be separable or non-
separable depending upon the particle's position and movement.
The semantic properties comprise the following features: they are of three types, namely,
literal, semi-idiomatic, and idiomatic PVs, in that their meanings range from the most
literal to the most idiomatic. The idiomatic type can be substituted by one word synonym.
Furthermore, the particle plays an important role in modifying the meaning of the verb it
combines with, in the sense that they fuse together and sacrifice their basic meanings to
produce a new one semantic unit. Finally, IEPVs have the characteristic of polysemy, in
that any given idiomatic PV may occur in as many as ten, or more, different meanings
according to the contexts in which it is used.
Unlike the English language, which imparts a clear prominence to the phenomenon of
idiomatic PVs as one of the most essential features of English grammar and vocabulary,
the Arabic language does not classify similar structures. Arabic has one structure which
is, more or less, similar to IEPVs, that is, verb + preposition structure. Following a
327
number of researchers (Lentzner, 1977; Najiib, 2001; Kharama & Hajjaj, 1989; Alkhuli,
1999; and Bataineh & Bataineh, 2002), I considered the idiomatic type of such
constructions as idiomatic Arabic PVs due to the fact that the basic components of the
structure sacrifice their original meanings and merge together to form a single unit of new
meaning which has nothing to do with the meanings of the individual parts. However, not
all Arabic verb + preposition constructions are idiomatic, nor do all of them fit the
syntactic and semantic criteria of IEPVs. There are, in fact, several dissimilarities
between them in terms of syntactic and semantic properties, functionality, register and
pragmatic usage (see 2.6 above).
The review also addressed the issue of derivation of EPVs and the differences in
derivational mechanisms between the English and Arabic languages. Although both
languages have the characteristic of productivity as a result of word-formation systems,
IEPVs have the ability to be far more productive than their Arabic counterparts, which
can only be productive when used as integral parts of metaphorical and fixed expressions.
This is mainly because IEPVs are dominantly colloquial, hence are more easily produced
by English native speakers.
A comparison between the monolingual English-English dictionaries of PVs and bilingual
English-Arabic dictionaries of PVs showed that the bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries
of PVs are inferior in quality and quantity than the monolingual English-English
dictionaries of PVs. While there are more than ten monolingual English-English
dictionaries devoted to the phenomenon of EPVs, there are, to the best of my knowledge
and research, no more than two bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries dedicated to such a
phenomenon.
328
In addition, unlike the monolingual English-English dictionaries of PVs which are, to a
great extent, comprehensive in covering enormous amount of EPVs and providing
fundamental information about the syntactic, semantic and, collocational properties, as
well as register, derivation, and productivity of each listed PV, the bilingual English-
Arabic dictionaries of PVs paid no attention to most of such crucial information, leaving
Arabic translators and Arab learners of English with no choice but to find the meaning of
idiomatic PVs in English then to improvise on their Arabic equivalents, which may or
may not be accurate (see 2.9 above).
As far as teaching IEPVs to non-native speakers is concerned, a number of methods
proposed for teaching them have been investigated. Pedagogues varied in what to teach as
PVs and how to teach them. Some pedagogues believe that all types of EPVs (i.e.,
literal/semantically transparent, and idiomatic/semantically opaque) have to be taught
since the former constitutes the basic by which the latter can be understood. Others, on
the other hand, consider that only the idiomatic/semantically opaque type of PVs has to
be taught, as it is the prototypical one.
Likewise, they disagree upon how to teach EPVs to non-native speakers of English. Some
of them believe that they have to be taught by knowing the patterns underlying them, in
order to identify the system and logic by which they work. Others, however, consider
EPVs as random combinations of verbs and particles, and they have to be memorized by
heart.
By the same token, pedagogues differ in the question of how to sequence EPVs in
textbooks. Some are quite convinced that they must be dealt with by particles, while some
329
others prefer to handle them by verbs. Others recommend qualitative analysis by
conducting frequency counts of EPVs to determine the most common and needed ones in
order to be taught, and, in turn, to avoid depending upon pedagogues' intuitions in
designing pedagogical tools and materials.
Moreover, most pedagogues agree upon the issue of teaching EPVs in context rather than
as unrelated elements, due to the fact that such a manner enhances and facilitates their
learnbility.
Moreover, Chapter Two dealt with the issue of randomness of EPVs. There is very strong
evidence that EPVs are not random combinations. It was clearly demonstrated that there
is, in fact, a pattern underlying each one of them (see 2.10 above).
The comparison between the methods of teaching IEPVs utilized by Arab pedagogues
with those used by non-Arab pedagogues revealed that the methods of teaching IEPVs to
Arab learners of English is, to a great extent, inadequate. The two main reasons behind
such an inadequacy are the lack of rich pedagogical materials and the utilization of old-
fashioned teaching methods.
Furthermore, the question of how the phenomenon of IEPVs has been dealt with in
translation studies was, also, explored in Chapter Two. It was quite evident that unlike the
cases of such languages as Spanish and Russian, which have many correspondences
between them and the English language in terms of PVs (see 2.11.1 above), the Arabic
language which has few syntactic and semantic correspondences with English, hence the
task of translating IEPVs is far more challenging and subject to a great deal of difficulties.
330
Such difficulties prompted some Arab researchers to tentatively suggest the employment
of such strategies as evasion, omitting and paraphrasing IEPVs when translating them
into Arabic. According to my study, these strategies are proven to be haphazard and
cannot be replicated because they have no place in assessing, perceiving and producing
IEPVs by Arabic learners of English, Arabic translators and Arabic interpreters.
Chapter Two highlighted as well the fact that the question of translating English idioms in
general and IEPVs in particular into Arabic has not been adequately attended to in
translation studies. Scholarly efforts are needed to account for the challenges and
difficulties such expressions pose to Arabic translators. The literature review showed that
more practical approaches, as well, need to be established, tested and applied. That is
precisely what this study has accomplished by focusing on IEPVs, the most important
type of English idiomatic expressions. Hopefully, my efforts can contribute in narrowing
the existing gap in this particular area of translation studies.
A link between the theoretical part of the study (the literature review) and the practical
part of it (the experimental research) was established in Chapter Three in which I set up a
theoretical foundation for my experiments by reviewing the key and influential
approaches of contrastive analysis. I gauged the appropriateness/inappropriateness of
such approaches to my topic in an attempt to devise a practical and scientific model for
the analysis and translation of IEPVs into Arabic. Four most appropriate parameters were
selected to formulate my model, being: House's functional-pragmatic equivalence, which
is, as sketched by her (2001, p. 247), "the preservation of 'meaning' across two different
languages and cultures"; context of situation/register (field, mode and tenor), Austin's
(1962) speech acts (locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutionary acts), House's (1977)
331
overtly/covertly erroneous errors and Hymes's (1971) translation communicative
competence.
The research methodology employed in this study to conduct the experimental research
was outlined in Chapter Four where the research design, participants, data collection
and data analysis were elaborated on.
The results of the translation tests carried out by the two groups involved in the present
study were presented, analysed, interpreted and discussed in Chapter Five, where a
general overview of the results of the translation tests was given first followed by ample
analyses and discussion of the subjects' performance in light of the second set of the
research questions.
The results analysed and discussed supported the hypothesis outlined in the introductory
Chapter of this thesis and demonstrated that there were wide ranges of difficulties
encountered by Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students when
translating IEPVs into Arabic.
6.1.2 Summary of the findings
The findings arrived at in this study are summarized in what follows:
1. Despite the differences between the two groups of subjects, both of them have
encountered a great deal of difficulties when translating IEPVs into Arabic. This is
quite evident from the overall performance of the subjects, which was poor, and from
the achievement of functional-pragmatic equivalents of the listed IEPVs which was so
332
hard that both groups have scored low percentages of (very good) answers. This
confirms the fact that since the Arabic language has a small number of syntactic,
semantic and pragmatic correspondences with English in terms of the phenomenon of
idiomatic PVs, the task of translating such verbs into Arabic is far more challenging
and more difficult than the task of translating them into other languages such as
Spanish and Russian, where many correspondences between them and the English
language exist.
2. The newly coined IEPVs, (p) category, where there are no readily Arabic equivalents
for them, constituted the most difficult one for both groups. I attributed that to the two
previously confirmed facts, being:
i) The productive nature of IEPVs prevents lexicographers from keeping up with
these and listing them in dictionaries. Consequently, there have been many gaps
in the coverage of IEPVs, even in specialized dictionaries. Such gaps resulted in
an absence of a number of newly coined PVs. A translator, in this case, is left
with no choice but to intuitively work them out one by one in order to produce
their Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents, which may or may not be correct.
ii) The lack of effective teaching methods and materials which may help make
Arabic translators and translation students capable enough to deal with such
newly coined IEPVs. Unlike other pedagogues who suggested valuable methods
of teaching IEPVs based on the fact that these verbs are not mere random
combinations of verbs and particles and there are patterns underlying them,
Arab pedagogues nonetheless seem resigned to the fact that EPVs are random
combinations and for learners to master them they have to memorize them by
333
heart. Accordingly, there are no reliable Arabic pedagogical materials that can
help overcome the problem of the newly coined IEPVs.
3. The complex idioms, (c) category, constituted the second hardest category for both
groups. I attributed that to the double complexity nature of such idioms, which
requires a high level of competence on the part of translators, in both source and
target languages.
4. The derivative IEPVs, (d) category, were less difficult than categories (p) and (c) for
both groups. However, they caused a great deal of difficulties to the subjects and this
is particularly evident from the low averages of the functional-pragmatic equivalents
achieved. I attributed such difficulties to the differences in derivational mechanisms
between English and Arabic languages that make the derivational forms of IEPVs
sound abnormal and odd for Arabic subjects.
5. The items containing IEPVs that are derived from nouns, (dpn) subcategory,
represented the most difficult subcategory of the (d) category for both groups.
6. The syntactic forms of IEPVs, (s) category, constituted the easiest one for both
groups, even though the subjects encountered a number of difficulties when
attempting the items containing such forms. Such difficulties were quite evident from
the low averages of the functional-pragmatic equivalents achieved.
7. The (svp) subcategory represented the most difficult subcategory of the (s) category
for both groups.
334
8. The (svap) subcategory constituted the second hardest subcategory for both groups.
9. The easiest subcategory of the (s) category was the (sva) subcategory.
10. There were two types of translational errors made by Arabic professional translators
and Arabic translation students: the overtly erroneous errors and covertly erroneous
errors. The results of both groups showed that the overtly erroneous errors
outnumbered the covertly erroneous errors.
11. The Arabic professional translators made less overtly erroneous errors than the Arabic
translation students.
12. The overtly erroneous errors were mainly attributed to the idiomaticity of EPVs. This
played a significant role in hindering the subjects from obtaining the denotative
meanings of the listed IEPVs.
13. The overtly erroneous errors made by the subjects were of four types, namely: literal
translation, mistranslating, reducing the idioms to sense and breaching of the Arabic
language system.
14. Literal translation was manifested in the tendency of a number of the subjects to
perceive the listed IEPVs literally and deal with the two parts of the combination
separately rather than appreciating their metaphorical/idiomatic meaning and looking
at each combination as one semantic unit. I attributed committing such type of errors
to the following four reasons:
335
i) Interference of the subjects' L1 (Arabic) with their L2 (English). That is due to
the fact that the syntactic structure of IEPVs is quite odd for the Arabic
subjects. Unlike English, Arabic does not allow proper verbs to collocate with
adverbs. The only type of PVs in Arabic is that of verb + preposition structure
(see 2.6 above). Consequently, the subjects perceived the second parts of the
listed PVs literally and either translated them as prepositions or ignored them.
ii) The deceptive appearance of EPVs in general may catch the attention of
translators to provide prompt literal translations without carefully taking into
account the idiomaticity of this kind of verbs.
iii) Due to the productive nature of IEPVs which makes them hard to be captured
and listed in dictionaries, great deals of IEPVs are not covered by general and
even some specialized dictionaries.
iv) The decotextualization phenomenon in dealing with the IEPVs not only in
bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries, but also in textbooks devoted to
teaching EPVs to Arab students. Nevertheless, bilingual English-Arabic
dictionaries provide out of context, decontextualized and idealised equivalents
for IEPVs.
15. Mistranslating was apparent from the failure of a number of the subjects to
appreciate the polysemic nature of the listed IEPVs. I attributed producing such
mistaken translations to three reasons, they are:
i) The variety of shades of meanings given to each PV due to the polysemic nature
of the IEPVs which makes it hard for the subjects to choose the appropriate
meaning.
336
ii) The fact that the combinations of IEPVs are quite confusing makes the task of
choosing the appropriate meaning more difficult. That is, one proper verb can
collocate with a number of particles to form a range of PVs with many different
meanings, and one particle may co-occur with a number of proper verbs to form
a variety of PVs of diverse meanings.
iii) The inadequate treatment of the phenomenon of PVs in general and specialized
dictionaries. Lexicographers skip a large amount of PVs and provide insufficient
definitions for the listed ones.
16. Reducing the idioms to sense was noticeable when a number of the subjects seemed
to understand the functional meaning of the listed IEPVs in English but did not
deliver it correctly into Arabic. Instead, they produced a translation in which the
denotative meaning was achieved but at the expense of the idiomaticity of the given
EPVs. Such type of translational pitfalls was manifested in the subjects' answers of
the items of the complex idioms, (c) category, which have to be translated by Arabic
equivalents of an idiomatic nature i.e. employing Arabic PVs, Arabic proverbs,
Arabic fixed expressions etc. given the double complexity nature of such complex
idioms.
17. Breaching of the Arabic language system was manifested in the tendency of a
number of subjects to produce grammatically and/or morphologically incorrect
translations to the listed IEPVs. This is mainly owing to the lack of the required
linguistic competence.
337
18. The Arabic professional translators made more covertly erroneous errors than the
Arabic translation students.
19. The covertly erroneous errors made by the Arabic subjects were of five types,
namely: wrong Arabic collocation, shift of register, incorrect delivery of speech
acts, usage of paraphrasing and usage of Arabic colloquial and regional dialects.
20. Wrong Arabic collocation error was evident when a number of subjects seemed to
understand the functional-pragmatic meanings of the listed IEPVs in English but
stopped short from delivering them correctly into Arabic.
21. Some of the Arabic subjects surveyed in this study rightly made use of such
pragmatic/stylistic structures as Arabic collocations, Arabic fixed expressions,
Arabic idioms and Arabic proverbs when translating the listed IEPVs into Arabic,
while some others failed to do so.
22. The data collected revealed that most of the very good answers (functional-
pragmatic equivalents) were based on finding the right Arabic collocation (see
Appendix 2).
23. Translating IEPVs by its Arabic counterpart (IAPVs) was quite a rare phenomenon
in the data collected. I attributed such a rarity to the fact that Arabic PVs are more
formal than their English counterparts and, due to their highly rhetorical nature,
typically used in high register contexts by educated natives of a particular sector of
society and education.
338
24. Shift of register was apparent in the failure of a number of subjects to consider
formality/informality variations of the listed IEPVs. They instead translated
informal IEPVs by formal classical Arabic expressions or employing the passive
voice and vice versa, which resulted in distortion of the intended meanings by
conveying the wrong messages. Those types of errors were attributed to the
following three reasons:
i) When providing their Arabic translations, the Arabic subjects did not consider
the text types in which the listed IEPVs were embedded.
ii) The sharp distinction that exists in the Arabic language between written and
spoken discourse, where two varieties (formal high written variety and
informal low spoken variety) are interchangeably used.
iii) Arabic lexicographers, unlike the majority of the English lexicographers, did
not include enough information about such an essential issue as register
variations of EPVs in their bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries. They,
instead, confined themselves to providing either literal or intuitive idealised
and decontextualized Arabic equivalents for them.
25. Incorrect delivery of speech acts was manifested in the failure of a number of the
subjects to understand the speech acts performed in the utterances in which IEPVs
were used. I attributed committing such a type of errors to the following four reasons:
i) Not taking what is termed by Mason (2001) as the "real-world situational
factors" into account when dealing with the phenomenon of IEPVs.
ii) The polysemous nature of IEPVs and their typically informal use in everyday
spoken English.
339
iii) Most importantly, Arabic equivalents provided to IEPVs in bilingual English-
Arabic dictionaries and in the available textbooks on learning and translating
EPVs are intuitive and not theoretically based.
iv) The disregard of fundamental issues, such as register variations, illocutionary
acts, and functional-pragmatic equivalents by Arabic lexicographers left Arabic
translators with no choice but to consult monolingual English-English
dictionaries to understand the functional-pragmatic meaning of IEPVs in order
to be able to guess their Arabic equivalents, which are, in many cases,
functionally and pragmatically inaccurate.
26. Usage of paraphrasing was noticeable in the tendency of a number of subjects to gloss
the listed IEPVs by employing long Arabic sentences instead of providing their
appropriate Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents.
27. The usage of Arabic colloquial and regional dialects was apparent in the failure of a
number of the subjects, despite the note I made at the beginning of the translation tests
distributed to them, to seek the abovementioned middle-ground Arabic style by
utilizing Modern Standard Arabic when tackling the phenomenon of IEPVs. They
instead produced highly informal colloquial Arabic expressions or regional dialects as
functional-pragmatic equivalents.
28. Despite the fact that translations by employing Arabic colloquial and regional dialects
may deliver the denotative and the communicative meanings of the IEPVs, and they
may well be used by interpreters, they cannot be accepted as written Arabic
340
translations as they are not lexicalized and not current and putting them in writing
sounds unacceptable.
29. The comparison between the two groups demonstrated the fact that the translation
communicative competence of both groups was relatively inadequate. There was a
shortage of knowledge of syntactic, semantic and pragmatic properties of IEPVs, and
a lack of ability in understanding them and translating them into Arabic. The
differences between the two groups regarding the main concern of this study i.e.
achieving the functional-pragmatic equivalents were marginal, which probably gives
the impression that the years of training and experience the Arabic professional
translators have did not help much in translating IEPVs into Arabic.
30. The comparison of the performance of professionals among themselves and the
performance of students among themselves confirmed the abovementioned fact and
revealed that neither the years of experience, in the case of professionals, nor the
stages of study, in the case of students, made any difference with regard to translation
communicative competence of IEPVs. Subjects of each group outperformed each
other regardless of the years of experience and the stages of study. Such a result was
attributed to lack of systematic approach and teaching process of IEPVs.
Nonetheless the Arabic professional translators were more competent and have more
sense of encouragement to take initiative and risk-taking, while the Arabic translation
students deem to require increased awareness of the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic
properties of IEPVs to boost their own ability in comprehending the idiomatic and
polysemic nature of EPVs, and their ability in targeting their communicative
341
meanings by appreciating situational contexts so as to achieve their Arabic functional-
pragmatic equivalents.
6.2 Recommendations
In light of the abovementioned findings, and owing to the diversity of the reasons to
which each piece of finding was attributed, the following pertinent recommendations
can be proposed:
6.2.1 Recommendations for Arabic professional translators
• When translating IEPVs into Arabic, Arabic translators ought to resist the
temptation of hastily translating them literally by taking up the components of
each PV separately. They have to look at each PV as one single, discrete unit of
meaning and consider its idiomatic tendency.
• Arabic translators should not adhere to the direct semantic meaning of IEPVs
(locutionary act/prepositional meaning) when translating them into Arabic. They,
however, have to take into account the situational context in which such verbs are
employed if they are to achieve their functional-pragmatic equivalence.
• In order to achieve the Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalence for IEPVs,
Arabic translators need, to a great extent, to appreciate the register of such
demanding verbs. Primarily, they must be conscious of the parameter of 'field' by
342
recognizing the type of the text in which a given PV is embedded to grasp the
field of the discourse and to see whether it is used in a specialised sense of a
particular field (cf. Heliel 1994). After that, they have to precisely consider the
parameters of 'mode' and 'tenor' to determine the medium by which the utterance
is delivered and the social distance of the interlocutors so as to convey the same
level of formality/informality and to avoid any shift of register as a result of
mismatches between the English and the Arabic languages in this regard. Indeed
such register variations need to be kept in check constantly by translators when
dealing with IEPVs.
