Translating Idiomatic English Phrasal Verbs Into Arabic

Home , Defective verb, Noun particle

TRANSLATING IDIOMATIC ENGLISH

PHRASAL VERBS INTO ARABIC

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

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.

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

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 اَ

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

.fa) are marked ف wa and و) The coordination particles

This system may not conform to some Arabic names occuring in this study, which

ا :have their own previously establiehed transiliterations. For example

.Dar El Ilm Lilmalayin دارا Munir Ba'albaki and

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

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

. (الاآ) are commonly known as: phrasal verbs

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.

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).

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.

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).

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.

2.2.2 Idioms and idiomaticity in Arabic

The phenomenon of idiomatic expressions in the Arabic language has been

by many ancient and modern (ان) exclusively tackled in the Arabic rhetoric

rhetoric and) انوا Arabic writers such as Al-jaaHiZ (died 255 A.H.) in his book

أارا clarification) [my translation], Al-jurjaanii (died 471 A.H.) in his books

(Indications of the Miraculous) داز secrets of rhetoric) [my translation] and)

أسا my translation], and Al-zamakhsharii (died 538 A.H.) in his books]

[The Explorer) [my translation) اّف Foundation of Rhetoric) [my translation] and) among others.

being defined by Arabic linguists as "a science (ان) Bearing in mind that rhetoric 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

figurative expression), which) از (science falls into four rhetorical styles being: 1 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:

The winter [sic] poured down) (Shakkour, 1992) [my translation]. In this) ااء

is not intended. What is meant by (اء) example the original meaning of winter winter here is the rain due to the fact that the rain pours down only in winter in the

simile), which is, following Shakkour (1992, p. 65), "An) ا (Arab land; 2 indication of sharing of one meaning by two things" [my translation]. For instance: 20

Lebanon is like a paradise in beauty) [my translation]. In this) نآال sentence Lebanon and paradise share one meaning, that is, the beauty (p. 65); 3)

metaphor), which means: Using a word in a meaning which is not its original) أرة 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

The light smiled shining) (p. 125) [my translation]. In) احاً.:example 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

antonomasia), which means: Any word) ا (handsome person, i.e. shining; and 4 that expresses a meaning which can be perceived literally and metaphorically at the same time (Shakkour, 1992) [my translation]. For example:(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; [اأمان] Example: to put the cart before the horse b. Genitive constructions whose individual meanings are familiar, while the result of their combination is unfamiliar; something that gathers many' [ح] Example: Noah's ark objects or species' 21

'real patience and tolerance' [أب] the patience of Job c. Individual idiomatic words; He tells of what he hears without' [هأذن] Example: He is an ear thinking' 2. They are influenced by certain linguistic phenomena such as: where different structures express the same ,[اادف] a. synonymy meaning; where one structure expresses different ,[ا] b. homonymy meanings; and where one structure expresses opposite ,[اد] c. antonymy 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

he returned empty-handed) (literally: he)د:gives thefollowingexample

he arrived) or) و returned with the slippers of Hunain) where we cannot substitute

.he returned) and keep the idiomaticity of the expression (p) د he walked) for) ر

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

,(literally: fat and fire, meaning: completely opposites) ور lexemic as in 22

literally: on my eye / head, meaning: with) /را phraseological as in

literally: he who walks on the) راربو pleasure), and proverbial as in road will get there, meaning: he who takes the first step will eventually achieve his aims). ,LikeEnglish Arabic lexemic idioms can be verbal, nominal, adjectival, and adverbial (p. 58). Yet, "Arabic verbal lexemic idioms do not occur with particles" (p.

د or اا Therefore, the Arabic equivalent for (he broke into the house) is .(58

meaning: he entered the house by force) (p. 58). Hence "Arabic verbal) اة lexemic idioms are made up of either the verb alone or the verb followed by an adverbial nominal" (p. 58).

The) اااتا In their monolingual Arabic-Arabic dictionary

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].

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.

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:

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).

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.

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]

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].

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.