• Achieving the functional-pragmatic equivalence of IEPVs also requires Arabic
translators to target their illocutionary acts/pragmatic meanings by accounting for
the speech acts performed in given utterances where IEPVs are used.
• Arabic translators should not reduce IEPVs to sense when translating them into
Arabic. That is, the idiomatic nature has to be kept equivalent. This can typically
be achieved by employing such Arabic idiomatic structures as Arabic proverbs,
Arabic collocations and Arabic fixed expressions.
• When translating IEPVs into Arabic, Arabic translators need to seek the middle
ground Arabic style by adhering to Modern Standard Arabic and avoiding the
usage of both classical and colloquial varieties of the Arabic language.
343
• The strategy of translating English idioms by paraphrasing is quite common
amongst researchers in the field of translation theory (cf. Baker, 1992; Bataineh &
Bataineh, 2002; Ghazala, 2003 to cite just a few). However, it is not
recommended for Arabic translators to typically opt for it when rendering IEPVs
into Arabic, as the findings of the present study demonstrated that resortring to
such an alternative would be very much at the expense of the idiomatic nature of
IEPVs, which has to be kept equivalent in order to achieve the appropriate Arabic
functional-pragmatic equivalence.
• Given the fact that bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries of PVs are far less in
both quantity and quality than the specialized English-English dictionaries of PVs
(see 2.9 above), Arabic translators are best recommended to consult specialized
English-English dictionaries first in order to obtain the contextual meaning and
the situational usage of a given IEPV, then they need to consult the specialized
English-Arabic dictionaries to grasp the Arabic equivalent if found. In case such
an Arabic equivalent is not found, Arabic translators are best advised to take the
parameters of the model devised in this study into their consideration when
coining the required functional-pragmatic equivalent of a given IEPV.
6.2.2 Recommendations for Arabic lexicographers��
Arabic Lexicographers are recommended to take the following crucial points into
consideration when compiling bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries:
344
• First and foremost, there is a real need for more specialized bilingual English-
Arabic dictionaries to be compiled on IEPVs. There are, to the best of my
knowledge and research, only two bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries dedicated
to the phenomenon of EPVs, while there are more than ten monolingual English-
English dictionaries devoted to such a phenomenon. The former type of
dictionaries is far below; both in quality and quantity the latter type (see Chapter
Two above).
• Arabic lexicographers should always assign separate entries to IEPVs in their
general bilingual English-Arabic dictionaries, in the same way they are provided
in the monolingual English-English dictionaries, and list each one of them as one
entity rather than under the verb (first component) or the particle (second
component). Such a procedure makes IEPVs more prominent and easy to be
looked up by Arabic dictionaries users.
• Arabic lexicographers ought to put in a great deal of scholarly effort, when
compiling dictionaries to bridge the quantitative and qualitative gaps that exist in
their available dictionaries. This can only be done by accounting for such key
issues as derivational forms of IEPVs, complex idioms where they constitute a
fundamental part, syntactic and semantic properties and most importantly
pragmatic properties of IEPVs. The latter may be attended to by addressing the
question of register variations of IEPVs and by presenting them in a variety of
situational contexts to allow the Arabic readership to appreciate types of speech
acts preformed so as to grasp their appropriate illocutionary meanings.
345
• Arabic lexicographers need to keep up with the productive nature of IEPVs. In
order to do so, they are best advised to follow the Collins COBUILD Dictionary
and the Oxford Phrasal Verbs Dictionary for Learners of English in this respect
and assign separate appendices for exploring the English particles (prepositions
and adverbs) and the shades of meanings they impart when collocating with
proper verbs to form PVs. By doing so, Arabic lexicographers would provide their
readership with a sort of systematic approach to understand the way the IEPVs
work and the logic behind their collocations and, in turn, enable them to make an
informed decision rather than an arbitrary guessing when faced by newly coined
PVs.
• Another way of keeping up with the productive nature of IEPVs, and best
suggested for Arabic lexicographers, is to keep dictionaries up-to-date by
including any IEPV that pops up among English native speakers. This can be done
by many ways, such as utilizing up-to-dated English corpora (such as British
National Corpus, COBUILD The Bank of English and English Language Corpora
to cite only a few), or even by observing the English language used in the mass
media. Cowie (1993) makes the point that "[a] new edition of a dictionary has not
only to include phrasal verbs and meanings which have entered the language since
the first edition was published but must also take account of new sources of
information about the English language"( p. 40).
• Some English lexicographers provided workbooks to be studied in conjunction
with specialized dictionaries, such as Using Phrasal Verbs by McArthur (1975)
and Collins COBUILD Phrasal Verbs Workbook (1994), which are produced in
346
conjunction with the Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and their Idioms, and the
Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs respectively (see 2.8 & 2.10
above). It would be of great benefit to Arabic learners of English, Arabic
translators and Arabic interpreters if Arabic lexicographers follow suit and
provide their readership with workbooks on IEPVs to be studied in conjunction
with their dictionaries. I believe that dictionary compilers are, more than any one
else, in a better position to write teaching materials on a given aspect of language
in which they are specialized.
6.2.3 Recommendations for Arabic pedagogues ��It is undeniable fact that types of methods and materials utilized in teaching IEPVs to
Arabic students play a significant role not only in learning and perceiving them but
also in using and producing the right equivalents for them in Arabic. Along these lines
Darwin and Gray (1999) point out that:
[…] to alleviate the difficulties phrasal verbs present, ESL teachers and material writers need to approach the problematic areas of phrasal-verb pedagogy systematically, developing and presenting material in a manner that avoids unnecessary confusion and loss of time for both student and instructor (p. 66).
Hence, Arabic pedagogues are recommended to pay a great deal of attention to the
following vital points:
• Owing to the findings arrived at in this dissertation, in which the poor
performance of both groups that were survyed was the rule rather than the
exception, IEPVs must have a prominent place in the overall learning and training
347
process, and they have to be included as an integral part of the interpreting and
translating courses undertaken by Arabic students.
• The findings of the present study revealed that the newly coined IEPVs, (p)
category were the most difficult for both groups involved. In order to enhance the
competence of Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students, in
receiving/understanding and producing/translating the newly coined IEPVs into
Arabic, a systematic approach to account for their productive nature and to
explore a number of learnable patterns underling them is inevitable. Arabic
pedagogues should develop such patterns and present them in a systematic way so
as to provide good pedagogical materials that can help overcome the difficulties
caused by EPVs and, most importantly, to equip the learners with a learning
experience that can assist them in this life-long learning profession. English
pedagogues suggest that the patterns underlying EPVs have to be taught explicitly
so as to shortcut the learning process and make it more efficient (Sansome, 2000;
Sawyer, 2000; Side, 1990). McArthur and Atkins (1974) rightly believe that PVs
"are more consistent in their behaviour and far more teachable than is generally
supposed" (p. 5).
• Arabic pedagogues are best encouraged to spend more time and effort on teaching
the doubled idiomatic nature of the complex idioms, (c) category, which
according to the findings of this study constituted the second hardest category for
both groups.
348
• When teaching IEPVs to Arabic students, Arabic pedagogues need to put more
scholarly effort on their derivational mechanism and syntactic peculiarities,
especially the IEPVs derived from nouns, (dpn) subcategory, and the IEPVs of
verb + preposition constructions, (svp) subcategory, as the finding of this study
showed that they were the most difficult subcategories of (d) and (s) categories
respectively.
• Arabic pedagogues have to develop students' positive attitude toward IEPVs by
establishing a logic and sense of IEPVs when teaching them to Arabic students.
Hannan (1998) indicates that proving to students "that there is a human logic,
based on experiences which they can recognise, gives them confidence that it is
feasible to learn these things, and open doors to useful methods of vocabulary
storage and organization" (p. 27).
• In order to provide Arabic learners of English, Arabic translators and Arabic
interpreters with rich pedagogical materials that can help them overcome the
difficulties IEPVs cause, Arabic pedagogues, curriculum designers and material
developers need to consider and make use of the up-to-date teaching methods of
IEPVs (some of which are mentioned in Chapter Two above) and keep away from
the ineffective and fruitless old-fashioned methods in which IEPVs are deemed as
random and haphazard combinations of verbs and particles and there is no way for
students to master them but to memorize them by heart.
• The majority of experienced English pedagogues who proposed methods of
teaching EPVs to non-native learners of English are in favour of listing and
349
learning them according to their particles rather than their proper verbs. Arabic
pedagogues are best advised to follow suit, since it is the particles, more than the
verbs, which carry the main portion of the function of these combinations (see
2.10 above).
• Arabic pedagogues are required to keep in mind the previously stated point made
by McArthur (1971) in which he maintains that PVs must be taught as units, and
as the equivalent of single verbs. Prompting Arabic learners of English with such
a crucial principle would keep them away from tracing the literal meanings of
these constructions by taking each component of them on its own. IEPVs are
indeed constructions of one semantic unit and have to be taught as such.
• In order to avoid the intuitive decisions of material developers when choosing the
IEPVs to be taught, Arabic pedagogues are best recommended to take into
consideration the previously mentioned point made by Cornell (1985) who
suggests to assemble a "core" of EPVs to determine and choose the most frequent
and common IEPVs to be taught to non-native learners of English.
• Arabic pedagogues should consider the point raised by Side (1990) in which he
asserts that due to the analogous nature of EPVs "single examples should never be
taught in isolation". IEPVs have to be learned in contexts rather than in lists of
unrelated words, thus, connections always have to "be made in order to establish
their context within the language, to show they are meaningfully idiomatic rather
than meaninglessly random" (pp. 150-151).
350
• When teaching IEPVs to Arabic learners of English, Arabic translators and Arabic
interpreters, Arabic pedagogues have to utilize authentic example sentences
representing communicative situations taken from reliable, up-to-date and
comprehensive enough corpora, and avoid what is called by Kharma and Hajjaj
(1989) the "idealisation of teaching materials". Such bookish idealised examples
would do more harm than good and deepen the negative attitude of Arabic
learners toward IEPVs.
• Arabic students, Arabic translators and Arabic interpreters are best encouraged to
make their own list of IEPVs according to the particle in their vocabulary
notebooks. Such a method was suggested by some English pedagogues to non-
native learners of English as a way to mastering the perception and production of
problematic EPVs (cf. Side, 1990; Flower, 2000).
6.3 Contributions made by this study
The contributions made by this study to the knowledge base of linguistics and
translation are sevenfold: 1) it is the first academic thesis entirely devoted to
exploring the most challenging phenomenon of IEPVs on a linguistic contrastive
analysis framework, so as to describe and bring to light the correspondences and
differences of the characteristics of such a phenomenon between the English and
Arabic languages; 2) The study provides a generic practical linguistic model as a
disciplined approach for the analysis and translation of IEPVs into Arabic. The model
was applied as a yardstick by which the translation quality of such idiomatic
expressions was analysed, compared, and evaluated; 3) it presents a comprehensive
351
syntactic, semantic and pragmatic categorization of the problematic aspects of the
phenomenon of IEPVs. Such a categorization leads a greater perception of the
phenomenon and hopefully will constitute a platform from which prospective
researchers, practicing translators and interpreters, lexicographers and pedagogues can
move on to enhance their strategies of dealing with this phenomenon; 4) it is the first
of its kind to carry out a large scale experimental research into translating IEPVs into
Arabic. The considerable number of the items of the translation tests (100 questions)
and the enormous number of answers obtained (2400 answers) provided the study
with a reliable amount of data and enabled the present researcher to confidently
generalize the essential findings arrived at; 5) the study has the virtue of targeting not
only the professional translators but also the translation students and the virtue of
coming up with a number of fruitful insights as to the impact of the years of
experience and stages of study on translation communicative competence of the
participants; 6) the study contributes to reconciling the theory and the practice as to
translating IEPVs into Arabic, by providing vital insights on the theoretical gaps that
caused the abovementioned problems in practice. 7) it provides a number of
theoretically based recommendations for translators to help them tackle the
difficulties of translating IEPVs into Arabic, for lexicographers to close the existing
gaps and for pedagogues to modify their methods and materials and make them more
valid and practical.
6.4 Directions for further research
This dissertation mainly concentrated on translating IEPVs into Arabic. In spite of its
comprehensive coverage of the peculiarities of the phenomenon of IEPVs and the
352
difficulties they cause to Arabic professional translators and Arabic translation students,
it was limited to one language pair. It will be interesting to replicate and extend this
study to other language combinations. The workable model devised in this study for the
analysis and translation of IEPVs into Arabic can easily be employed in conducting
more parallel studies to analyse IEPVs and translate them into other languages.
Since IEPVs are typically used in everyday spoken English more than in formal written
English, they are more likely to pose a great deal of difficulties to interpreters when
rendering them to Arabic. It would also be important to replicate or extend this study to
investigate the difficulties encountered by Arabic (or any other language) interpreters
when facing such a phenomenon.
It goes without saying that the real need for a comprehensive, up-to-date, and
theoretically based bilingual English-Arabic dictionary of PVs is urgent. Such a very
much wanted dictionary can well be compiled in the light of the findings and
recommendations of this study which pave the way to Arabic-English lexicographers to
avoid the existing critical drawbacks if they are to achieve the objective of satisfying their
end users, that is, the learners of English and Arabic, as well as the English-Arabic
translators.
353
BIBLIOGRAPHY Aarts, B. (1989). Verb-Preposition Constructions and Small Clauses in English J.
Linguistics (25), 277-290. Aarts, B. (1997). English Syntax and Argumentation. London: University College. Abboud, P. F., & McCarus, E. N. (1968). Elementary Modern Standard Arabic.
United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Abdel-Hafiz, A.-S. (2003). Pragmatic and Linguistic Problems in the Translation of
Naguib Mahfouz's The Thief and the Dogs: A Case Study. Babel, 49 (3), 229-252.
Al-bayyatii, T. (1982). What Pupils Need in English. Beirut: Al-NahDah Institution
for Cultural Services. Al-bustaanii, F. A. (1963). munjid al-Tulaab (in Arabic). Beirut: al-maTba3atu al-
katholiikyyah. Al-ghalaayiinii, M. (1986). Jaami3 al-dduruus al-3arabiyyah (in Arabic). Beirut: al-
maktabatu al-3aSriyyah. Ali, A. S. M. (2004). A study of antonymous and synonymous couplings in Arabic
with reference to translation. Babel, 50 (4), 346-360. Al-jaaHiZ, A. A. (1932). al-bayaan wa-altabyiin (in Arabic) Cairo: al-maTba3atu al-
raHmaanyyah. Al-jurjaanii, A. A. (1991). ?asraar al-balaaghah (in Arabic). Beirut: Daar al-jiil. Al-jurjaanii, A. A. (n.d.). dalaa?ilu al-?i3jaaz (in Arabic). Cairo: maTba3atu majallati
al-manaar. Al-jurjaanii, A. M. (1969). kitaab al-ta3riifaat (in Arabic). Beirut. maktabat lubnan. Alkhuli, M. A. (1999). Comparative Linguistics: English and Arabic. Jordan: Alfalah
House. Al-Kufaishi, A. (2004). Translation as a learning and teaching strategy. Babel, 50 (1),
45-59. Al-Qinai, J. (2000). Translation Quality Assessment: Strategies, Parameters and
Procedures. Meta, XLV (3), 497-519. Al-raazii, M. (1981). mukhtaar al-SiHaaH (in Arabic). Beirut: Daar al-kitaab al-
3arabii.
354
Al-saghir, A. M. (1993). English for All Levels (Fifth ed.). Riyadh: Narjis Printing Press.
Al-sarraaj, A. M. (1973). rissalat al-?ishtiqaaq (in Arabic). Damascus: maTba3at al-
3ilm. Al-tha3aalibii, A. (n.d.). kitaab fiqih al-lughtia wa-asraar al-3arabiyyah (in Arabic).
Beirut: Daar maktabat al-Hayaat. Al-zamakhsharii, A. J. (1948). al-keshshaaf (in Arabic). Cairo: Daar al-kitaab al-
3arabii. Al-zamakhsharii, A. J. (1953). ?assasal-balaaghah (in Arabic). Ciaro: maTba3atu
?urfaand. Armstrong, K. (2004). Sexing Up the Dossier: A Semantic Analysis of Phrasal Verbs
for Language Teachers. Language Awareness, 13(4), 213-224. Austin, J. L. (1975). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clearndon Press. Awwad, M. (1990). Equivalence and Translatability of English and Arabic Idioms.
Papersand Studies in Contrastive Linguistics (26), 57-67. Azzaro, G. (1992). The Syntactic Learning of English Phrasal Verbs: Theory.
Rassegna Italiana di Linguistica Applicata, XXIV (1), 33-60. Baker, M. (1992). In Other Words: A coursebook on translation. London and New
York: Routledge. Barber, C. (1993). The English Language: A Historical Introduction. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. Bataineh, R. F., & Bataineh, R. F. (2002). The Difficulties Jordanian Graduate
Learners of English as a Second language Face When Translating English Idioms into Arabic. RASK, 16, 33-83.
Beate Hampe, J. (1997). Towards a solution of the phrasal verb puzzle:
Considerations on some scattered pieces. Lexicology, 3/2, 203-243. Belkacemi, C. (1998). Prepositions with verbal functions in Arabic. Orientalia
Suecana (47), 13-20. Bell, R. (1991). Translation and Translating: Theory and Practice. London and New
York: Longman. Bennett, D. C. (1975). Spatial and Temporal Uses of English Prepositions: An Essay
in Stratificational Semantics: London: Longman Group Limited. Berman, L. A., & Kirstein, L. (1996). Practical Idioms: Using Phrasal Verbs in
Everyday Contexts (Second ed.). Illinois: National Textbook Company (NTC).
355
Bernstein, J. S. (1974). On the Semantics of Certain English Phrasal Verbs and their Rendering into Spanish. Bilingual Review/Revista Bilingue, 1 (1), 59-66.
Besserman, L. (1998). Chaucer's Multi-Word Verbs: A Historical Introduction and
Illustrative Sample. NOWELE (34), 99-153. Bolinger, D. (1971). The Phrasal Verb in English. Cambridge and Massachusetts:
Harvard University Press. Brashi, A. S. (2005). Arabic Collocations: Implications for Translation. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Western Sydney, Australia. Brugman, C. M. (1983). Story of Over. Unpublished master's thesis, University of
California at Berkeley. Campbell, S. (1998). Translation into the second language. London and New York:
Longman. Campoy, M. C. (2002). Up and Over: Phrasal Verbs Expressing Superiority and
Quantity. Modern English Teacher, 11(1), 17-19. Cantarino, V. (1974). Syntax of Modern Arabic Prose. Bloomington / London:
Indiana University Press. Catford, J. (1974). A linguistic Theory of Translation: An Essay in Applied Linguistics
(Fourth ed.). London, New York and Toronto: Oxford University Press. Chakhachiro, R. (1997). The Translation of Irony in Australian Political Commentary
Texts from English into Arabic. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Western Sydney, Sydney.
Chakhachiro, R. (2005). Revision for Quality. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology,
13 (3), 225-238. Chen, P. (1986). Discourse and Particle Movement in English. Studies in Language,
10 (1), 79-95. Chesterman, A. (1998). Contrastive Functional Analysis. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:
John Benjamins Publishing Company. Close, R. A. (1992). A Teacher's Grammar: An Approach to the Central Problems of
English. London: Language Teaching Publications. Collins, P. (1998). English Grammar. South Melbourne: Wesley Longman Australia
Pty Limited. Corless, B. (1979). Formal English. Canberra: Australian National University Press. Cornell, A. (1985). Realistic Goals in Teaching and Learning Phrasal Verbs. IRAL,
XXIII (4), 269-280.
356
Cowie, A. P. (1993). Getting to grips with phrasal verbs. English Today 36, 9 (4), 38-41.
Crowley, T., Lynch, J., Siegel, J., & Piau, J. (1995). The Design of English: An
introduction to descriptive linguistics. Auckland: Longman Paul. Crutchley, A. (2007). Comprehension of idiomatic verb + particle constructions in 6-
to 11- year-old children. First Language, 27 (3), 203-226. Crystal, D. (1997). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dainty, P. (1991). Phrasal Verbs in Context. London and Basingstoke: Macmillan
Publishers Limited. Darwin, C. M., & Gray, L. S. (1999). Going After the Phrasal Verb: An Alternative
Approach to Classification. TESOL QUARTERY, 33 (1), 65-83. DeArmond, R. C. (1977). On Decide On and Similar Constructions in English.
glossa, 11 (1), 20-47. Dehe, N. (2005). The Optimal Placement of up and ab-A Comparison. The Journal of
Comparative Germanic Linguistics, 8 (3), 185-224. Dixon, R. M. W. (1982). The Grammar of English Phrasal Verbs. Australian Journal
of Linguistics, 2, 1-42. Dixon, R. M. W. (1991). A New Approach to English Grammar, on Semantic
Principles. Oxford: Clarendon Press. El-Nagar, H. Y. (1998). Phrasal Verbs. Cairo: Dar El-Talae for Publishing,
Distribution and Exporting. El-Yasin, M. K. (1996). The Passive Voice: A Problem for the English-Arabic
Translator. babel, 42 (1), 18-26. Emery, P. G. (1988). Collocation: A Problem in Arabic/English Translation?
Quinquereme, 11 (1), 178-184. Emery, P. G. (1991). Collocation in Modern Standard Arabic. Journal of Arabic
Linguistics (23), 56-65. Fawcett, P. (2001). Linguistic approaches. In M. Baker (Ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia
of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge. Fernando, C. (1996). Idioms and Idiomaticity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fisiak, J. (Ed.). (1981). Contrastive Linguistics and the Language Teacher. Oxford:
Pergamon Press.
357
Flower, J. (2000). Phrasal Verb Organiser (Seventh ed.). London: Language Teaching Publications (LTP).
Fraser, B. (1974). The Phrasal Verb in English [Review of the book]. Language, 50
(3), 568-575. Fraser, B. (1976). The Verb-Particle Combination in English. New York, San
Francisco and London: Academic Press. Gardner, D. & Davies, M. (2007). Pointing Out Frequent Phrasal Verbs: A Corpus-
Based Analysis. TESOL QUARTERLY, 41 (2), 339-360. Ghadessy, M. (1993). Register analysis: Theory and Practice. London and New
York: Printer Publishers. Ghazala, H. (2003). Idiomaticity Between Evasion and Invasion in Translation:
Stylistic, Aesthetic and connotative Considerations. Babel, 49 (3), 203-227. Goodale, M. (1994). Collins COBUILD Phrasal Verbs Workbook (Second ed.).
London: Harper Collins Publishers. Gries, S. (2002). The influence of processing on syntactic variation: Particle
placement in English. In N. Dehe, R. Jackendoff, A. McIntyre & S. Urban (Eds.), Verb-Particle Explorations Berlin and New York: Mourton de Gruyter.
Grundy, P. (1995). Doing Pragmatics. London: Edward Arnold, a division of Hodder
Headline PLC. Hale, S. (1996). Pragmatic Considerations in Court Interpreting ARAL, 19 (1), 61-72. Hale, S. (1997). The Treatment of Register Variation in Court Interpreting. The
Translator, 3 (1), 39-54. Hale, S. (2002). How faithfully do court interpreters render the style of non-English
speaking witnesses' testimonies? A data-based study of Spanish-English bilingual proceedings. Discourse Studies, 4 (1), 25-47.
Hale, S. B. (2004). The Discourse of Court Interpreting: Discourse practices of the
law, the witness and the interpreter. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Halliday, M., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London and New York:
Longman. Halliday, M., & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language
in a social-semiotic perspective. Victoria: Deakin University. Hammaad, A. (1983). 3awaamil al-taTawwri al-lughawii (in Arabic). Beirut: Daar al-
?andalus.
358
Hannan, P. (1998). Particles and Gravity: Phrasal Verbs with 'Up' and 'Down". MET, 7 (1), 21-27.
Hatim, B. (1997). Communication across Cultures: Translation Theory and
Contrastive Text Linguistics. UK: University of Exeter Press. Hatim, B. (2001). Discourse analysis and translation. In M. Baker (Ed.), Routledge
Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge. Hatim, B. (2001). Pragmatics and translation. In M. Baker (Ed.), Routledge
Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge. Hatim, B. (2001). Teaching and Researching Translation. London: Longman. Hatim, B. (2001). Text linguistics and translation. In M. Baker (Ed.), Routledge
Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge. Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1990). Discourse and the Translation. London: Longman. Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1997). The Translator as Communicator. London: Routledge. Heaton, J. B. (1965). Prepositions and Adverbial particles. London: Longman Group
Limited. Heaton, J. B. (1968). Using Prepositions and Particles (Fourth ed.). London:
Longman Group Limited. Heine, A. (2002). Functional Phrasal Verbs in a Learner's Dictionary Using Material
from Langenscheidts Grossworterbuch Deutsh als Fremdsprache. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 103 (1), 51-62.
Heliel, M. H. (1994). Verb-Particle Combinations in English and Arabic: Problems
for Arab Lexicographers and Translators. In R. De Beaugrand, A. Shunnaq & M. H. Heliel (Eds.), Language, Discourse and Translation in the West and Middle East. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Hermans, T. (2001). Models of translation. In M. Baker (Ed.), Routledge
Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge. Hill, L. A. (1968). Prepositions and adverbial Particles: An Interim Classification
Semantic, Structural, and Graded. London: Oxford University Press. Hiltunen, R. (1983). Phrasal Verbs in English Grammar Books before 1800.
Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 3 (Lxxxiv), 376-386. Hoey, M., & Houghton, D. (2001). Contrastive analysis and translation. In M. Baker
(Ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge.
359
Holes, C. (1994). Designing English-Arabic Dictionaries. In R. De Beaugrand, A. Shunnaq & M. Heliel (Eds.), Language, Discourse and Translation In the West and Middle East (pp. 161-180). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Holes, C. (1995). Modern Arabic: Structures, Functions and Varieties. London and
New York: Longman. Homeidi, M. A. (2004). Arabic translation across culture. Babel, 50 (1), 13-27. Hopper, V. F., Gale, C., & Foot, R. C. (1990). Essentials of English (Fourth ed.). New
York, London, Toronto and Sydney: Barron's Educational Series, INC. House, J. (1977). A Model for Translation Quality Assessment. Tubingen: TBL
Verlag Gunter Narr. House, J. (1986). Acquiring Translational Competence in Interaction. In J. House &
S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlingual and Intercultural Communication. Germany: Gunter Narr Verlag Tubingen.
House, J. (2001). Quality of translation. In M. Baker (Ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of
Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge. House, J. (2001). Translation Quality Assessment: Linguistic Description versus
Social Evaluation. Meta, XLVI (2). Huddleston, R. (1988). English grammar: an outline. Cambridge, New York, New
Rochelle, Melbourne and Sydney: Cambridge University Press. Hurford, J., & Heasley, B. (1983). Semantics: a coursebook. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. Hymes, D. H. (1972). On Communicative Competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes
(Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected Readings. Victoria, Australia: Penguin Books.
Ibrahim, Z., Aydelott, S., & Kassabgy, N. (Eds.). (2000). Diversity in Language:
Contrastive Studies in Arabic and English Theoretical and Applied Linguistics. Cairo and New York: The American University in Cairo Press.
Jackendoff, R. (2002). English particle constructions, the lexicon, and the autonomy
of syntax. In N. Dehe, R. Jackendoff, A. McIntyre & S. Urban (Eds.), Verb-Particle Explorations. Berlin and New York: Mourton de Gruyter.
Jacobs, R. A. (1995). English Syntax: A Grammar for English Language
Professionals. Oxford: Oxford University Press. James, C. (1980). Contrastive Analysis. London: Longman. Jespersen, O. (1976). Essential of English Grammar. London: Lowe and Brydone
Printers Limited.
360
John, & Smithback, C. Y. (1991). Fun with Idioms. Singapore: Federal Publications. Jones, L. (1985). Use of English: Grammar practice activities for intermediate and
upper-intermediate students. Cambridge, London, New York, New Rochelle, Melbourne and Sydney: Cambridge University Press.
Jong, A. L. a. N. d. (2002). German particle verbs and word formation. In Nicole
Dehe, Ray Jackendoff, Andrew McIntyre & S. Urban (Eds.), Verb-Particle Explorations. Berlin and New York: Mourton de Gruyter.
Jowett, W. P. (1951). On Phrasal Verbs. English Language Teaching, 5, 152-157. Kaluza, H. (1984). English Verbs with Prepositions and Partcles. IRAL, XXII (2), 109-
113. Kaminska, P. (2001). Keywords for phrasal verbs. MET 10 (2), 59-61. Kaplan, J. (1995). English Grammar Principles and Facts (Second ed.). Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Kennedy, A. G. (1967). The Modern English Verb-Adverb Combination. New York:
AMS Press Inc. Kenny, D. (2001). Equivalence. In M. Baker (Ed.) Routledge Encyclopedia of
Translation Study. London and New York. Kharma, N. (1983). A Contrasitve Analysis of the Use of Verb Forms in English and
Arabic. Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag. Kharma, N., & Hajjaj, A. (1989). Errors in English Among Arabic Speakers: Analysis
and Remedy. London: Longman Kroch, A. S. (1979). The Verb-Particle Combination in English [Review of the book].
Language 55 (1), 219-224. Lattey, E. (1986). Pragmatic Classification of Idioms as an Aid for the Language
Learning. IRAL, XXIV (3), 217-233. Leech, G. (1974). Semantics. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Lentzner, K. R. (1977). Semantic and Syntactic Aspects of Arabic Prepositions.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University, Washington, D. C. Lindner, S. J. (1983). A Lexico-Semantic Analysis of English Verb Particle
Constructions With Out and Up. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University
Lindstromberg, S. (1991). (Re)teaching Prepositions. English Teaching Forum, XXIX
(2), 47-50.
361
Lindstromberg, S. (1998). English Prepositions Explained. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:
John Benjamins Publishing Company. Live, A. H. (1965). The Discontinuous Verb in English. Word (21), 428-451. Marton, W. (1972). Pedagogical Implications of Contrastive Analysis. Studia Anglica
Posnaniensia, 4, 115-125. Mason, I. (2001). Communicative/functional approaches. In M. Baker (Ed.),
Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge.
McArthur, T. (1971). Teaching English Phrasal Verbs. Teaching, 43 (3), 71-75. McArthur, T. (1975). Using Phrasal Verbs (Second ed.). London and Glasgow:
Collins. McArthur, T. (1979). The strange cases of the English phrasal verb. Zielsprache
Englisch, 9 (3), 24-26. McArthur, T. (1989). The long-neglected phrasal verbs. English Today, 5 (2), 38-44. Mikio, K. (1997). Instructional Effects of Positive and Negative Evidence on
Prepositional/Phrasal Verbs. The IRLT Bulletin (11), 1-39. Mitchell, T. F. (1958). Syntagmatic Relations in Linguistic Analysis. Translations of
The Philological Society, 101-118. Moon, R. (1998). Fixed Expressions and Idioms in English. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Morgan, P. S. (1997). Figuring out figure out: Metaphor and the semantics of the
English verb-particle construction. Cognitive Linguistics (8-4), 327-357. Mortimer, C. (1979). Phrasal Verbs in Conversation (Seventh ed.). London:
Longman Group Limited. Moutaouakil, A. (1989). Pragmatic Functions in a Functional Grammar of Arabic.
Dordrecht: Foris Publications. Najiib, A. M. (2001). ?usus al-tarjamah (in Arabic) (Fourth ed.). Ciaro: maktabat
?ibn siinaa lilTiba3a wa-alnashr wa-lajwzii3 wa-altaSdiir. Newby, M. (1987). The Structure of English: A Handbook of English Grammar.
Cambridge, New York, New Rochelle, Melbourne and Sydney: Cambridge University Press.
Newmark, P. (1996). Introductory Survey. In R. Owens (Ed.), The Translator's
Handbook (Third ed.). London: Aslib, The Association for Information Management.
362
Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. London: Longman. Nida, E. (2001). Contexts in Translating. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company. Nord, C. (1991). Text Analysis in Translation: Theory, Methodology, and Didactic
Application of a Model for Translation-Oriented Text Analysis. Amsterdam - Atlanta, GA: Rodopi B. V.
Palmer, F. R. (1968). A Linguistic Study of the English Verb. Coral Gables and
Florida: University of Miami Press. Palmer, F. R. (1974). The English Verb (Second ed.). London: Longman. Quirk, R., & Greenbaum, S. (1973). A University Grammar of English. London:
Longman. Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A Comprehensive
Grammar of the English Language. London and New York: Longman. Ronowicz, E., Hehir, J., Kaimi, T., Kojima, K., & Lee, D. (2005). Translator's
frequent Lexic Store and Dictionary Use as Factors in SLT Comprehension and Translation Speed-AComparative Study of Professional, Paraprofessiona and Novice Transaltors. META, L (2), 580-596.
Rottet, K. J. (2005). Phrasal Verbs and English Influence in Welsh. Word, 56 (1), 39-
70. Salama-Carr, M. (2001). Interpretive Approach. In M. Baker (Ed.), Routledge
Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge. Sansome, R. (2000). Applying lexical research to the teaching of phrasal verbs. IRAL,
38, 59-69. Sawyer, J. H. (1999). Verb adverb and verb particle constructions: Their syntax and
acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Boston University. Sawyer, J. H. (2000). Comments on Clayton M. Darwin and Loretta S. Gray's "Going
After the Phrasal Verb: An Alternative Approach to Classification" A Reader Reacts. TESOL QUARTERY, 34 (1), 151-159.
Sayyd Ahmad, R. A. (1993). fannu al-kitaabah. Beirut (in Arabic): Daar al-bayaan al-
3arabii. Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in The Philosophy of Language. Oxford:
Alden & Mowbray Ltd. Shakkour, J. (1992). kitaab al-bayaan (in Arabic). Beirut: Daar al-fikr al-lubnanii.
363
Sheen, R. (2000). Comments on Clayton M. Darwin and Loretta S. Gray's "Going After the Phrasal Verb: An Alternative Approach to Classification" Another Reader Reacts. TESOL QUARTERY, 34 (1), 160-173.
Shovel, M. (1992). Making Sense of Phrasal Verbs. London: Prentice Hall
International (UK) Limited. Side, R. (1990). Phrasal verbs: sorting them out. ELT Journal, 44 (2), 144-152. Sjoholm, K. (1995). The Influence of Crosslinguistic, Semantic, and Input Factors on
the Acquisition of English Phrasal Verbs. Finland: Abo Akademi Printing Press.
Snell-Hornby, M. (1995). Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach.
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Sorvali, S. (1996). Translation Studies in a New Perspective. Frankfurt am Main,
Berlin, New York, Paris and Wien: Peter Lang. Sroka, K. A. (1972). The Syntax of English Phrasal Verbs. The Hague and Paris:
Mouton. Swierzbin, B. (1996). Word Order with Separable Phrasal Verbs. Unpublished
master's thesis, University of Minnesota. Taha, A. (1960). The Structure of Two-Word Verbs in English. Language Learning,
X (3 & 4), 115-122. Taymuur, M. (n.d). mushkilaatu al-lughati al-3arabyyah (in Arabic). Beirut: al-
maktabah al-3aSryyah. Thomson, A. J., & Martinet, A. V. (1986). A Practical English Grammar (Fourth ed.).
Oxford: Oxford University Press. Thrush, E. A. (2001). Pain English? A study of plain English vocabulary and
international audiences. Technical Communication, 48 (3), 289-296. Vestergaard, T. (1977). Prepositional Phrases and Prepositional Verbs: A Study in
Grammatical Function. The Hague, Paris and New York: Mouton. Villaviicencio, A., & Copestake, A. (2003). Verb-particle constructions in a
computational grammar of English. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG), South Korea.
Waafii, A. A. (1973). fiqh al-lughah (in Arabic). Ciaro: Daar al-nahDah. Wallace, L. C. (1968). Idiomaticity as an Anomaly in the Chomskyan Paradigm.
Foundations of Language (4), 109-127. Wightwick, J., & Gaafar, M. (1998). Arabic Verbs and Essentials of Grammar.
Illinois: Passport Books.
364
Wood, F. T. (1964). English Verbal Idioms. London and Basingstoke: Macmillan
Publishers Ltd Wood, F. T. (1967). English Prepositional Idioms. London and Basingstoke:
Macmillan and Co Ltd. Wright, W. (1981). A Grammar of the Arabic Language (Third ed.). Beirut: Librairie
Du Liban. Yatskovich, I. (1999). Some Ways of Translating English Phrasal Verbs into Russian.
Translation Journal, 3 (3), 1-4. Retrieved April 12, 2002, from http://accurapid.com/journal/09russ.htm
Zeller, J. (2001). Particle verbs and local domains. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing Company. Zughoul, M. (1979). Teaching English Prepositions. English Teaching Forum, 42 (3),
24-29.
DICTIONARIES
Ba'albaki, M. (1994). Al-Mawrid: A Modern English-Arabic Dictionary (Twenty eighth ed.). Beirut: Dar El Ilm Lilmalayin.
Baalbaki, R. (2000). Al-Mawrid: A Modern Arabic-English Dictionary (Tirteenth ed.).
Beirut: Dar El Ilm Lilmalayin. Benson, M., Benson, E., & Ilson, R. (1997). The BBI Dictionary of English Word
Combinations. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Butler, S. (Ed.). (1990). The Macquarie Dictionary of New Words. NSW: The
Macquarie Library. Constant, M. C. (1991). English Phrasal Verbs in French. Hong Kong: Thomas
Nelson and Sons Ltd. Courtney, R. (1983). Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs. England: Longman
Group Limited. Cowie, A. P., & Mackin, R. (1975). Oxford Dictionary of Current Idiomatic English.
London: Oxford University Press. Cowie, A. P., & Mackin, R. (1993). Oxford Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs (Second ed.).
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
365
Daud, N., Dollah, N., & Zubir, B. (2003). Linguistics Dictionary: English-Arabic Arabic-English. Kuala Lampur: A. S. Noordeen.
Delbridge, A., Bernard, J., Blair, D., Butler, S., Peter, P., & Yallop, C. (Eds.). (2001).
The Macquarie Dictionary (Federation ed.). NSW: The Macquarie Library. Doniach, N. S. (1982). The Concise Oxford English-Arabic Dictionary. Oxford:
Oxford University Press. Doniach, N. S. (Ed.). (1981). The Oxford English-Arabic Dictionary Of Current
Usage (Fourth ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gove, P. B. (Ed.). (1993). Webster's Third New International Dictionary Springfield,
Massachusetts: Merriam-Webster INC, Publishers. Heliel, M. H. (2000). York Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and Their Idioms: English-
English-Arabic. Beirut: York Press-Librairie du Liban Publishers. Karmi, H. (1997). Al-Mughni Al-Akbar. Beirut: Librairie du Liban. Khalaili, K. (1979). English Phrasal Verbs in Arabic. London: Hodder and Stoughton. Kirkpatrick, E. M., & Davidson, G. (Eds.). (1982). Time-Chambers Dictionary of
Phrasal Verbs. Singapore: Federal Publications (S) Pte Ltd. McArthur, T., & Atkins, B. (1974). Dictionary of English Phrasal Verbs and their
Idioms. London and Glasgow: Collins. McCarthy, M. (Ed.). (1997). Cambridge International Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mowafi, M. I., Kharma, N. N., Durayni, M. R., Fayad, S. H., Barbary, S., Hajjaj, S., et
al. (1985). A Dictionary of English Idioms: English-Arabic. Beirut: Librairie du Liban.