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:

Type Combination Intransitive Transitive 1 Verb + adverb Can you please carry Don’t let me down. on? 2 Verb + preposition He is looking for a car She reminds me of our to buy. meeting. 3 Verb + adverb + She cannot put up with I will get the price down preposition you. 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 She will not give in. down. 2 Verb + preposition - He looks after his parents. 3 Verb + adverb + I will get the price I'm looking forward to preposition down on. meeting you. Table 2.3 The word order of EPVs.

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.

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).

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).

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:

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.

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

(literally: phrasal verbs), and Daud et al. (2003) الارّ instance, calls them

literally: verbal compound), whereas Najiib (2001) considers) آ name EPV

literally: tailed verbs) which consist in addition to) الاّ EPVs as one part of

PVs, prepositional verbs and phrasal-prepositional verbs.

As far as the Arabic language is concerned, there exist many constructions in which

,(to look at) إ,(to eat from) آ :verbs are followed by prepositions such as

to) بِ ,(to talk about), ّ (to think of), ّ (to comment on) ّث 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

are able to combine semantically with verb roots and to act as integral" وفا parts of verb-preposition structures" (p. 19). By "true" Arabic prepositions, he means

,baa?, fii, 3alaa, laam, ?ilaa, min) اء,,,ام,إ,, prepositions such as

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 means "the casual point of departure" it is used with "verbs meaning to sell and to give in marriage" or that because 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

and categorized by prepositions. He ,"دةاإا" Barakat's novel entitled

to consider their relations to verbs اء, , :starts with the locative prepositions

and "are by far the most اء they often combine with. He maintains that

is the most widely ranging" اء commonly used in conjunction with verbs" and preposition of all" (p. 162).

(?baa) اء

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" اء ,(162 of motion into transitive verbs of transport" (p. 162). Arabic grammarians refer to

baa? of) ءا the transitivizing baa?) or) ء اas اء such a function of

,to run off with) (p. 162). Moreover) هببِ ,(to transport by) ّبِ ,.transport), e.g

in construction with a noun اء there are some intransitive verbs which may use

.to pass by) etc) ّبِ ,(to boast about) إبِ ,(to meet with) ابِ :phrase such as

:has two functions اء In such verbs

1) Specifying the subject, for example:

ابااوباا

The first year-students met with the second year-students.

2) Bringing a second element into the predication, for example:

اابة

The students met with the professors.

serves the purpose of specifying those who took parts" اء ,In both of the above cases in the action" (pp. 165-168).

to) بِ :such as اء Furthermore, there exist some verbs that do not occur without

افبِ ,(to welcome) رّبِ ,(to be worthy of) ُربِ ,(to donate) ّعبِ ,(believe in

و ,(to be interested in) اهّبِ ,(to stick to) ّبِ ,(to join with) ابِ ,(to confess)

.(to contact) etc. (pp. 170-171) ابِ ,(to trust) بِ

to mark noun phrases in" اء There are, however, some transitive verbs which use particular syntactic relations" (p. 171), but may occur without it in other contexts such

,to hear about) (p. 171). Also) بِ to accept) and) ّبِ ,(to dream about) بِ :as

to mark the direct object, but […] can be directly" اء there are some verbs which use

to) أطبِ ,(to hope for) أبِ :transitive with no change in meaning" (p. 171) such as

إم ,(to overtake) بِ ,(to throw) ربِ ,(to feel) أّبِ ,(to begin) أبِ ,(surround

to pledge) etc. (p. 171). There are other verbs, "which are passive in either form or) بِ

,(to mark an underlying agent or instrument" (p. 172" اء meaning" (p. 172), and use

(to be surprised at) بِ ,(to admire) أُبِ ,(to be influenced by) أُبِ :such as etc. (p. 172). Finally, there are some verbs which involve two noun phrases, one of

,(to condemn someone to something) ++اء :such as اء which is marked by

to convince) أ+ا+اء ,(to introduce someone to someone) ّف+ا+اء

أ+ا ,(to provide someone with something) أّ+ا+اء ,(someone of something

.(to command someone to do something) etc. (p172) +اء

(fii)

Lentzner claims that the occurrence of with verbs "is not common" (p. 173), and he pinpoints four different cases in which verbs combine with : Firstly, "verbs that take

,to hope for). Secondly) أ ,.optionally; can be directly transitive" (p. 173), e.g []

"verbs that take [] for one meaning, another preposition for other meaning" (p. 173),

to) ه :to desire). Thirdly, "verbs that require []" (p. 173) such as) ر ,.e.g

to share). Lastly, "Intransitive verbs that use [] in) اك participate in) and

to) اّ construction with a noun phrase" (p. 173), e.g., ّ (to think of) and continue) (p. 173). 75

(3alaa)

Lentzner observes that "[m]any intransitive verbs use [] in construction with a

ف ,(to regret), (to cry over/for) أ :noun phrase" (p. 175), such as

(to fear for), (to watch over) in which "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

to rebel against), (to laugh at), (to) ر :is illustrated in

become angry of), ّ (to overcome) which have to do with actions or feelings directed "AGAINST" someone or something. Thus, 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].

to) ص ,(to influence) أّ :There are some verbs that require , such as

,(to indicate), (to dominate) دلّ ,(ensure), (to pass judgment on

.to attack) etc. (pp) ه ,(to be limited to) ا ,(to look out upon) أّ

180-181). Whereas there are some transitive verbs that "may occur with []", such

.to depend on) etc) ا ,(to concentrate on), ّ (to comment on) رآّ :as

(p. 181). Finally, there are some verbs which involve two noun-phrases, one of which

ّ+ ,(to help someone to do something) +ا+ :is marked with such as

to dictate something to) أ+ا+ ,(to prefer something to something) ا+ someone) etc. (pp. 181-182).

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

combine with verb roots to provide "lexical structures ( ام,إ,,) prepositions

or اء with particular semantic content", however, they are less frequent than either

(p. 182).

(laam) ام

with no change in meaning. It may إ This preposition is interchangeable with

أ :combine with four types of verbs as follows: 1) Verbs which require it, such as

ا :to listen to), 2) "Transitive verbs that can optionally take it" (p. 183), such as) لِ

((marks the person(s) (or thing(s [ام] to listen to). 3) "Verbs of permitting, where) لِ

to permit someone to do) أحلِ :to whom permission is granted" (p. 183), such as

to permit someone to do something). 4) "Intransitive verbs) لِ something), and

to) ىلِ :in construction with a noun-phrase" (p.183), such as [ام] which use

.(to avenge) etc. (pp. 182-183) الِ ,(to surrender to) الِ ,(happen to

(ilaa?) إ

,verbs which require it (1 : إ There are three types of verbs that may combine with

to listen) أإ ,(to need) اجإ ,(to long for) ّإ ,(to stare at) ّقإ :such as

to listen to ) etc.; 2) transitive) أإ ,(to resort to) إ ,(to look at) ّإ ,(to

to listen) اإ :optionally with no change in meaning, such as إ verbs which use

to look at); and 3) intransitive) إ to miss) and) اقإ ,(to harm) أءإ ,(to 77

to) ّثإ :in construction with a noun-phrase, such as إ verbs which may use

to) اإ to join), and) اّإ ,(to trust) انّإ ,(to indicate to) أرإ ,(speak to

in most of the above instances is "essentially إ notice). However, the function of

can be termed إ directional", and the relationship between the verb and the object of

"TOWARDS" (pp. 185-187) [Emphasis in original].

(min)

Similarly, there are three types of verbs that may combine with : 1) verbs which

,(to approach) اب ,(require it, such as: ّ (to get rid of), (to mock

to take revenge on); 2) "[t]ransitive verbs which may take []", such as) اand

to increase), and ّ (to reduce); and 3) "[i]ntransitive verbs which may take) زاد

to) ف ,(in construction with a noun-phrase", such as: (to get tired of [] be afraid of), (to complain about), (to laugh at), (to get angry with), (to avoid) etc. (pp. 188-189).