Nasser, K. A. (1997). A Dictionary of American & Canadian Terms: English-Arabic.
Beirut: Librairie du Liban. Oxford Phrasal Verbs Dictionary of Learners of English. (2001). Oxford: Oxford
University Press. Oxford Wordpower Dictionary: English-English-Arabic (2000). (Third ed.). Oxford:
Oxford University Press. Rooney, K. (Ed.). (2004). Macquarie International English Dictionary (Second ed.).
Sydney: Pan Macmillan Australia Pty Limited. Siinii, M., Hussein, M., & Al-doush, S. A. (1996). al-mu3jam al-syaaqii lilta3biiraat
al-?iSTilaaHyyah (in Arabic). Beirut: maktabat lubnan nashiroun.
366
Simpson, J. A., & Weiner, E. S. C. (1989). The Oxford English Dictionary (Second ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sinclair, J. (Ed.). (1998). Collins COBUILD Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs. London and
Glasgow: Collins. Spears, R. (1993). NTC's Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs and Other Idiomatic Verbal
Phrases. Illinois: National Textbook Company (NTC) Publishing Group. Stern, G. (2000). The Grammar Dictionary: 250 terms explained, and illustrated with
real-life texts. Greenwood: R. I. C. Publications. Taha, A. (1972). An Analysis and Dictionary of Two-Word Verbs in English
Illustrated in Sentences. Kuwait: Kuwait University. Taha, A. (1996). York Dictionary of Two-Word Verbs in English. Beirut: York Press-
Librairie du Liban Publishers. Trask, R. L. (2000). Dictionary of English Grammar. London: Penguin Group. Turton, N., & Manser, M. (1985). The Student's Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs. London
and Basingstoke: Macmillan. Wallace, M. J. (1981). Dictionary of English Idioms. Glasgow and London: Collins. Wehr, H. (1980). A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic: Arabic-English (Third
Printing ed.). Beirut and London Librairie Du Liban and Macdonald & Evans LTD.
NEWSPAPERS
The Australian (2004, March 31). p. 1 The Australian. (2005, May 10). p. 2 The Australian. (2005, May 10). p. 22 The Daily Telegraph (2004, August 12). p. 1 The Daily Telegraph (2004, August 12). p. 9 The Daily Telegraph (2004, August 12). p. 14 The Daily Telegraph (2004, August 12). p. 23 The Sun Herald (2004, August 8). pp. 10-11 The Sunday Telegraph (2004, April 11). p. 1 The Sun-Herald (2004, August 8). p. 51
367
The Sydney Morning Herald (2004, June 3). p. 11 The Sydney Morning Herald (2004, June 3). p. 2
WEB SITES
http://a4esl.org/q/j/ck/fb-phrasalverbs.html
http://eslus.com/LESSONS/GRAMMAR/PHRASALS/Pv1.htm
http://eslus.com/LESSONS/GRAMMAR/PHRASALS/Pv1b.htm
http://eslus.com/LESSONS/GRAMMAR/PHRASALS/Pv1c.htm
http://eslus.com/LESSONS/GRAMMAR/PHRASALS/Pv1d.htm
http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~ozesl/quiz4.html
http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~ozesl/quiz5.html
http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~ozesl/quiz6.html
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/esl/eslphrasal.html http://valenciaenglish.netfirms.com/phrasals00.htm
http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~billw/nlpdict.html#phrasalverb
http://www.english-zone.com/index.php
http://www.eslcafe.com/pv/
http://www.eslpartyland.com/quiz%20center/the%20big%20let%20down%202.htm
http://www.eslpartyland.com/quiz/get.htm
http://www.phrasalverbdemon.com/
http://www.sk.com.br/sk-twow.html
http://www.super-memory.com/sml/colls/pv.htm
http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/phrasal-verbs/
368
APPENDICES
������������
369
APPENDIX 1
TRANSLATION TESTS
University of Westerm Sydney College of Arts, School of Humanities and Languages
Locked Bag 1797 PENRITH SOUTH DC NSW 1797
___________________________________________________
Dear research participant,
Your are invited to participate in a research project conducted by Ali Yunis Aldahesh,
a PhD. student at the School of Humanities and Languages, College of Arts,
University of Western Sydney.
The present study attempts to explore the difficulties encountered by Arabic
translators and Arabic translation students when translating idiomatic English phrasal
verbs into Arabic, and to propose recommendations for professional translators,
translation students, translation teachers and lexicographers.
An idiomatic English phrasal verb can be broadly defined as a combination of a
simple verb with one of a range of particles (adverbial or prepositional). Such a
combination constitutes one unit of meaning, which is totally different from the
meanings of its components. Idiomatic English phrasal verbs, however, represent a
great deal of difficulty to English learners in general, and to Arabic translators and
Arabic translation students in particular due to their complexity and idiomaticity.
370
If you agree to participate, you will be given a translation test of one hundred English
sentences. You are required to translate into Arabic the underlined phrases only. The
test will take approximately one hour. If you decide not to participate, please return
the material in the postage paid envelope.
For the sake of confidentiality, the participants will be given code numbers to
replace their names, so that their real names will not appear in our records.
Furthermore, the information collected will be safely stored at the University of
Western Sydney. Only the researcher, Ali Yunis Aldahesh, will be permitted to use
the information. The information, however, will be destroyed after five years.
As a participant in this research, you may withdraw from the test at any time without
having to give us any reasons. There will be no penalty or disadvantage to participants
who decide to terminate or not participate in the research.
Your participation is greatly appreciated. You will receive a letter from the School of
Humanities and Languages acknowledging your valuable participation.
Note: This study has been approved by the University of Western Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee. If you have any complaints or reservations about the ethical conduct of this research, you may contact the Ethics Committee through the Research Ethics Officers (tel.: 02 47 360883). Any issues you raise will be treated in confidence and investigated fully, and you will be informed of the outcome. Yours sincerely, Ali Yunis Aldahesh Phone: 0402964764 Email: [email protected]
������
371
University of Westerm Sydney College of Arts, School of Humanities and Languages
Locked Bag 1797 PENRITH SOUTH DC NSW 1797
___________________________________________________
Consent Form
I,………………………………………….., have read and understood the information
about the research, and any questions I have asked have been answered to my
satisfaction. I understand that my participation is voluntary and I agree to participate
in this research, knowing that I can withdraw at any time. I understand that the
information I provide will not be identified as coming from me in any way and that
the information I provide will be part of Ali Yunis Alahesh's thesis. I have been given
a copy of this form to keep.
Participant's Name: ………………………………………………….
Participant's Signature: ……………………… Date: ………………
Investigator's Name: Ali Yunis Aldahesh
Investigator's Signature: …………………….. Date: ………………
Note:
This study has been approved by the University of Western Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee. If you have any complaints or reservations about the ethical conduct of this research, you may contact the Ethics Committee through the Research Ethics Officers (tel.: 02 47 360883). Any issues you raise will be treated in confidence and investigated fully, and you will be informed of the
outcome.
372
Part One Please fill in the following form: Please use a tick or a cross between the brackets, as appropriate.
• Name (optional):
• Gender:
Male ( )
Female ( )
• Age (optional):
• First language spoken at home:
• Period living in Australia:
• Qualification:
• Professional Translator:
Years of translation experience:
NAATI accreditation (if applicable):
Academic qualification in translation (if applicable):
• Translation Student:
Undergraduate ( )
Year one ( )
Year two ( )
Year three ( )
Postgraduate ( )
Graduate Diploma ( )
M.A ( )
PhD ( )
373
Part two: Translation Tests Note:
Since the study is about translation only, please confine your answers to Modern
Standard Arabic and avoid colloquial equivalents for the idiomatic English phrasal
verbs itemized in the translation tests.
Due to space limitation, short contextual information is provided between square
brackets following each item.
Please translate the underlined phrases only into Arabic
1. Don't keep talking about that letter. I know I shouldn't do it, but there's no need to
rub my nose in it. [Fiction novel - Conversation between friends]
….………………………………………………………………………………………
…….……………………………………………………………………………………
2. Father wasn't supposed to know about his birthday surprise – now you've let the cat
out of the bag. [Fiction novel - Conversation between two brothers]
….………………………………………………………………………………………
…….……………………………………………………………………………………
3. The 'Daily Mirror' says nobody can put back the clock and get rid of decimal
currency. [News report]
….………………………………………………………………………………………
…….……………………………………………………………………………………
374
4. When I realized that her husband was listening to what I was saying to her, I could
have bitten my tongue off. [Diary entry]
….………………………………………………………………………………………
…….……………………………………………………………………………………
5. Mary thinks too highly of herself. Someone should cut her down to size.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between classmates]
….………………………………………………………………………………………
….……………………………………………………………………………………… 6. Slow down this instant, Percy! You're going to drive me around the bend!
[Fiction novel - Conversation between friends]
….………………………………………………………………………………………
….……………………………………………………………………………………… 7. My eyes popped out when I saw Miriam. I hadn't seen her in years. She has aged a
lot since then. [Fiction novel - Conversation between friends]
….………………………………………………………………………………………
….……………………………………………………………………………………… 8. The first time Max saw Edna he knew he was falling for her.�
[Fiction novel - Conversation between a wife and husband]
….………………………………………………………………………………………
….……………………………………………………………………………………… 9. I've been working for the last eight hours and now I'm fed up to my back teeth with
work. [Fiction novel - Conversation between fellow-workers]
….………………………………………………………………………………………
….………………………………………………………………………………………
375
10. When we gave Dorris a gift she got so carried away she began to cry. [Fiction
novel - Conversation between friends]
….………………………………………………………………………………………
….………………………………………………………………………………………
11. Poor Penelope. Mathematics has never been one of her favourite subjects. She
simply isn't able to comprehend it. She often complains that most of what her teacher
says goes over her head. [Fiction novel - Conversation between parents]
….………………………………………………………………………………………
….………………………………………………………………………………………
12. I'll have to pull up my socks if I'm going to finish my work today.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between fellow-workers]
….……………….………………………………………………………………………
….……….………………………………………………………………………………
13. I played when I should have studied. Now I'm stewing in my own juice trying to
pass my examinations. [Fiction novel - Conversation between classmates]
…...…...…………………………………………………………………………………
….....….…………………………………………………………………………………
14. She used to be so gentle but since being appointed supervisor Mrs. Wilson has
never stopped throwing her weight around in our office. [Fiction novel - Conversation
between fellow-workers]
…...….…….……………………………………………………………………………
…..….………..…………………………………………………………………………
376
15. George has been planning the exhibition for months but, because of the
workman's strike, the whole thing has fallen about his ears. [Article on an Art
exhibition]
…...…...…………………………………………………………………………………
…..………………………………………………………………………………………
16. If you think that I was responsible, then you are barking up the wrong tree: I am
completely innocent. [Fiction novel - Conversation between neighbours]
…...…...…………………………………………………………………………………
…….….…………………………………………………………………………………
17. Tom is top of the class, but there are two other students breathing down his neck. [Parent-teacher interview] …...….…..………………………………………………………………………………
…..………………………………………………………………………………………
18. He is not at all a practical person: perhaps having to earn his living will bring him
down to earth. [Fiction novel - Conversation between friends]
…...….…….……………………………………………………………………………
…..….…..………………………………………………………………………………
19. The young singer's performance brought the house down: the applause lasted for
about twenty minutes. [Art review - article]
…...….…….……………………………………………………………………………
…..…...…………………………………………………………………………………
20. If Mr. Brown finds out that you have been leaving the office early, he'll come
down on you like a ton of bricks. [Fiction novel - Conversation between fellow-
workers]
…...….………….………………………………………………………………………
…..….…..………………………………………………………………………………
377
21. He said he would have the whole house decorated by Christmas, but he fell down
on the job. [Movie script - Conversation between neighbours]
…...…...…………………………………………………………………………………
…….….…………………………………………………………………………………
22. We had a few minutes of polite conversation, but then he got down to brass tacks,
and asked me what salary I would want if I worked for him. [Fiction novel - Recount
on a job interview]
…...….…………….……………………………………………………………………
…..….…………..………………………………………………………………………
23. John has an idea for a new tennis club, but I don't know if it will ever get off the
ground. [Fiction novel - Conversation between friends]
…...….……….…………………………………………………………………………
……….…………………………………………………………………………………
24. Bill must have got up on the wrong side of the bed today: he has been very nasty
to me all day. [Fiction novel - Conversation between fellow-workers]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
…..….….………………………………………………………………………………
25. Mr. Brown keeps interfering with my work: I'm going to his office now to have it
out with him. [Fiction novel - Conversation between fellow-workers]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………..
…..….………….………………………………………………………………………..
26. Jason is striving for his best. I expect he'll clock up quite a few successes in the
next year or two. [Fiction novel - Conversation between parents]
…...….………………………………………………………………………………….
…..………………………………………………………………………………………
378
27. I used to wolf my food down so quickly that I didn't have time to enjoy it.
[Women’s magazine article]
…...….…………..………………………………………………………………………
…...….………..…………………………………………………………………………
28. Why are the children all dolled up? Is someone important coming?
[Fiction novel - Conversation between parents]
…..….…….….…………………………………………………………………………
…...….…….……………………………………………………………………………
29. I was accustomed to the old train schedule. The new one has balled me up.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between commuters]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………..
…..…...…..……………………………………………………………………………...
30. You can't skirt round the matter, you'll have to give the workers a satisfactory
answer. [Fiction novel - Advice from a factory manager to his deputy]
…...…..…………………………………………………………………………………
…..…...…………………………………………………………………………………
31. I'm shocked at Joseph's attitude. Did you notice the way he bossed his wife
around. [Fiction novel - Conversation between a wife and husband]
…...…...…………………………………………………………………………………
…..………………………………………………………………………………………
32. Don't bother asking Dean for support. He won't cotton on, he's too involved with
his own affairs. [Fiction novel - Advice from friend to friend]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………..
…..…..…………………………………………………………………………………..
379
33. He was shopping around to see what support he could get for his proposals.
[Biography]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
….……….……..……………………………………………………………………… 34. I know you are so upset about that matter. Don’t bottle it up, speak out.
[Letter – union leader to members]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
….……….……..………………………………………………………………………
35. Aquarius (Jan 21 - Feb 19)
The erratic behaviour of Uranus this week is likely to bring out the impish, impulsive
and unpredictable side of Aquarius. It's quite okay to walk on the wild side as long as
you recognise the limits beyond which it would be crazy to go. Don't let anyone egg
you on to make a complete fool of yourself. [Horoscope]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
….……….……..………………………………………………………………………
36. Now, stop worrying about those exams. You've revised well, so relax. It's going to
be a walk-over. [Fiction novel - Mother's advice to her daughter]
….…………...…………………………………………………………………………..
….……….………...…………………………………………………………………….
37. If you launch a sales campaign now, when there's so little money about, it'll be a
total wash-out. [Email - Advice from a businessman to his colleague]
.….……………………………………………...………………………………………
….…..…….…………………………………………………..…………………………
380
38. I've been so worried about you. Where were you during the cave-in? Everyone has
been looking for you. [Fiction novel - Conversation between a father and his son]
….…………………………………………...…………………………………………
….……….………………………………..……………………………………………
39. Najaf is at the heart of a political stand-off.
US troops earlier drove through the centre of the holy city and used loud speakers to
order militiamen to leave and urge civilian to flee. [News report]
….…………..…………………….……………………………………………………
….……….……………………………..………………………………………………
40. My sister always had new clothes, while I had to make do with her cast-offs.
[Diary entry]
….……………...………………………………………………………………………
….………………………...……………………………………………………………
41. I want to propose a vote of thanks to Sergeant Wilson for an excellent mock-up of
a boat.�[Fiction novel���Announcement at a meeting]
….……….……………..………………………………………………………………
….……….………………………..……………………………………………………
42. Revised UN draft sets pullout date.
The United States would withdraw its troops from Iraq by the end of 2005 under a
new draft of a resolution before the United Nations Security Council. [News headline]
….………..………….…………………………………………………………………
…….……….…………………………………...………………………………………
381
43. I bought a house last week, and I requested three weeks as a cooling-off period.
[Question in a chat-room]
……….…………………………………...…………………………………………… ……….…………………………………...…………………………………………… 44. I went to the shop to buy some groceries. I found a sign on the display window
saying " The shop is closed due to the black out ". [Notice on a closed shop]
….……….…………………………………….……………………………………… ….…………………………...…………………………………………………………
45. Managers concerned by a recent drop-off in sales. [News headline]
…..….……….………………………………………………………………………… ….……….……..……………………………………………………………………… 46. This handout is a summary of Dr James' Method provided for information
purposes only without the assumption of a duty of care.
[Disclaimer - Medical brochure]
…..….……….………………………………………………………………………… ….……….……..………………………………………………………………………
47. The party brightened up when the pop group arrived. It would have been so boring
without them. [Fiction novel - Conversation between friends]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
….……….……..………………………………………………………………………
48. You've had a long day today. Would you like to freshen up? The bathroom is
upstairs. [Fiction novel - Conversation between friends]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
….……….……..………………………………………………………………………
382
49. Don't put your prices too high or you'll frighten the customers off. [Advice from a
trade union official to a trader]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
….……….……..………………………………………………………………………
50. Two smart, attractive, well-educated young law graduates, Sally and Edith, were
competing for a prestigious job. As part of the job interview, each was asked why she
wanted the job. Edith answered that she wanted to work for a firm with a reputation of
being concerned with truth and justice. When it was her turn, Sally simply opened her
purse, took out a rather thin wallet and laid it on the senior partner's desk. "I want to
fatten it up as fast as possible," she said. Sally got the job. [Joke]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
….……….……..………………………………………………………………………
51. Jasmine cried out to her husband: Why fasten on me? It's not my fault.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between a wife and husband]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
….……….……..………………………………………………………………………
52. I tried to calm him down after the bad news, but his emotions got the better of
him. [Fiction novel - Conversation between neighbours]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
….……….……..………………………………………………………………………
53. They have just warmed up the same old plan, because it has always been
successful. [News report]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
….……….……..………………………………………………………………………
383
54. My hopes of a better job damped down after six years' waiting. [Diary entry]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
….……….……..………………………………………………………………………
55. Harry thinks he is unique, but in fact he is just warming over ideas he's heard from
other people. [Fiction novel - Conversation between fellow-workers]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
….……….……..………………………………………………………………………
56. The craftsman fined the wood down very gently. His boss told him to smoothen it
out as much as possible.�[Fiction novel - Conversation between townsfolk]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
….……….……..………………………………………………………………………
57. It will not be easy for you to change your whole way of thinking, but I believe that
you have the strength to shape up to it.
[Advice in an article on well-being in a coffee table magazine]
….……………………………………………………………………………………… ….………………………………………………………………………………………
58. Sandra knows that she can trust her parents and count on them to make her proud.
She always looks up to her parents. [Biography]�
….……………………………………………………………………………………… ….………………………………………………………………………………………
59. Michael is a well mannered young man. You shouldn’t look down on him just
because he left school at 16. [Fiction novel - Conversation between friends] �
….………………………………………………………………………………………
….……………….…………...…………………………………………………………
384
60. I've never been able to come at Isabella since she took up with Tim.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between classmates]
….…………...…………………………………………………………………………
….……………...………………………………………………………………………
61. A popular question among Christians at this time of year is 'what are you giving
up for Lent?' [Article on Ash Wednesday]�
….…………...…………………………………………………………………………
….…………….…..……………………………………………………………………
62. Bill and William became very successful in their political life since they made
away with their opponents. . [Background feature article - Conversation between
political figures]
...….……………………………………………………………………………………
...….……………………………………………………………………………………
63. Commencing with my very first speech as Chief Justice, on the day of my
swearing in, through several dozen other addresses and over two hundred speeches on
the occasion of the admission of legal practitioners, I have emphasised the
significance of the longevity of our institutions of parliamentary democracy and of the
rule of law. Many of you have had to put up with this more than once. You should
brace yourselves.