(3an)

Likewise, may combine with three types of verbs: 1) verbs which require it, such

(as: ّ (to abandon), ّ (to express),and ّ (to produce); 2

to) أب ,(t]ransitive verbs which may take []", such as: (to search for]"

ّ to announce), and) أ ,(to express) أب ,(to defend) دا ,(answer

(to search for); and 3) "[i]ntransitive verbs which may use [] in construction with a

to differ from), ّ (to be) ا ,(to move away) ا :noun-phrase", such as

,less than), ّ (to desist from), and ّ (to stop). With intransitive verbs 78 has three kinds of functions: first, it embodies the semantic component "FROM" with

;(the student withdrew from her friends) اتاأ :verbs of motion, as in

the) اا :secondly, it functions "as a comparative predicate", as in student differed from her friends); and thirdly, it extends "the condition predicted by

the) ّاارا :the verb to an action in which the subject is involved" as in 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 which basically means (to discuss), becomes (to look for) when combining with the preposition . Likewise, 79

.(to depend on) ا to authorize, to sanction) and the combination) ا the verb

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 (to help someone) and the combination

(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

.standpoint ا Translators in which he approaches the issue from the transitivity

He starts with the traditional classification of verbs in the Arabic grammar where

أل or intransitive verbs أل they, like English verbs, can be transitive verbs

The former verbs govern the accusative of a noun through themselves, they are .ز

verbs which pass on to their objects through) أل traditionally known as themselves). The latter verbs govern a preposition with a noun in the genitive case

verbs which)ألف instead of accusative, they are traditionally known as pass on to their objects through a preposition). There are some verbs, however, that

,(to call) د may be used in both ways with different meanings, for instance the verb

د :he called him), or intransitively as in) د :which can be used transitively, as in

(he prayed for him) (p. 144).

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

.(he went without dessert after lunch) ااىااء :following example

.after lunch) is a genuine prepositional phrase) ااء Heliel asserts that the phrase

But he proposes two ways of bracketing the remainder, verb phrase plus prepositional phrase, or verb phrase plus noun phrase as follows:

[ ا ] [ اى] or [ ا ] [ اى]

Verb phrase + prepositional phrase / verb phrase + noun phrase

In order to identify a prepositional phrase Heliel conducts three tests:

اىا ,.a) fronting the prepositional phrase, e.g

b) questioning the prepositional phrase with a 'what' question, e.g.,

أيءا؟

c) separating the prepositional phrase from the rest of the sentence by an

ااى ,.adjunct, e.g

,is indeed one stable constituent"اىHe comes to the conclusion that the phrase

ا and hence a prepositional phrase" (p. 145). Consequently, the combination of

بِ ,(supervise) أف :dispense with) along with similar combinations like)

(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

آا expose the crime) versus) آا ,.the entire combination, e.g 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

looked in the) اة ,.the preposition and perhaps the following noun, e.g

,looked into the case). Prepositions, on the other hands) ا mirror) versus

to connect) اربِ,.almost always retain a degree of their physical meaning, e.g

to escape from) etc. Yet both the preposition and the noun it governs) هب,(with 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., (to follow him) versus (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

the branches swayed) [my translation] versus) ان :ways" (p. 146), as in

the girl tended towards her friend) [my translation] where the verb) اا is literal in the first sentence and extended in the second since it is associated with the

.(to) (p. 146) إ preposition

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).

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.,

دّا ,(he sailed through the ocean) أا ,(he sat on the chair) ا

(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:

(to desire, to crave for) ر (to avoid, to dislike) ر (to like, to sympathize) لا (to avoid, to dislike) ل (to fall down) و (to come across, to find) و (to look at) ا (to consider) (p. 71) [My translation].