[Transcription of a public speech in the Opening of Law Term Dinner]
...….……………………………………………………………………………………
..….………………….…………………………………………………………………
385
64. The police are confident that the gang who carried out the robbery will be caught.
The Guardian therefore, has this headline: 'Net closes in on £50m robbers'.
[News headline]
...….……………………………………………………………………………………
..….…………………………………………………………………………………….
65. Robin is going all out to pass his final examination. He really wants to get his
Bachelor's degree. [Fiction novel - Conversation between parents] �
...….……………………………………………………………………………………
..….…………………………………………………………………………………….
66. Vickie: Jack, can you do the dishes tonight? I'm very tired.
Jack: Can't we just put them in the dish-washer? I've had a very bad day, too! I just
want to kick back and relax.
Vickie: Hey! Just because you had a bad day today doesn't give you permission to
take it out on me! [Fiction novel - Conversation between a wife and husband]
...….……………………………………………………………………………………
..….……….……………………………………………………………………………
67. I have a tight schedule tomorrow. Can you fill in for me at the meeting?
�[Fiction novel - Conversation between fellow-workers] �
..….……………………………………………………………………………………
..….……………………………………………………………………………………
68. Priscilla: Rich, can you come downstairs for a minute right now?
Richard: I'm sorry I can't. I'm tied up with something urgent at the moment.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between a wife and husband]
...….……………………………………………………………………………………
…….……………………………………………………………………………………
386
69. The death penalty has been done away with in many European countries. However,
it's still being carried out in many other countries. [Article on death penalty]
...….………….…………………………………………………………………………
..….…………..…………………………………………………………………………
70. Judy: you look like you're fuming. What's going on?
Andy: The boss is being unreasonable! He flared up at me, making a mountain out of
molehill! [Fiction novel - Conversation between fellow-workers]
...….……………………………………………………………………………………
..….………………….………………………………………………………………… 71. I hear you're always getting into trouble. Keep out of what doesn't concern you.
Curiosity killed the cat.
[Fiction novel - Advice from a school teacher to a student]
………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………… 72. If you want to get ahead in this world, you've to work, work and work.
[Fiction novel - Advice from parents to their children]
…………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………… 73. Kids have gone overweight from eating too much McDonalds. They need regular
exercise to use up sugar. [Advice from a doctor to parents in an article in a coffee
table magazine]
………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………
387
74. Sarah: I've managed to learn typing on the computer, but I still haven't got the
hang of it.
Sally: You have to practise a lot to build up skills.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between two sisters]
………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………… 75. They finally realized that there is an urgent need for the health promotion
program. They will have a special meeting to work it out. [News report]
…………………………………………………………………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………………
76. Accused: I wasn't at that market last night, and I don't know the person you are
talking about.
Prosecutor: We are not going into that again, are we?�[A cross examination in court]
………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………… 77. You are making a big fuss out of nothing. Why don't you two kiss and make up?
[Fiction novel - Conversation between classmates]
………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………… 78. Men are like computers: Hard to figure out and never have enough memory.
[Joke]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………..
….……….……..………………………………………………………………...………
388
79. Mr. Crutcher is working in a Starbucks coffee shop. He says that he is now a
reformed character. He says he's not back to his old tricks and uses a nice phrase 'I've
cleaned up my act.' � [News report]�
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
80. This is a nice tune and I think it'll catch on quickly.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between friends]
...….……………………………………………………………………………………..
..….………………………………………………………………………………………
81. My neighbour had a bad car accident yesterday. After the accident he blacked out
and couldn't remember what happened. [Diary entry]
...….……………………………………………………………………………………
..…..……………………………………………………………………………………
82. Five or six years ago I'd put away a big piece of meat most evenings. Now I just
eat a bit of chicken or fish. [An advertisement for a weight loss product]
...….………………..……………………………………………………………………
..………………………………………………………………………………………… 83. I was busy paying lots of bills this morning, and I ran into my wife at the post
office. [Diary entry]
..….……………………………………………………………………………………...
..….………………………………………………………………….…………………..
389
84. The salesman finds it easy to take in old ladies and persuade them to give him
their money.�[Fiction novel - Conversation between shoppers]
...….……………………………………………………………………………………..
..….………….…………………………………………………………………………..
85. I had a bad pain in my stomach last night. It was severe to begin with, but it soon
passed away. [Fiction novel - Conversation between a patient and a doctor]
...….……………………………………………………………………………………..
..….……………………………………………………………………………………...
86. I must warn you that anything you may say will be taken down and used in court as
evidence against you. [Police interview]
...….……………………………………………………………………………………..
..….…………………..………………………………………………………………….
87. You may not like our flowers, but they will grow on you in the end.
[A note written on a flower stall]
...….……………………………………………………………………………………..
..….………………………….………………………………………………………….. 88. One woman says that her boss is horrible and he stresses her out. She says that she
deals with the stress by chanting. Another woman says her partner stresses her out
because he doesn't tidy up. And she copes with it by having a relaxing bath!
[Article on stress]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
…..….……………………………………………………………………………….…
390
89. It's spring break in Florida and students are chilling out at the beach and partying
late into the night. [News report]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
…..….………………………………………………………………………………….
90. One day, I went over to my Uncle Tony's house and didn't get a chance to do my
Maths homework. The teacher told me off for not doing it the day after.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between a daughter and her parents]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………..
…..….……………………………………………………………………………….….. 91. Chris: you want to come out tonight?
Adam: I've had enough, I'm partied out. [Fiction novel - Conversation between
friends]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
…..….………………………………………………………………………………….
92. Funk up your mobile with cool screen savers [An internet advertisement for
mobile phone screen savers]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
…..….………………………………………………………………………………… 93. Latham sexed up Iraq brief.
Mark Latham's credibility as opposition leader faced its gravest test last night after
John Howard effectively accused him of misleading parliament over top-secret
intelligence briefings on Iraq.�[News headline]�
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
391
94. Waitress: Are you ready to order now?
Maria: Yes. I'll have some salad, roast beef, and mashed potatoes.
Waitress: How do you want the beef? Rare, medium, or well-done?
Maria: Well-done. And go easy on the salt, please.
[Fiction novel - Conversation at a restaurant]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………..
…...….……………………………………………………………………………………
95. Bill: Where did you get this article from?
Jack: I googled around for three hours to get the site on which it was published.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between friends]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………..
…...….……………………………………………………………………………………
96. I've spent four hours doing my late night shopping. I'm really shopped out.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between a wife and husband]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………..
…...….……………………………………………………………………………………
97. How about we get the students of floral art from the Tech to fang up a few
arrangements using roses and jasmine? [Fiction novel – Conversation between school
teachers]
…..….…………………………………………………………………………………
…..….…………………………………………………………………………………
392
98. When I mentioned it, they all looked at me strangely and said 'What are we going to
do?' and I said we're going to talk, tell secrets, dance, dag out.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between friends]
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
…...….…………………………………………………………………………………
99. Human beings run into trouble when arterial walls guck up with cholesterol and
blood can't easily flow. [Medical brochure]
…...….………………………………….………………………………………………
…..….……………………………….………………………………………………….
100. We had built up this cult following while being an independent band, but as soon
as we had a commercial record we were slagged down as cashing in on a theme.
[Diary entry]
…...….…………………………….……………………………………………………
…..….……………………………………..……………………………………………
393
APPENDIX 2
SUGGESTED ARABIC FUNCTIONAL-PRAGMATIC EQUIVALENTS
IEPVs Suggested Arabic functional-
pragmatic equivalents 1 Don't keep talking about that letter. I
know I shouldn't do it, but there's no
need to rub my nose in it. [Fiction
novel - Conversation between friends]
M�7داعO\�73Lدا�%P,-*}9ن����
2 Father wasn't supposed to know about
his birthday surprise – now you've let
the cat out of the bag. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between two brothers]
�,Y+ا�x-N8أ�[�+\�,Y+ا�xQ^8�\,Y+ا�x_Nآ�
3 The 'Daily Mirror' says nobody can
put back the clock and get rid of
decimal currency. [News report]
�E�[-*1راءX+ا�p+�5اE7Y+7رب�ا��
4 When I realized that her husband was
listening to what I was saying to her, I
could have bitten my tongue off.
[Diary entry]
������F)w�73\��X_}أن�أ�K(w�%P7Y+�]{w�X+�x-.3}\�x-.3}�
�%.F*)F\ا9رص�وا�x�NPا�X+
5 Mary thinks too highly of herself.
Someone should cut her down to size.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
classmates]
�7&&&O3IQ1\��%&&&�-�Q+�7ا&&&O3IZ�7&&&O1,1�\�%&&&8�7O*^&&&1�
�%�-�Q+�7اO3IZ\7ره[w�7{*,ف�O)*I1���
6 Slow down this instant, Percy! You're
going to drive me around the bend!
[�8�H�%\اX`�\�%\اX`�,-{FH�\%..IFH�
394
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
friends]
7 My eyes popped out when I saw
Miriam. I hadn't seen her in years. She
has aged a lot since then. [Fiction
novel - Conversation between friends]
�%.-E�4أ`]ق�+
8 The first time Max saw Edna he knew
he was falling for her. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between a wife and
husband]
�7O7آ(&&o�%&&8��&&)E\�7&&O/ا,G�,-&&Hأ�]&&w8&&%�\�و�]&&wو��
7O(Z
9 I've been working for the last eight
hours and now I'm fed up to my back
teeth with work.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
fellow-workers]
�K&&&3*+م�/&&&�0ا�&&&H�7&&&31أ�x3�&&&H\�p&&&+إ�K)Y&&&F1�K&&&)3+ا�
��K&&3*+�0ا&&/�%&&Zرو\��K&&3*+ا��&&-Wأ�[&&E�4أ&&+�\�x&&))/�
������K&3*+�517/&�0ا�)+\������������K&3*+�0ا&/�K&-'+ا�%&\��&_W�\���4&+�
���K&3*+ا�p&&)E�,(&&`�%&&+�[&*1\�[1[N&&+ا�K&&)3+7\�x(&&`أ�
�K3*+�0ا/
10 When we gave Dorris a gift she got so
carried away she began to cry. [Fiction
novel - Conversation between friends]
{��,ت�آ�-,ا�ا+Z�p]�أ�7OPأ��xNO\7+)'7ء
11 Poor Penelope. Mathematics has never
been one of her favourite subjects. She
simply isn't able to comprehend it. She
often complains that most of what her
teacher says goes over her head.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
parents]
�\�31&,�\&~ه.�7O/&,ور�ا+'&,ام�����\ آW97,ش�8%�ا+�8&�5
��3O8�7O-)E�|*U1\�7Oى�ادراآXFY/ق�X8�
395
12 I'll have to pull up my socks if I'm
going to finish my work today.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
fellow-workers]
�E(%��\�أ�K3Eآ�K/8�7%�وH*%�������\أE7H�0E�,3o]ي����
أن�أ\~ل�7Uwرى��O]ي��
13 I played when I should have studied.
Now I'm stewing in my own juice
trying to pass my examinations.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
classmates]
�\�أ{3E�¥L7&FP�K&3Q(&%����\أ�.%�F)*8�7&/�5I-FP&��1&]اي������
��أآXFي�\.7ر�اه73+%
14 She used to be so gentle but since
being appointed supervisor Mrs.
Wilson has never stopped throwing
her weight around in our office.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
fellow-workers]
�\+��wXF}�4ا\]ا��0Eا+UF,ف�وآ��7OPا¤/&,�ا+.&7ه%�������
��,('F\ف�,UF+�0اE\������7&(F\�7O(U&./73ل�*F&H�0ا&E\�
�\�},FH7\\�5H*2ء�
15 George has been planning the
exhibition for months but, because of
the workman's strike, the whole thing
has fallen about his ears. [Article on
an Art exhibition]
�H]ى\y}}��ذه)�xأدراج�ا+,71ح�
16 If you think that I was responsible,
then you are barking up the wrong
tree: I am completely innocent.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
neighbours]
*}�M�xP�8ل�%اذن�X�}�7/�\���{n/�xP�8اذن��
396
17 Tom is top of the class, but there are
two other students breathing down his
neck. [Parent-teacher interview]
�������7/73}���\�o7(/��&_)y&,ة����\و+'�0ه.7ك�7W+)-8�0%�ا�,
�2U11'7دان�أن��� �w,1)7ن�/XFY/�0ا��\ا+XFY/�pا
18 He is not at all a practical person:
perhaps having to earn his living will
bring him down to earth. [Fiction
novel - Conversation between friends]
��&&&3IZ�p&&&+إ��[-*-&&&H\�]&&&wاX+أرض�ا�p&&&+ا��[-*-&&&H\�
�7-*wوا��)*I-H\�7-)3E��)*I-H�
19 The young singer's performance
brought the house down: the applause
lasted for about twenty minutes. [Art
review - article]
�أ/F&&[�\أ�8&&]�ا+X&&O3Iر�`&&Xا\��/&&XN&&P�0ة�ا+}&&,ب�����
�أ+P�\�|&&&O&&&7ل�17G&&&�5اIEJ&&&7ب���\ا+X&&&O3Iر�+(�17&&&��5
XEا��Wا+73Iه-,�
20 If Mr. Brown finds out that you have
been leaving the office early, he'll
come down on you like a ton of
bricks. [Fiction novel - Conversation
between fellow-workers]
�����S-)E��(^G7م���|U-H\��������§-\X&}�7&31أ�Sn\X-&H�\�
7O.-Hل�XYw�K'\�7_-.*}�S-)Eة��
21 He said he would have the whole
house decorated by Christmas, but he
fell down on the job. [Movie script -
Conversation between neighbours]
�S+8%�ذ��_yو+'.��أ\S+7ز�ذIP8%�ا�KN8��.'+و�
22 We had a few minutes of polite
conversation, but then he got down to
brass tacks, and asked me what salary
I would want if I worked for him.
[Fiction novel - Recount on a job
{}&&,ق�ا+&&�pا+.�}&&��5 \د8�K&&y&&%�`&&(|�ا+X&&RX3ع�
�\]أ�8%�ا+I]\ا+8�5/7O%�ا+XRX3ع�
397
interview]
23 John has an idea for a new tennis club,
but I don't know if it will ever get off
the ground. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between friends]
�\E&&,ف�8-3&&�7إذا�آ�x&&P7ا+_'&&,ة����I.F&&Hو+'..&&%��Mأ
�Z�Ky[FH-��ا+FH\~-_.F,ى�ا+.Xر�
24 Bill must have got up on the wrong
side of the bed today: he has been very
nasty to me all day. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between fellow-
workers]
�������X-+ا�ه~ا�ا,'*F/�K-\ن�/�اج�X'1أن��[\M1)&]و�أن���\م��
��/�ا���XHداوي
25 Mr. Brown keeps interfering with my
work: I'm going to his office now to
have it out with him. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between fellow-
workers]
�R9&&[�ا+.�&&7ط��p&&)Eا+Q&&,وف�\�4Y&&Z9ا9/&&,�/*&&��
���*/\7O\7UP�%8ر�X/9ا�]R9��
26 Jason is striving for his best. I expect
he'll clock up quite a few successes in
the next year or two. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between parents]
�Q-&&&&H,ز�\أ{wX&&&&[�أZ7IP���Q-&&&&H��&&&&P&&&&7ت�E]1&&&&]ة��
7Z7IPت�E]1]ة
27 I used to wolf my food down so
quickly that I didn't have time to enjoy
it. [Women’s magazine article]
�������5E,Y&\�%/7*W�4OF+ت�أن�أ[FEا\������K&دت�أن�أأآX&*}�
5E,Y\
28 Why are the children all dolled up? Is
someone important coming? [Fiction
novel - Conversation between parents]
�\)&Xن�إ+&�pز8&7ف؟�������+�4اW9_7ل�/X�P�&Fن�وآ&��4OPذاه������
+73ذا�1()��اW9_7ل�أ4O1[+�7/�K^8؟
398
29 I was accustomed to the old train
schedule. The new one has balled me
up. [Fiction novel - Conversation
between commuters]
���P,¢-Z%\�]ول�ا+�}7ر�ا+w�[1[I]�أر\'.%�
30 You can't skirt round the matter, you'll
have to give the workers a satisfactory
answer. [Fiction novel - Advice from a
factory manager to his deputy]
�IF}M.|�ا+XRX3ع�\OF}�M,ب�/�0ا9/,�
31 I'm shocked at Joseph's attitude. Did
you notice the way he bossed his wife
around. [Fiction novel - Conversation
between a wife and husband]
��ه�x�ZM�Kا+},�5�1ا+�p)E�7O\�,/�F1�%Fزو��F؟
�)YF\��Fزو��]/�K/7*F1��-/�x�ZM�Kه
32 Don't bother asking Dean for support.
He won't cotton on, he's too involved
with his own affairs. [Fiction novel -
Advice from friend to friend]
�+EXFY1�0+\4O_F1�0|�ا9/,�
33 He was shopping around to see what
support he could get for his proposals.
[Biography]
�FY&&&1}([�\�F1_�&&&]�اX&&&Z9ال�\آ&&&7ن�QF1&&&,ى�اX&&&/9ر�
���I1ا+.)�\ا¤راء�
34 I know you are so upset about that
matter. Don’t bottle it up, speak out.
[Letter – union leader to members]
�4'\X)w�%8�,/9ا�اX3F'}�M\�XF('}M�\��7F(آ_7آ�4آ� ��
35 Aquarius (Jan 21 - Feb 19)
The erratic behaviour of Uranus this
�-,ك�FY1ا�[Zع�أ[}�M\�ك_FY1�
399
week is likely to bring out the impish,
impulsive and unpredictable side of
Aquarius. It's quite okay to walk on
the wild side as long as you recognise
the limits beyond which it would be
crazy to go. Don't let anyone egg you
on to make a complete fool of
yourself. [Horoscope]
36 Now, stop worrying about those
exams. You've revised well, so relax.
It's going to be a walk-over.
[Fiction novel - Mother's advice to her
daughter]
�X'-&&H\�2O&&&Hن�اQF/M&&7ن�أo�0&&/�KO&&H&&,\�5/&&7ء�������
�517�)+\5+XOY+ا�pOF.3\�
37 If you launch a sales campaign now,
when there's so little money about, it'll
be a total wash-out. [Email - Advice
from a businessman to his colleague]
�X'FHن�/^-*�KN_FH\����xwX)+�5ا+�2N8�5)3Qذر1*�����7
وا+73ل
38 I've been so worried about you. Where
were you during the cave-in? Everyone
has been looking for you.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between a
father and his son]
��أ�01آ.�xأ�.7ء�اOPM-7ر؟
39 Najaf is at the heart of a political
stand-off.
US troops earlier drove through the
�%8��I.+ا�,(F*}_`7*+�0ا-E�5-H7-Y+�5ا�\���|&)w�%&8�
�ا+H7-Y-5ا+�و\*5
400
centre of the holy city and used loud
speakers to order militiamen to leave
and urge civilian to flee. [News report]
40 My sister always had new clothes,
while I had to make do with her cast-
offs. [Diary entry]
����7OY&&\2/7ر{&&]اء�\�%&&_Fأن�أآ�%&&)E�|&&I13&&�7آ&&7ن�.-\
�أ7O+73H\)7+-�5ا+
41 I want to propose a vote of thanks to
Sergeant Wilson for an excellent
mock-up of a boat. [Fiction novel -
Announcement at a meeting]
��`.*\�4YI/�|(Yا+�7رب�ا+7F33ز�ا+~ي
42 Revised UN draft sets pullout date.
The United States would withdraw its
troops from Iraq by the end of 2005
under a new draft of a resolution
before the United Nations Security
Council. [News headline]
�{Q&&]د�/&&XYدة�w&&,ار�ا9/&&�4ا+QF3&&]ة���\�{*&&-�0\{&&^[�
�{&.��ا+XY&3دة�ا+3*]+&�����5\ا+3*]+�5{7ر7QYPª+�7n1ب����
)Eة�[QF3+7ب+�,ار�ا�4/9اQYPM7ر1§�ا}�p��
43 I bought a house last week, and I
requested three weeks as a cooling-off
period. [Question in a chat-room]
�/E�5)O]ول��0Eا+N,اء\�F8,ة�{_'-,�\F8,ة�إ/7Oل�
44 I went to the shop to buy some
groceries. I found a sign on the display
window saying " The shop is closed
due to the black out ".
[Notice on a shop].
%L7\,O'+7ر�ا-F+7ع�ا{�Pا�|(Y\��)�/�KQ3+ا
45 Managers concerned by a recent drop- �%8�,-y97ض�ا_nPMا�|(Y\ن�X�)wا+3]راء�
401
off in sales. [News headline] ط�\ا+3)-*7ت�X(O+ا�[\�ا,F+ا�
46 This handout is a summary of Dr
James' Method provided for
information purposes only without the
assumption of a duty of care.
[Disclaimer - Medical brochure]
ه&&~��ا+.&&N,ة�E)&&7رة�n)/�0&&E&&��+},�1&&�5ا+&&]آXFر����
��3-�
47 The party brightened up when the pop
group arrived. It would have been so
boring without them. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between friends]
�5)_Q+7ة�8%�ا-Q+ا�x\د��
48 You've had a long day today. Would
you like to freshen up? The bathroom
is upstairs. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between friends]
�ه&G,}�K&|�����\هX}�Kد�أن�{.*��73QF&HM7\�SY_Pم؟��������
�SW7N&&&&&&P�[&&&&&&1[I}�%&&&&&&8واFPM*&&&&&&7ش؟�ا7Y&&&&&&FGMل��
��واFPM*7ش؟
49 Don't put your prices too high or you'll
frighten the customers off. [Advice
from a trade union official to a trader]
�0L7\�+ا�S./�,_-H�Mوإ
50 Two smart, attractive, well-educated
young law graduates, Sally and Edith,
were competing for a prestigious job.
As part of the job interview, each was
asked why she wanted the job. Edith
answered that she wanted to work for
a firm with a reputation of being
concerned with truth and justice.
�أر1&]�أن��\أر1]�أن�أ/»هX�.+7\��7د�\�H&,ع�/&31�7'&������0
�أر1&&]�أن�أ/»ه&&&��p&&&FZ�7\أH�\�%&&.FG&&&,ع�/&&31�7'&&&���0
�y,هH�\�7,ع�/31�7'0
402
When it was her turn, Sally simply
opened her purse, took out a rather
thin wallet and laid it on the senior
partner's desk. "I want to fatten it up
as fast as possible," she said. Sally got
the job. [Joke]
51 Jasmine cried out to her husband:
Why fasten on me? It's not my fault.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
a wife and husband]
[�ا+(Xم�E(%؟�آ��X+�0E/%+73ذا�{^
52 I tried to calm him down after the bad
news, but his emotions got the better
of him. [Fiction novel - Conversation
between neighbours]
\7UEأن�أه]ئ�/�0أ�x+7وZ��\�.E��_yأ���
53 They have just warmed up the same
old plan, because it has always been
successful. [News report]
�+�&]�أX&-Zا�����\+�]�أ7Eدوا�ا+*�K3\&._��ا+n}&�5ا+�]31&����������5
P_��ا+n}�5ا+�]�531
54 My hopes of a better job damped
down after six years' waiting.
[Diary entry]
��x+7ء^}\���x(y�\���p&)Eل�XU&Q+دت��/7+%�8%�ا[(}�
K^8أ�K3E �\/��x(7+%�أدراج�ا+,71ح�ذه
55 Harry thinks he is unique, but in fact
he is just warming over ideas he's
heard from other people. [Fiction
novel - Conversation between fellow-
workers]
�F�1&&)��ا89'&&7ر�\�1&&,دد�\�FI1�\�[&&-*1&&,�\اP&&��1'&&,ر�
,-GM�01,y¤�0/�7اO*3H�%F+ا
403
56 The craftsman fined the wood down
very gently. His boss told him to
smoothen it out as much as possible.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
townsfolk]
�K�`\د�,\�\|Nn+ا�]P7U+�4ا*P���
57 It will not be easy for you to change
your whole way of thinking, but I
believe that you have the strength to
shape up to it. [Advice in an article on
well-being in a coffee table magazine]
4-3U}�5وE7IN\�,/9ا���اX}أن�
58 Sandra knows that she can trust her
parents and count on them to make her
proud. She always looks up to her
parents. [Biography]
�����p&&)E9�7ا&&O)�/�7&&3L��7\وا+&&]اه�7ه3&&�7داO1[&&+وا�,&&F(*}�
7O+وة�[w�73Lدا��
59 Michael is a well mannered young
man. You shouldn’t look down on him
just because he left school at 16.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
friends]
(.1M%���-)*7+ى*F}در�1\�أن���}\�,�FQ}\���.}�
���� �{w�0/��Q]ر�\/w�0]ر
60 I've never been able to come at
Isabella since she took up with Tim.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
classmates]
�\{&&&-�4 ��أw2E�x&&&/7w&&&�5/&&&[\ا{n&&&~ت�{&&&-�4`&&&]�7�1
���ار{)}o7E\4-F\�x,ت�{-�4
61 A popular question among Christians
at this time of year is 'what are you
0Eن�X*.F3-Hء�%o�7أي�-U+ة�ا,F82ل�yم؟�
404
giving up for Lent?'
[Article on Ash Wednesday]
62 Bill and William became very
successful in their political life since
they made away with their opponents.
[Background feature article -
Conversation between political
figures]
4O/XUy�0/�7U)n}��
63 Commencing with my very first
speech as Chief Justice, on the day of
my swearing in, through several dozen
other addresses and over two hundred
speeches on the occasion of the
admission of legal practitioners, I have
emphasised the significance of the
longevity of our institutions of
parliamentary democracy and of the
rule of law. Many of you have had to
put up with this more than once. You
should brace yourselves.
[Transcription of a public speech in
the Opening of Law Term Dinner]
�\و�p)E�4FQ}�[wا+'�-&,�/&.'�4أن��K&3QF1ه&~ا�ا9/&,��������������
��أن��p)E�,(U1ه~ا�ا9/,�
64 The police are confident that the gang
who carried out the robbery will be
caught. The Guardian therefore, has
�الخناق�ماليين�جينيه�على�سارقي�الخمسة�يضيق
�يـد�العدالـة�����\�الطوق�يـشتد�����\�الدائرة�تضيق����\
405
this headline: 'Net closes in on £50m
robbers'. [News headline]
�بـدأ�العـد�التنـازلي�������\أوشكت�أن�تطبق�علـى������
ماليين�جينيه/7Yك�\7Yرw%�ا+�5Y3nلإل
65 Robin is going all out to pass his final
examination. He really wants to get
his Bachelor's degree. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between parents]
%L7&&O.+ا��&&P7QF/7ح�8&&%�ا&&I.)+��*&&Hو�K&&3*1�0&&\رو \�
��E7{FY/�%87/�K3*1\1)~ل�7Uwرى��O]ة�
66 Vickie: Jack, can you do the dishes
tonight? I'm very tired.
Jack: Can't we just put them in the
dish-washer? I've had a very bad day,
too! I just want to kick back and
relax.
Vickie: Hey! Just because you had a
bad day today doesn't give you
permission to take it out on me!
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
a wife and husband]
%\�S(^G�0E��_.}أن�
67 I have a tight schedule tomorrow. Can
you fill in for me at the meeting?�
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
fellow-workers]
ه�SP7'/7\�Kأن�{Q/�KQ(%�8%�ا73F�Mع؟�أن�{.Xب���������
E.%�8%�ا73F�Mع؟
68 Priscilla: Rich, can you come
downstairs for a minute right now?
Richard: I'm sorry I can't. I'm tied up
أ�7Pا¤ن�/X�Nل�\�/,�/(�
406
with something urgent at the moment.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
a wife and husband]
69 The death penalty has been done away
with in many European countries.
However, it's still being carried out in
many other countries.
[Article on death penalty]
+�]�{�4ا+�7ء�X�E\�5اEJ]ام
70 Judy: you look like you're fuming.
What's going on?
Andy: The boss is being
unreasonable! He flared up at me,
making a mountain out of molehill!
[Fiction novel - Conversation between
fellow-workers]
%)E�7(R7G�,I_Pا��
71 I hear you're always getting into
trouble. Keep out of what doesn't
concern you. Curiosity killed the cat.
[Fiction novel - Advice from a school
teacher to a student]
S-.*1�M�73-8�Ky[F}�M
72 If you want to get ahead in this world,
you've to work, work and work.
[Fiction novel - Advice from parents
to their children]
�إذا�أرد{�4\إذا��4F�oأن�P�o�X)*1'8�4%�ه~ا�ا+*�4+7
�7/[w�,-Y+7\ا/[wا�X^3}أن��
73 Kids have gone overweight from ,'Y+ا�اXw,Q-+
407
eating too much McDonalds. They
need regular exercise to use up sugar.
[Advice from a doctor to parents in an
article in a coffee table magazine]
74 Sarah: I've managed to learn typing on
the computer, but I still haven't got the
hang of it.
Sally: You have to practise a lot to
build up skills. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between two sisters]
S}7راO/�5-3.F+ \7راتO/7ب�YFآM
75 They finally realized that there is an
urgent need for the health promotion
program. They will have a special
meeting to work it out. [News report]
�]RX+\�[1[Q}�\¥/7P,(+اد�ا[EJ���
76 Accused: I wasn't at that market last
night, and I don't know the person you
are talking about.
Prosecutor: We are not going into that
again, are we?
[A cross examination in court]
X3)+د�X*.H�7.Pأ�%+�K�}�M�5-P7ع�/,ة��XR\�[1أر�M�
أن�X*Pد�إ+�p{_��ا+XRX3ع�/,ة�أy,ى
77 You are making a big fuss out of
nothing. Why don't you two kiss and
make up? [Fiction novel - Conversation
between classmates]
�و{*-]ا�ا+7-3��ا+7I/�pر7O1\و{7Q+7UF؟
78 Men are like computers: Hard to �4&&&&O3O8�|*U&&&&+�4\/&&&&�0اOF8,&&&&*/�|*U&&&&}�\�0&&&&/�
408
figure out and never have enough
memory. [Joke]
��ا+�S8�|*U+��ه4
79 Mr. Crutcher is working in a
Starbucks coffee shop. He says that he
is now a reformed character. He says
he's not back to his old tricks and uses
a nice phrase 'I've cleaned up my act.'
[News report]�
�����5.-N3+78ت�ا,UF+�0اE�x_wX}\���7آX)&H�S)Hأت�ا[\
7\~&&&O/�\�5\-&&&^7ء��Q_&&&`��5\�\&&&]أت�Q_&&&`�x&&&1XW�
�%R73+41\اX�+ا+},��1ا�p+ت�إ[E� ��
80 This is a nice tune and I think it'll catch
on quickly. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between friends]
���5E,Y&&\�,OFN&&FH�7&&OP7\�[&&�FE��7\اO+73*F&&Hا�]-N&&-H�
5E,Y\
81 My neighbour had a bad car accident
yesterday. After the accident he
blacked out and couldn't remember
what happened. [Diary entry]
��-)E�%3Gأ\�%EX+�8]�ا�\%EX+�0اE7ب�G�
82 Five or six years ago I'd put away a
big piece of meat most evenings. Now
I just eat a bit of chicken or fish. [An
advertisement for a weight loss
product]
�4OF+أ�x.�4\آQ)+ة�/�0ا,-(�5آ*{w�p)E�%}��
83 I was busy paying lots of bills this
morning, and I ran into my wife at the
post office [Diary entry]
�%Fزو��x8�58\`7د[U+7\�%Fزو��x)\7w���
84 The salesman finds it easy to take in
old ladies and persuade them to give
�L7I*+ع�ا[n1أن�
409
him their money. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between shoppers]
85 I had a bad pain in my stomach last
night. It was severe to begin with, but
it soon passed away. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between a patient and a
doctor]
�po2}\زال��\p_Fyا�
86 I must warn you that anything you may
say will be taken down and used in
court as evidence against you.
[Police interview]
���4F-H{]و1.��
87 You may not like our flowers, but they
will grow on you in the end. [A note
written on a flower stall]
�X'F&Hن���\و+'.FH�7O.7ل�ا17OP�%8�S\7IE&�5ا+3}&7ف���������
�F&H,وق�+&��Q/\����%&8�Sا�517OP�%8�S\7IEا+3}&7ف���
�517OPا+3}7ف�
88 One woman says that her boss is
horrible and he stresses her out. She
says that she deals with the stress by
chanting. Another woman says her
partner stresses her out because he
doesn't tidy up. And she copes with it
by having a relaxing bath!
[Article on stress]
������|&-},F+7\��&/7-w������7\+*]م�&O_)n1�%&F+ا�p&RX_)+�\����&P9
�4�./�,-G\ي�XRX8��P9�\�,O�3\�4FO1�M��
89 It's spring break in Florida and
students are chilling out at the beach
and partying late into the night.
1,FY���W7N+ا�p)Eن�Xy\�����W7N&+ا�p&)Eن�X&Z,31�\�
&&&�1�5&&&Z�7+(,ا&&&Fwن�وX^\��4OY&&&_P�0أ&&&Eن�X&&&Z1,و�\�
5Z�0ا+,ا/��Y�\ن�X3*.1
410
[News report]
90 One day, I went over to my Uncle
Tony's house and didn't get a chance to
do my Maths homework. The teacher
told me off for not doing it the day after.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between a
daughter and her parents]
�\�\&&&&N]ة��أP).&&&&%�ا+3&&&&]رس\��\&&&&N]ةو\n.&&&&%�ا+3*(&&&&4
�%P,ز�\%._.E�
91 Chris: you want to come out tonight?
Adam: I've had enough, I'm partied
out. [Fiction novel - Conversation
between friends]
�,OY+ا�%.'OPأ\�,OY+ا�%P[2ت\�ه_Z�%.-_'1�
92 Funk up your mobile with cool screen
savers [An internet advertisement for
mobile phone screen savers]
�ا�*&&&�Kه�S&&&_}7أآ�&&&,�{�7-&&&o73/&&&[����\�Z&&&]ث�\ز1&&&�0
5RX3+ا
93 Latham sexed up Iraq brief.
Mark Latham's credibility as
opposition leader faced its gravest test
last night after John Howard
effectively accused him of misleading
parliament over top-secret intelligence
briefings on Iraq. [News headline]
�K-)^&&&F+ض�ا,&&&�+�%&&&w1�4_)&&&,ك�ا+3(&&&��ا+*,ا�&&&1M\�
%w8%�ا+3(��ا+*,ا�|E2}�4�1M��
94 Waitress: Are you ready to order now?
Maria: Yes. I'll have some salad, roast
beef, and mashed potatoes.
Waitress: How do you want the
�S)^8�0/��-_y��)/\)w�0ا+3(��ر�7ء�/�%)��
411
beef? Rare, medium, or well-done?
Maria: Well-done. And go easy on
the salt, please. [Fiction novel -
Conversation at a restaurant]
95 Bill: Where did you get this article
from?
Jack: I googled around for three hours
to get the site on which it was
published. [Fiction novel -
Conversation between friends]
��p)E�KGXG�%8�xا�xP,FP9+3]ة��2ث�7E7HتQ\
96 I've spent four hours doing my late night
shopping. I'm really shopped out.
[Fiction novel - Conversation between a
wife and husband]
�\�اO��4U&&&�P&&&,ي�/&&&�0ا+XY&&&Fق�\أه('.&&&%�ا+XY&&&Fق�
] (F+ة�ا,� {*)�x/�0آ
97 How about we get the students of
floral art from the Tech to fang up a
few arrangements using roses and
jasmine? [Fiction novel –
Conversation between school
teachers]
5E,Y+و���ا�p)Eر�X7ت�ا+�هw7\��*\��-Y.F+
98 When I mentioned it, they all looked at
me strangely and said 'What are we
going to do?' and I said we're going to
talk, tell secrets, dance, dag out. [Fiction
novel - Conversation between friends]
�[\,*P\3,حPح�و,YP�
412
99 Human beings run into trouble when
arterial walls guck up with cholesterol
and blood can't easily flow.
[Medical brochure]
����p&&&&&)E&&&&&]ران�F1�7/[&&&&&.E&&&&&,اآ�4ا+'Y&&&&&FY-+X,ول
�U&&&&&&}�7/[&&&&&&.E-��ا+&&&&&&N,ا�0-1/��(&&&&&&��5\ا+&&&&&&N,ا�0-1
\FY-+X'+7,ول
100 We had built up this cult following
while being an independent band, but
as soon as we had a commercial
record we were slagged down as
cashing in on a theme. [Diary entry]
H,o�5)3Q+�7.R,*}��5\7.F*3H��1XN}�7وP7د�FP�4ا}�
413
APPENDIX 3
FULL DETAILS OF THE RESULTS OF THE TRANSLATION TESTS
Subject Number: P1
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 √ 4 X 5 √ 6 √ 7 X 8 √ 9 X 10 √ 11 √ 12 √ 13 √ 14 X 15 X 16 √ 17 √ 18 √ 19 X 20 √ 21 √ 22 √ 23 √ 24 √ 25 X 26 √ 27 √ 28 X 29 √ 30 √ 31 √ 32 X 33 √ 34 √ 35 X 36 √
414
37 √ 38 X 39 X 40 X 41 √ 42 √ 43 √ 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 √ 48 X 49 √ 50 √ 51 X 52 √ 53 X 54 X 55 √ 56 √ 57 X 58 √ 59 √ 60 X 61 X 62 √ 63 √ 64 X 65 √ 66 X 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 X 71 √ 72 √ 73 √ 74 √ 75 √ 76 X 77 √ 78 √ 79 √ 80 √ 81 √ 82 √ 83 √ 84 X
415
85 X 86 √ 87 X 88 √ 89 X 90 X 91 X 92 X 93 √ 94 √ 95 √ 96 √ 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 50 Satisfactory= 14 Overtly= 26 Covertly= 10 Unanswered= 0
Subject Number: P2
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 √ 4 X 5 X 6 X 7 X 8 √ 9 √ 10 X 11 √ 12 X 13 X 14 X 15 X 16 √ 17 X 18 √ 19 X 20 √ 21 √ 22 X 23 √
416
24 X 25 X 26 √ 27 √ 28 X 29 X 30 √ 31 √ 32 X 33 √ 34 √ 35 X 36 X 37 X 38 √ 39 X 40 X 41 √ 42 √ 43 X 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 √ 48 X 49 X 50 √ 51 X 52 √ 53 X 54 √ 55 X 56 √ 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 X 61 X 62 X 63 √ 64 √ 65 X 66 √ 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 √ 71 √
417
72 √ 73 X 74 √ 75 X 76 X 77 √ 78 X 79 √ 80 X 81 √ 82 X 83 X 84 X 85 √ 86 √ 87 X 88 X 89 X 90 √ 91 X 92 √ 93 X 94 X 95 √ 96 X 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 27 Satisfactory= 19 Overtly= 46 Covertly= 8 Unanswered= 0
Subject Number: P3
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 X 3 √ 4 X 5 √ 6 X 7 X 8 √ 9 X 10 √
418
11 √ 12 X 13 X 14 X 15 X 16 X 17 X 18 X 19 √ 20 √ 21 √ 22 X 23 √ 24 X 25 X 26 √ 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 √ 31 X 32 X 33 √ 34 X 35 √ 36 √ 37 X 38 √ 39 X 40 X 41 √ 42 √ 43 X 44 √ 45 √ 46 X 47 √ 48 X 49 √ 50 X 51 X 52 √ 53 √ 54 √ 55 √ 56 √ 57 X 58 X
419
59 √ 60 X 61 √ 62 √ 63 X 64 √ 65 √ 66 X 67 √ 68 X 69 X 70 √ 71 √ 72 √ 73 √ 74 X 75 X 76 X 77 X 78 X 79 X 80 X 81 X 82 X 83 √ 84 X 85 √ 86 √ 87 X 88 √ 89 X 90 X 91 X 92 √ 93 X 94 √ 95 √ 96 X 97 X 98 X 99 √ 100 X Very Good= 32 Satisfactory= 12 Overtly= 48 Covertly= 8 Unanswered= 0
420
Subject Number: P4
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 √ 4 X 5 X 6 X 7 √ 8 √ 9 X 10 √ 11 X 12 √ 13 √ 14 √ 15 X 16 X 17 X 18 √ 19 √ 20 √ 21 X 22 X 23 √ 24 X 25 X 26 √ 27 √ 28 √ 29 √ 30 X 31 X 32 X 33 X 34 X 35 √ 36 √ 37 √ 38 X 39 X 40 X 41 X
421
42 √ 43 √ 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 X 48 √ 49 √ 50 √ 51 √ 52 √ 53 √ 54 √ 55 X 56 X 57 X 58 √ 59 √ 60 √ 61 √ 62 X 63 √ 64 √ 65 √ 66 X 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 √ 71 √ 72 √ 73 √ 74 X 75 X 76 X 77 X 78 √ 79 √ 80 X 81 √ 82 X 83 X 84 X 85 √ 86 √ 87 X 88 √ 89 √
422
90 √ 91 X 92 X 93 √ 94 √ 95 X 96 √ 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 43 Satisfactory= 13 Overtly= 36 Covertly= 8 Unanswered= 0
Subject Number: P5
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 √ 4 X 5 √ 6 X 7 X 8 √ 9 X 10 X 11 √ 12 √ 13 X 14 √ 15 X 16 √ 17 X 18 √ 19 X 20 X 21 X 22 X 23 √ 24 √ 25 √ 26 √ 27 X 28 X
423
29 √ 30 √ 31 X 32 √ 33 √ 34 X 35 √ 36 X 37 X 38 X 39 X 40 X 41 √ 42 √ 43 X 44 X 45 √ 46 X 47 X 48 √ 49 X 50 √ 51 X 52 √ 53 X 54 √ 55 X 56 √ 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 X 61 √ 62 √ 63 X 64 √ 65 √ 66 X 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 √ 71 √ 72 √ 73 √ 74 √ 75 X 76 X
424
77 √ 78 X 79 √ 80 √ 81 √ 82 X 83 √ 84 X 85 √ 86 √ 87 √ 88 √ 89 √ 90 √ 91 X 92 X 93 X 94 √ 95 X 96 X 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 36 Satisfactory= 15 Overtly= 36 Covertly= 13 Unanswered= 0
Subject Number: P6
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 √ 4 X 5 √ 6 X 7 X 8 √ 9 √ 10 √ 11 √ 12 √ 13 X 14 √ 15 X 16 X
425
17 √ 18 X 19 X 20 √ 21 X 22 X 23 √ 24 X 25 √ 26 √ 27 X 28 X 29 √ 30 √ 31 √ 32 X 33 X 34 X 35 X 36 √ 37 X 38 X 39 √ 40 X 41 ▬ 42 √ 43 √ 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 √ 48 √ 49 √ 50 √ 51 √ 52 √ 53 √ 54 √ 55 √ 56 √ 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 √ 61 X 62 X 63 √ 64 X
426
65 X 66 X 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 √ 71 √ 72 √ 73 √ 74 √ 75 X 76 X 77 √ 78 √ 79 X 80 X 81 √ 82 X 83 √ 84 √ 85 √ 86 √ 87 X 88 X 89 X 90 X 91 √ 92 √ 93 X 94 √ 95 X 96 X 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 38 Satisfactory= 17 Overtly= 37 Covertly= 7 Unanswered= 1
Subject Number: P7
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 X 3 √ 4 X
427
5 X 6 X 7 √ 8 √ 9 X 10 √ 11 X 12 X 13 X 14 √ 15 X 16 √ 17 X 18 √ 19 √ 20 √ 21 X 22 √ 23 ▬ 24 X 25 X 26 √ 27 X 28 √ 29 √ 30 √ 31 √ 32 X 33 X 34 √ 35 X 36 √ 37 X 38 X 39 X 40 √ 41 √ 42 √ 43 √ 44 √ 45 √ 46 X 47 √ 48 √ 49 √ 50 √ 51 X 52 √
428
53 X 54 √ 55 X 56 √ 57 X 58 √ 59 √ 60 √ 61 √ 62 √ 63 √ 64 √ 65 √ 66 √ 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 √ 71 √ 72 √ 73 X 74 √ 75 X 76 X 77 √ 78 √ 79 X 80 X 81 √ 82 X 83 X 84 √ 85 √ 86 √ 87 X 88 √ 89 √ 90 X 91 X 92 √ 93 X 94 √ 95 √ 96 √ 97 X 98 X 99 √ 100 X
429
Very Good= 44 Satisfactory= 15 Overtly= 33 Covertly= 7 Unanswered= 1 Subject Number: P8
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 X 4 X 5 √ 6 √ 7 X 8 √ 9 X 10 √ 11 √ 12 √ 13 X 14 X 15 X 16 √ 17 X 18 √ 19 X 20 X 21 √ 22 √ 23 √ 24 √ 25 X 26 √ 27 √ 28 X 29 X 30 √ 31 √ 32 √ 33 X 34 √ 35 X 36 X 37 √ 38 √ 39 √ 40 √ 41 √
430
42 √ 43 √ 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 √ 48 √ 49 √ 50 √ 51 √ 52 √ 53 √ 54 √ 55 X 56 √ 57 X 58 √ 59 √ 60 √ 61 √ 62 √ 63 √ 64 √ 65 √ 66 √ 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 X 71 √ 72 √ 73 X 74 √ 75 X 76 X 77 √ 78 √ 79 X 80 √ 81 X 82 √ 83 √ 84 √ 85 √ 86 √ 87 X 88 √ 89 X
431
90 X 91 X 92 √ 93 √ 94 √ 95 √ 96 X 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 52 Satisfactory= 14 Overtly= 26 Covertly= 8 Unanswered= 0
Subject Number: P9
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 √ 4 X 5 √ 6 X 7 X 8 √ 9 X 10 X 11 √ 12 √ 13 X 14 √ 15 X 16 √ 17 X 18 √ 19 X 20 √ 21 X 22 √ 23 √ 24 √ 25 √ 26 √ 27 √ 28 X
432
29 √ 30 √ 31 X 32 X 33 √ 34 √ 35 √ 36 X 37 √ 38 √ 39 √ 40 √ 41 √ 42 √ 43 X 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 √ 48 √ 49 √ 50 √ 51 X 52 √ 53 √ 54 √ 55 X 56 X 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 X 61 √ 62 √ 63 √ 64 X 65 X 66 √ 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 X 71 √ 72 √ 73 √ 74 √ 75 X 76 X
433
77 √ 78 √ 79 X 80 X 81 √ 82 √ 83 X 84 √ 85 √ 86 √ 87 X 88 X 89 √ 90 X 91 X 92 X 93 √ 94 X 95 X 96 X 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 40 Satisfactory= 18 Overtly= 36 Covertly= 6 Unanswered= 0
Subject Number: P10
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 X 3 X 4 √ 5 √ 6 X 7 √ 8 X 9 X 10 √ 11 X 12 √ 13 X 14 √ 15 √ 16 √
434
17 √ 18 √ 19 X 20 X 21 X 22 √ 23 √ 24 X 25 X 26 √ 27 √ 28 X 29 √ 30 √ 31 √ 32 √ 33 X 34 √ 35 X 36 √ 37 X 38 ▬ 39 X 40 √ 41 √ 42 √ 43 X 44 √ 45 √ 46 X 47 √ 48 √ 49 √ 50 √ 51 √ 52 √ 53 X 54 √ 55 √ 56 √ 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 √ 61 √ 62 √ 63 √ 64 √
435
65 √ 66 X 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 √ 71 √ 72 √ 73 √ 74 X 75 √ 76 √ 77 √ 78 √ 79 √ 80 X 81 √ 82 X 83 √ 84 √ 85 √ 86 √ 87 X 88 X 89 X 90 X 91 X 92 √ 93 √ 94 √ 95 √ 96 √ 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 49 Satisfactory= 14 Overtly= 32 Covertly= 4 Unanswered= 1
Subject Number: P11
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 √ 4 √
436
5 √ 6 √ 7 X 8 √ 9 √ 10 √ 11 √ 12 X 13 √ 14 √ 15 √ 16 √ 17 √ 18 √ 19 X 20 √ 21 √ 22 √ 23 √ 24 X 25 X 26 √ 27 √ 28 √ 29 √ 30 √ 31 √ 32 X 33 X 34 √ 35 √ 36 √ 37 X 38 X 39 √ 40 X 41 √ 42 √ 43 √ 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 √ 48 √ 49 √ 50 √ 51 √ 52 √
437
53 √ 54 √ 55 √ 56 √ 57 X 58 √ 59 √ 60 √ 61 √ 62 √ 63 √ 64 √ 65 √ 66 √ 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 √ 71 √ 72 X 73 √ 74 √ 75 X 76 √ 77 √ 78 √ 79 X 80 √ 81 √ 82 X 83 √ 84 X 85 √ 86 √ 87 X 88 √ 89 √ 90 X 91 √ 92 √ 93 X 94 √ 95 √ 96 √ 97 X 98 X 99 √ 100 X
438
Very Good= 63 Satisfactory= 14 Overtly= 18 Covertly= 5 Unanswered= 0 Subject Number: P12
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 X 3 √ 4 √ 5 √ 6 X 7 X 8 √ 9 X 10 √ 11 X 12 X 13 X 14 X 15 X 16 √ 17 X 18 √ 19 √ 20 X 21 √ 22 X 23 √ 24 √ 25 √ 26 √ 27 X 28 X 29 √ 30 X 31 X 32 X 33 √ 34 √ 35 X 36 √ 37 X 38 √ 39 X 40 √ 41 √
439
42 √ 43 X 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 X 48 √ 49 X 50 X 51 √ 52 √ 53 √ 54 √ 55 √ 56 X 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 √ 61 √ 62 √ 63 √ 64 ▬ 65 √ 66 √ 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 X 71 √ 72 √ 73 X 74 √ 75 X 76 X 77 √ 78 √ 79 X 80 √ 81 X 82 X 83 √ 84 √ 85 √ 86 √ 87 √ 88 √ 89 √
440
90 X 91 ▬ 92 X 93 X 94 X 95 X 96 √ 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 ▬ Very Good= 29 Satisfactory= 25 Overtly= 37 Covertly= 6 Unanswered= 3
Subject Number: S1
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 X 3 X 4 X 5 X 6 X 7 X 8 X 9 X 10 √ 11 X 12 √ 13 X 14 X 15 X 16 X 17 X 18 X 19 X 20 X 21 X 22 X 23 √ 24 X 25 X 26 X 27 X 28 X
441
29 X 30 X 31 X 32 X 33 √ 34 √ 35 √ 36 X 37 X 38 X 39 X 40 X 41 X 42 X 43 X 44 √ 45 √ 46 X 47 X 48 X 49 X 50 √ 51 X 52 √ 53 X 54 X 55 X 56 √ 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 X 61 X 62 X 63 X 64 X 65 X 66 X 67 √ 68 X 69 X 70 X 71 X 72 √ 73 X 74 √ 75 X 76 X
442
77 √ 78 X 79 √ 80 X 81 X 82 X 83 X 84 X 85 X 86 √ 87 X 88 √ 89 √ 90 √ 91 X 92 X 93 X 94 √ 95 √ 96 X 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 9 Satisfactory= 14 Overtly= 73 Covertly= 4 Unanswered= 0
Subject Number: S2
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 X 3 X 4 X 5 X 6 ▬ 7 X 8 √ 9 X 10 X 11 √ 12 X 13 √ 14 √ 15 √ 16 √
443
17 ▬ 18 X 19 √ 20 X 21 X 22 ▬ 23 X 24 ▬ 25 X 26 √ 27 √ 28 ▬ 29 ▬ 30 X 31 X 32 ▬ 33 X 34 √ 35 X 36 X 37 ▬ 38 ▬ 39 ▬ 40 ▬ 41 ▬ 42 ▬ 43 ▬ 44 ▬ 45 ▬ 46 ▬ 47 ▬ 48 ▬ 49 √ 50 ▬ 51 √ 52 √ 53 √ 54 X 55 X 56 ▬ 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 X 61 ▬ 62 ▬ 63 √ 64 ▬
444
65 √ 66 ▬ 67 √ 68 X 69 √ 70 X 71 √ 72 X 73 √ 74 √ 75 √ 76 √ 77 X 78 √ 79 ▬ 80 ▬ 81 X 82 √ 83 ▬ 84 X 85 √ 86 X 87 ▬ 88 √ 89 X 90 X 91 X 92 ▬ 93 ▬ 94 X 95 √ 96 X 97 ▬ 98 ▬ 99 X 100 ▬ Very Good= 18 Satisfactory= 11 Overtly= 35 Covertly= 2 Unanswered= 34
Subject Number: S3
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 X 3 √ 4 √
445
5 √ 6 √ 7 √ 8 √ 9 X 10 √ 11 √ 12 √ 13 √ 14 √ 15 X 16 X 17 √ 18 √ 19 √ 20 √ 21 √ 22 √ 23 √ 24 X 25 √ 26 √ 27 X 28 √ 29 X 30 √ 31 √ 32 X 33 X 34 √ 35 X 36 X 37 √ 38 √ 39 X 40 √ 41 X 42 √ 43 X 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 X 48 √ 49 X 50 √ 51 √ 52 √
446
53 X 54 √ 55 √ 56 √ 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 √ 61 X 62 X 63 √ 64 √ 65 √ 66 X 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 √ 71 √ 72 √ 73 √ 74 √ 75 √ 76 √ 77 √ 78 √ 79 √ 80 X 81 √ 82 X 83 √ 84 √ 85 √ 86 √ 87 X 88 √ 89 √ 90 √ 91 X 92 X 93 ▬ 94 X 95 √ 96 X 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X
447
Very Good= 41 Satisfactory= 24 Overtly= 32 Covertly= 2 Unanswered= 1 Subject Number: S4
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 √ 4 X 5 √ 6 √ 7 X 8 X 9 √ 10 √ 11 X 12 √ 13 √ 14 √ 15 X 16 √ 17 X 18 √ 19 √ 20 √ 21 √ 22 √ 23 √ 24 √ 25 √ 26 X 27 √ 28 √ 29 X 30 √ 31 X 32 √ 33 X 34 √ 35 √ 36 X 37 √ 38 X 39 √ 40 X 41 √
448
42 √ 43 X 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 √ 48 √ 49 X 50 X 51 √ 52 √ 53 X 54 X 55 √ 56 √ 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 √ 61 X 62 X 63 √ 64 √ 65 √ 66 X 67 √ 68 X 69 √ 70 √ 71 √ 72 X 73 √ 74 √ 75 √ 76 X 77 √ 78 √ 79 √ 80 √ 81 √ 82 √ 83 √ 84 X 85 √ 86 √ 87 X 88 √ 89 √
449
90 X 91 √ 92 √ 93 X 94 √ 95 √ 96 X 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 50 Satisfactory= 14 Overtly= 30 Covertly= 6 Unanswered= 0
Subject Number: S5
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 √ 4 X 5 √ 6 X 7 √ 8 √ 9 X 10 X 11 X 12 X 13 X 14 X 15 √ 16 √ 17 X 18 X 19 X 20 X 21 √ 22 √ 23 X 24 √ 25 X 26 √ 27 √ 28 √
450
29 X 30 √ 31 √ 32 X 33 √ 34 √ 35 √ 36 √ 37 √ 38 X 39 X 40 √ 41 X 42 √ 43 X 44 √ 45 √ 46 X 47 X 48 √ 49 √ 50 X 51 √ 52 √ 53 X 54 √ 55 X 56 √ 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 √ 61 X 62 √ 63 √ 64 X 65 √ 66 X 67 √ 68 X 69 X 70 √ 71 √ 72 √ 73 X 74 √ 75 X 76 X
451
77 √ 78 √ 79 X 80 √ 81 √ 82 √ 83 √ 84 √ 85 √ 86 √ 87 √ 88 √ 89 √ 90 X 91 √ 92 √ 93 √ 94 √ 95 √ 96 √ 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 39 Satisfactory= 19 Overtly= 40 Covertly= 2 Unanswered= 0
Subject Number: S6
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 X 3 √ 4 ▬ 5 √ 6 ▬ 7 √ 8 √ 9 X 10 √ 11 √ 12 √ 13 √ 14 X 15 √ 16 √
452
17 X 18 √ 19 √ 20 X 21 √ 22 √ 23 X 24 X 25 X 26 √ 27 √ 28 X 29 ▬ 30 X 31 X 32 X 33 ▬ 34 X 35 √ 36 √ 37 X 38 X 39 √ 40 √ 41 X 42 ▬ 43 √ 44 ▬ 45 √ 46 ▬ 47 √ 48 ▬ 49 X 50 √ 51 √ 52 √ 53 X 54 √ 55 √ 56 ▬ 57 ▬ 58 √ 59 X 60 ▬ 61 X 62 √ 63 ▬ 64 ▬
453
65 √ 66 X 67 √ 68 X 69 ▬ 70 X 71 √ 72 √ 73 √ 74 X 75 X 76 √ 77 √ 78 √ 79 X 80 X 81 √ 82 X 83 X 84 ▬ 85 √ 86 X 87 X 88 √ 89 √ 90 X 91 X 92 ▬ 93 ▬ 94 X 95 √ 96 X 97 ▬ 98 X 99 X 100 ▬ Very Good= 23 Satisfactory= 20 Overtly= 31 Covertly= 7 Unanswered= 19
Subject Number: S7
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 √ 4 √
454
5 X 6 √ 7 √ 8 √ 9 X 10 √ 11 √ 12 X 13 X 14 √ 15 X 16 X 17 X 18 X 19 √ 20 √ 21 X 22 √ 23 √ 24 √ 25 X 26 √ 27 X 28 X 29 ▬ 30 √ 31 X 32 X 33 X 34 X 35 √ 36 √ 37 X 38 X 39 X 40 √ 41 X 42 √ 43 X 44 √ 45 X 46 √ 47 ▬ 48 √ 49 X 50 √ 51 X 52 √
455
53 √ 54 X 55 √ 56 X 57 X 58 √ 59 √ 60 √ 61 X 62 X 63 √ 64 X 65 √ 66 X 67 X 68 √ 69 X 70 X 71 √ 72 X 73 √ 74 X 75 X 76 X 77 √ 78 √ 79 X 80 √ 81 √ 82 √ 83 √ 84 √ 85 √ 86 X 87 X 88 √ 89 X 90 X 91 √ 92 X 93 √ 94 √ 95 √ 96 X 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 ▬
456
Very Good= 27 Satisfactory= 21 Overtly= 43 Covertly= 6 Unanswered= 3 Subject Number: S8
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 X 3 √ 4 X 5 √ 6 X 7 √ 8 √ 9 X 10 √ 11 X 12 X 13 X 14 √ 15 X 16 X 17 √ 18 X 19 √ 20 X 21 √ 22 X 23 X 24 X 25 √ 26 √ 27 √ 28 √ 29 √ 30 X 31 X 32 X 33 √ 34 √ 35 X 36 X 37 √ 38 X 39 X 40 X 41 X
457
42 √ 43 X 44 X 45 √ 46 X 47 √ 48 X 49 √ 50 √ 51 X 52 √ 53 X 54 √ 55 √ 56 X 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 √ 61 X 62 X 63 X 64 X 65 √ 66 X 67 X 68 √ 69 √ 70 √ 71 √ 72 √ 73 X 74 √ 75 X 76 X 77 √ 78 √ 79 √ 80 √ 81 √ 82 X 83 X 84 X 85 √ 86 X 87 X 88 √ 89 X
458
90 √ 91 X 92 √ 93 X 94 X 95 √ 96 X 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 24 Satisfactory= 20 Overtly= 52 Covertly= 4 Unanswered= 0
Subject Number: S9
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 X 4 X 5 X 6 X 7 √ 8 √ 9 X 10 X 11 √ 12 X 13 X 14 X 15 √ 16 √ 17 √ 18 X 19 X 20 √ 21 X 22 X 23 X 24 X 25 X 26 √ 27 X 28 √
459
29 √ 30 √ 31 X 32 X 33 X 34 √ 35 X 36 X 37 X 38 X 39 X 40 X 41 X 42 √ 43 X 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 X 48 √ 49 X 50 √ 51 X 52 √ 53 √ 54 √ 55 X 56 X 57 ▬ 58 X 59 √ 60 X 61 X 62 X 63 ▬ 64 ▬ 65 √ 66 X 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 √ 71 √ 72 √ 73 √ 74 √ 75 X 76 X
460
77 √ 78 √ 79 X 80 X 81 X 82 X 83 X 84 ▬ 85 X 86 X 87 X 88 X 89 X 90 ▬ 91 X 92 √ 93 ▬ 94 ▬ 95 X 96 ▬ 97 ▬ 98 ▬ 99 ▬ 100 ▬ Very Good= 20 Satisfactory= 15 Overtly= 49 Covertly= 4 Unanswered= 12
Subject Number: S10
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 √ 4 X 5 √ 6 √ 7 √ 8 √ 9 X 10 √ 11 √ 12 √ 13 X 14 √ 15 X 16 X
461
17 X 18 √ 19 √ 20 √ 21 X 22 X 23 √ 24 X 25 X 26 √ 27 √ 28 √ 29 √ 30 √ 31 √ 32 √ 33 √ 34 X 35 X 36 X 37 √ 38 √ 39 X 40 X 41 √ 42 √ 43 √ 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 √ 48 √ 49 X 50 √ 51 √ 52 √ 53 X 54 X 55 X 56 √ 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 X 61 √ 62 √ 63 √ 64 X
462
65 X 66 X 67 √ 68 X 69 √ 70 √ 71 √ 72 √ 73 X 74 √ 75 X 76 X 77 √ 78 √ 79 √ 80 √ 81 √ 82 √ 83 √ 84 √ 85 √ 86 √ 87 X 88 √ 89 √ 90 X 91 X 92 √ 93 X 94 √ 95 √ 96 X 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 46 Satisfactory= 15 Overtly= 34 Covertly= 5 Unanswered= 0
Subject Number: S11
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 X 3 X 4 √
463
5 √ 6 X 7 √ 8 √ 9 X 10 X 11 √ 12 √ 13 X 14 X 15 X 16 √ 17 X 18 X 19 X 20 X 21 √ 22 √ 23 X 24 X 25 X 26 X 27 √ 28 X 29 √ 30 √ 31 X 32 X 33 X 34 X 35 X 36 √ 37 √ 38 X 39 X 40 X 41 X 42 X 43 X 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 X 48 √ 49 √ 50 √ 51 X 52 √
464
53 √ 54 X 55 √ 56 √ 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 √ 61 X 62 X 63 √ 64 X 65 X 66 √ 67 X 68 √ 69 X 70 √ 71 √ 72 √ 73 √ 74 √ 75 X 76 X 77 √ 78 √ 79 X 80 X 81 √ 82 X 83 X 84 X 85 X 86 √ 87 X 88 X 89 √ 90 √ 91 X 92 X 93 X 94 X 95 √ 96 X 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X
465
Very Good= 27 Satisfactory= 14 Overtly= 47 Covertly= 12 Unanswered= 0 Subject Number: S12
Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly
erroneous error
Covertly erroneous
error
1 X 2 √ 3 √ 4 X 5 √ 6 √ 7 √ 8 √ 9 X 10 X 11 √ 12 √ 13 X 14 √ 15 X 16 √ 17 X 18 X 19 √ 20 √ 21 √ 22 √ 23 X 24 X 25 √ 26 √ 27 √ 28 √ 29 √ 30 √ 31 √ 32 √ 33 X 34 √ 35 √ 36 √ 37 √ 38 √ 39 X 40 √ 41 √
466
42 √ 43 √ 44 √ 45 √ 46 √ 47 √ 48 √ 49 √ 50 √ 51 √ 52 √ 53 X 54 X 55 X 56 √ 57 X 58 X 59 √ 60 X 61 √ 62 √ 63 √ 64 X 65 X 66 √ 67 √ 68 √ 69 √ 70 √ 71 √ 72 √ 73 √ 74 X 75 X 76 √ 77 √ 78 √ 79 X 80 √ 81 X 82 X 83 X 84 √ 85 √ 86 √ 87 X 88 X 89 √
467
90 X 91 X 92 X 93 X 94 √ 95 √ 96 √ 97 X 98 X 99 X 100 X Very Good= 41 Satisfactory= 23 Overtly= 33 Covertly= 3 Unanswered= 0
468
APPENDIX 4
AVERAGE OF THE STANDARD DEVAITION
Arabic professional translators' group
Standard deviation
Average Percentage of the correct
Unanswered Total of incorrect answers
Total of correct answers
Category Question number
0% 0 12 0 c 1 66.66% 0 4 8 c 2 83.33% 0 2 10 c 3 25% 0 9 3 c 4 75% 0 3 9 c 5 25% 0 9 3 c 6 25% 0 9 3 c 7 91.66% 0 1 11 c 8 25% 0 9 3 c 9 66.66% 0 4 8 c 10 66.66% 0 4 8 c 11 58.33% 0 5 7 c 12 25% 0 9 3 c 13 58.33% 0 5 7 c 14 16.66% 0 10 2 c 15 75% 0 3 9 c 16 33.33% 0 8 4 c 17 83.33% 0 2 10 c 18 33.33% 0 8 4 c 19 66.66% 0 4 8 c 20 50% 0 6 6 c 21 50% 0 6 6 c 22 91.66% 1 0 11 c 23 41.66% 0 7 5 c 24 0.256748 50.66% 33.33% 0 8 4 c 25
100% 0 0 12 de 52 58.33% 0 5 7 de 53 91.66% 0 1 11 de 54 50% 0 6 6 de 55 0.212453 75% 75% 0 3 9 de 56
66.66% 0 4 8 den 47 83.33% 0 2 10 den 48 75% 0 3 9 den 49 83.33% 0 2 10 den 50 0.139435 71.66% 50% 0 6 6 den 51
469
66.66% 0 4 8 dnp 36 33.33% 0 8 4 dnp 37 41.66% 1 6 5 dnp 38 33.33% 0 8 4 dnp 39 41.66% 0 7 5 dnp 40 83.33% 1 1 10 dnp 41 100% 0 0 12 dnp 42 50% 0 6 6 dnp 43 91.66% 0 1 11 dnp 44 100% 0 0 12 dnp 45 0.275136 64.39% 66.66% 0 4 8 dnp 46
100% 0 0 12 dpn 26 58.33% 0 5 7 dpn 27 25% 0 9 3 dpn 28 75% 0 3 9 dpn 29 83.33% 0 2 10 dpn 30 58.33% 0 5 7 dpn 31 25% 0 9 3 dpn 32 50% 0 6 6 dpn 33 66.66% 0 4 8 dpn 34 0.261125 58.33% 41.66% 0 7 5 dpn 35 0.229834 65.32%
16.66% 1 9 2 p 91 58.33% 0 5 7 p 92 41.66% 0 7 5 p 93 75% 0 3 9 p 94 58.33% 0 5 7 p 95 50% 0 6 6 p 96 0% 0 12 0 p 97 0% 0 12 0 p 98 25% 0 9 3 p 99
0.27902 32.50% 0% 1 11 0 p 100 66.66% 0 4 8 sva 73 75% 0 3 9 sva 74 16.66% 0 10 2 sva 75 91.66% 0 1 11 sva 77 75% 0 3 9 sva 78 41.66% 0 7 5 sva 79 41.66% 0 7 5 sva 80 75% 0 3 9 sva 81 25% 0 9 3 sva 82 50% 0 6 6 sva 84 91.66% 0 1 11 sva 85 100% 0 0 12 sva 86 66.66% 0 4 8 sva 88 50% 0 6 6 sva 89 0.261381 59.44% 25% 0 9 3 sva 90
0% 0 12 0 svap 57
470
41.66% 0 7 5 svap 58 100% 0 0 12 svap 59 58.33% 0 5 7 svap 60 75% 0 3 9 svap 61 75% 0 3 9 svap 62 83.33% 0 2 10 svap 63 66.66% 1 3 8 svap 64 75% 0 3 9 svap 65 50% 0 6 6 svap 66 100% 0 0 12 svap 67 91.66% 0 1 11 svap 68 91.66% 0 1 11 svap 69 66.66% 0 4 8 svap 70 100% 0 0 12 svap 71 0.264398 72.91% 91.66% 0 1 11 svap 72
16.66% 0 10 2 svp 76 66.66% 0 4 8 svp 83 0.288675 33.33% 16.66% 0 10 2 svp 87 0.281305 63.48%
����
Arabic translation students' group
Question number
Category Total of correct answers
Total of incorrect answers
Unanswered Percentage of the correct
Average Standard devation
1 c 0 12 0 0% 2 c 6 6 0 50% 3 c 8 4 0 66.66% 4 c 3 8 1 25% 5 c 8 4 0 66.66% 6 c 5 5 2 41.66% 7 c 9 3 0 75% 8 c 10 2 0 83.33% 9 c 1 11 0 8.33% 10 c 7 5 0 58.33% 11 c 8 4 0 66.66% 12 c 7 5 0 58.33% 13 c 4 8 0 33.33% 14 c 7 5 0 58.33% 15 c 4 8 0 33.33% 16 c 7 5 0 58.33% 17 c 3 8 1 25% 18 c 4 8 0 33.33% 19 c 8 4 0 66.66%
471
20 c 6 6 0 50% 21 c 7 5 0 58.33% 22 c 7 4 1 58.33% 23 c 5 7 0 41.66% 24 c 3 8 1 25% 25 c 4 8 0 33.33% 47% 0.208157 52 de 12 0 0 100% 53 de 5 7 0 41.66% 54 de 5 7 0 41.66% 55 de 6 6 0 50% 56 de 7 3 2 58.33% 58.33% 0.242979 47 den 5 5 2 41.66% 48 den 8 2 2 66.66% 49 den 5 7 0 41.66% 50 den 9 2 1 75% 51 den 7 5 0 58.33% 56.66% 0.149093 36 dnp 5 7 0 41.66% 37 dnp 7 4 1 58.33% 38 dnp 3 8 1 25% 39 dnp 2 9 1 16.66% 40 dnp 5 6 1 41.66% 41 dnp 3 8 1 25% 42 dnp 8 2 2 66.66% 43 dnp 3 8 1 25% 44 dnp 9 1 2 75% 45 dnp 10 1 1 83.33% 46 dnp 7 3 2 58.33% 46.97% 0.227523 26 dpn 9 3 0 75% 27 dpn 8 4 0 66.66% 28 dpn 7 4 1 58.33% 29 dpn 5 4 3 41.66% 30 dpn 8 4 0 66.66% 31 dpn 4 8 0 33.33% 32 dpn 3 8 1 25% 33 dpn 4 7 1 33.33% 34 dpn 8 4 0 66.66% 35 dpn 6 6 0 50% 51.66% 0.174793 51.88% 0.198036
91 p 3 9 0 25% 92 p 5 5 2 41.66% 93 p 2 6 4 16.66% 94 p 6 5 1 50% 95 p 11 1 0 91.66% 96 p 2 9 1 16.66% 97 p 0 9 3 0% 98 p 0 10 2 0% 99 p 0 11 1 0% 100 p 0 8 4 0% 24.16% 0.297737
472
73 sva 8 4 0 66.66% 74 sva 9 3 0 75% 75 sva 3 9 0 25% 77 sva 11 1 0 91.66% 78 sva 11 1 0 91.66% 79 sva 5 6 1 41.66% 80 sva 6 5 1 50% 81 sva 8 4 0 66.66% 82 sva 5 7 0 41.66% 84 sva 5 5 2 41.66% 85 sva 9 3 0 75% 86 sva 7 5 0 58.33% 88 sva 9 3 0 75% 89 sva 8 4 0 66.66% 90 sva 4 7 1 33.33% 60% 0.204606 57 svap 0 10 2 0% 58 svap 2 10 0 16.66% 59 svap 11 1 0 91.60% 60 svap 6 5 1 50% 61 svap 2 9 1 16.66% 62 svap 4 7 1 33.33% 63 svap 8 2 2 66.66% 64 svap 2 7 3 16.66% 65 svap 8 4 0 66.66% 66 svap 2 9 1 16.66% 67 svap 9 3 0 75% 68 svap 6 6 0 50% 69 svap 7 4 1 58.33% 70 svap 8 4 0 66.66% 71 svap 11 1 0 91.66% 72 svap 9 3 0 75% 49.47% 0.29255 76 svp 4 8 0 33.33% 83 svp 5 6 1 41.66% 87 svp 1 10 1 8.33% 27.77% 0.173459 52.20% 0.25891
473
APPENDIX 5
RANKING THE ITEMS ACCORDING TO THEIR PERCENTAGES OF THE CORRECT IN A DESENDING
ORDER
Professional translators' group
Question number Total of correct answers
Total of incorrect answers
Unanswered Percentage of the correct
1 0 12 0 0% 57 0 12 0 0% 97 0 12 0 0% 98 0 12 0 0% 100 0 11 1 0% 15 2 10 0 16.6% 75 2 10 0 16.6% 76 2 10 0 16.6% 87 2 10 0 16.6% 91 2 9 1 16.6% 4 3 9 0 25% 6 3 9 0 25% 7 3 9 0 25% 9 3 9 0 25% 13 3 9 0 25% 28 3 9 0 25% 32 3 9 0 25% 82 3 9 0 25% 90 3 9 0 25% 99 3 9 0 25% 17 4 8 0 33.3% 19 4 8 0 33.3% 25 4 8 0 33.3% 37 4 8 0 33.3% 39 4 8 0 33.3% 24 5 7 0 41.6% 35 5 7 0 41.6% 38 5 6 1 41.6% 40 5 7 0 41.6% 58 5 7 0 41.6% 79 5 7 0 41.6% 80 5 7 0 41.6% 93 5 7 0 41.6% 21 6 6 0 50% 22 6 6 0 50%
474
33 6 6 0 50% 43 6 6 0 50% 51 6 6 0 50% 55 6 6 0 50% 66 6 6 0 50% 84 6 6 0 50% 89 6 6 0 50% 96 6 6 0 50% 12 7 5 0 58.3% 14 7 5 0 58.3% 27 7 5 0 58.3% 31 7 5 0 58.3% 53 7 5 0 58.3% 60 7 5 0 58.3% 92 7 5 0 58.3% 95 7 5 0 58.3% 2 8 4 0 66.6% 10 8 4 0 66.6% 11 8 4 0 66.6% 20 8 4 0 66.6% 34 8 4 0 66.6% 36 8 4 0 66.6% 46 8 4 0 66.6% 47 8 4 0 66.6% 64 8 3 1 66.6% 70 8 4 0 66.6% 73 8 4 0 66.6% 83 8 4 0 66.6% 88 8 4 0 66.6% 5 9 3 0 75% 16 9 3 0 75% 29 9 3 0 75% 49 9 3 0 75% 56 9 3 0 75% 61 9 3 0 75% 62 9 3 0 75% 65 9 3 0 75% 74 9 3 0 75% 78 9 3 0 75% 81 9 3 0 75% 94 9 3 0 75% 3 10 2 0 83.3% 18 10 2 0 83.3% 30 10 2 0 83.3% 41 10 1 1 83.3% 48 10 2 0 83.3% 50 10 2 0 83.3% 63 10 2 0 83.3%
475
8 11 1 0 91.6% 23 11 0 1 91.6% 44 11 1 0 91.6% 54 11 1 0 91.6% 68 11 1 0 91.6% 69 11 1 0 91.6% 72 11 1 0 91.6% 77 11 1 0 91.6% 85 11 1 0 91.6% 26 12 0 0 100% 42 12 0 0 100% 45 12 0 0 100% 52 12 0 0 100% 59 12 0 0 100% 67 12 0 0 100% 71 12 0 0 100% 86 12 0 0 100%
����
Translation students' group
Question number Total of
correct answers
Total of incorrect answers
Unanswered Percentage of the correct
1 0 12 0 0% 57 0 10 2 0% 97 0 9 3 0% 98 0 10 2 0% 99 0 11 1 0% 100 0 8 4 0% 9 1 11 0 8.3% 87 1 10 1 8.3% 39 2 9 1 16.6% 58 2 10 0 16.6% 61 2 9 1 16.6% 64 2 7 3 16.6% 66 2 9 1 16.6% 93 2 6 4 16.6% 96 2 9 1 16.6% 4 3 8 1 25% 17 3 8 1 25% 24 3 8 1 25% 32 3 8 1 25% 38 3 8 1 25% 41 3 8 1 25% 43 3 8 1 25% 75 3 9 0 25%
476
91 3 9 0 25% 13 4 8 0 33.3% 15 4 8 0 33.3% 18 4 8 0 33.3% 25 4 8 0 33.3% 31 4 8 0 33.3% 33 4 7 1 33.3% 62 4 7 1 33.3% 76 4 8 0 33.3% 90 4 7 1 33.3% 6 5 5 2 41.6% 23 5 7 0 41.6% 29 5 4 3 41.6% 36 5 7 0 41.6% 40 5 6 1 41.6% 47 5 5 2 41.6% 49 5 7 0 41.6% 53 5 7 0 41.6% 54 5 7 0 41.6% 79 5 6 1 41.6% 82 5 7 0 41.6% 83 5 6 1 41.6% 84 5 5 2 41.6% 92 5 5 2 41.6% 2 6 6 0 50% 20 6 6 0 50% 35 6 6 0 50% 55 6 6 0 50% 60 6 5 1 50% 68 6 6 0 50% 80 6 5 1 50% 94 6 5 1 50% 10 7 5 0 58.3% 12 7 5 0 58.3% 14 7 5 0 58.3% 16 7 5 0 58.3% 21 7 5 0 58.3% 22 7 4 1 58.3% 28 7 4 1 58.3% 37 7 4 1 58.3% 46 7 3 2 58.3% 51 7 5 0 58.3% 56 7 3 2 58.3% 69 7 4 1 58.3% 86 7 5 0 58.3% 3 8 4 0 66.6% 5 8 4 0 66.6% 11 8 4 0 66.6%
477
19 8 4 0 66.6% 27 8 4 0 66.6% 30 8 4 0 66.6% 34 8 4 0 66.6% 42 8 2 2 66.6% 48 8 2 2 66.6% 63 8 2 2 66.6% 65 8 4 0 66.6% 70 8 4 0 66.6% 73 8 4 0 66.6% 81 8 4 0 66.6% 89 8 4 0 66.6% 7 9 3 0 75% 26 9 3 0 75% 44 9 1 2 75% 50 9 2 1 75% 67 9 3 0 75% 72 9 3 0 75% 74 9 3 0 75% 85 9 3 0 75% 88 9 3 0 75% 8 10 2 0 83.3% 45 10 1 1 83.3% 59 11 1 0 91.6% 71 11 1 0 91.6% 77 11 1 0 91.6% 78 11 1 0 91.6% 95 11 1 0 91.6% 52 12 0 0 100%