2.6.6 Siinii, Hussein and Al-ddoush

The) اااتا In their monolingual Arabic-Arabic dictionary

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:

[To take into his account) (p. 3) [My translation) أ

[To take into consideration) (p. 5) [My translation) أ ار

(To be touched with) (p. 42) [My translation]

[To be away from people) (p. 143) [My translation) ا

[To fail in facing even the easiest problem) (p. 94) [My translation) قء

[To be confused) (p. 10) [My translation) أ

[It is too old) (p. 15) [My translation) أآ اهوب

[To grow older) (p. 33) [My translation) ّا

[They got lost) (p. 33) [My translation) ّاب

[to be old, to be advanced in years) (p. 80) [My translation) ا

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:

:p. 2) (To terminate or destroy). For example) أ .1

.(p. 2) أاانا

(The fire destroyed fifty houses in the village) [My translation]

p. 6) (To learn from, to study under, to borrow, to transmit, to narrate). For) أ .2 example:

(p. 6) أآءامأرها 84

(A lot of contemporary scientists have adopted their thoughts from their predecessors)

[My translation]

:p. 6) (To begin, to start). For example) أ .3

(p. 6) أاذإءولاب

(The professor started delivering his lecture after the arrival of all the students) [My translation]

:p. 15) (To give up). For example) أ .4

(p. 15) أاا

(The patient gave up smoking) [My translation]

:p. 18) (To refrain). For example) أ 5.

(p.18) ااموااباوبا

(The fasting man refrains from having food and drink from dawn to dusk) [My translation]

:p. 20) (To include or apply to). For example) ا .6

(p. 20)إاارااادوناء

(The new decision has applied to all citizens without exception) [My translation]

(p. 20)آماّآاباد

(The teacher's order applies to all new students) [My translation]

:p. 21) (To devote oneself to, to dedicate oneself to). For example) اإ .7

(p. 21) اأإدراااأ

(Ahmad devoted himself to study the Arabic language until he mastered it) [My translation]

:p. 21) (To quit, to give up, to stop). For example) ا .8

(p. 21) اتهىاازرزَ

(Huda has missed her friend who stoped visiting her for a long time) [My translation] 85

:p. 27) (To consummate the marriage with). For example) ب .9

(p. 27) او،أنأآدراا

(Abdullah consummated the marriage with his wife when she completed her university study) [My translation]

p. 30) (To study thoroughly, to go deeply into, to be an authority or expert) ّ .10 in). For example:

(p. 30) آناءذنهر،ّواا

(The ancestors did not allow their students to teach unless they are acquired through knowledge) [My translation]

:p. 32) (To fall in love with, to be very fond of). For example) ّب .11

(p. 32) ّاّا

(The young man fell in love with his cousin since childhood) [My translation]

:p. 61) (To intend to, to aim at). For example) رإ .12

(p. 61) راإإزااةاا

(The diplomat intended, by his statement, to eliminate the fabricated gap between the two countries) [My translation]

13. (p. 66) (To look after, to take care of). For example:

(p. 66) اونراواس

(The ambassador kept looking after his fellow citizens' affairs with a lot of diligence and enthusiasm) [My translation]

14. (p. 144) (To consist of, to contain, to make up of). For example:

(p. 144) ال

(The article is made up of fifty pages) [My translation]

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

'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 only to express the same meaning of the phrase 'to help'. Therefore, this type of Arabic constructions is non-idiomatic/literal by any means.

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 +

to depend on', which cannot' ا ,preposition structures. To take just one example 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

to authorize, to recognize) sacrifices its basic)ا owing to the fact that the verb 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.

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.

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 normal-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

.in Arabic (اف) which constitutes the cornerstone of morphology (ا)

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 () and inflected

The defective verb is a verb that carries a meaning unrelated to time, hence .(ّف) it is a frozen verb in the sense that it is confined to one particular pattern, e.g., (it 95

is not),(it may be),َِ(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

And partially inflected .(ا :and imperative ارع :present ,ا :patterns (past

آد–د :which can produce only two verbs patterns, either past and present such as

ح – ,(still, yet) زالال,(to be about to) أو– ,(to be on the brink of)

not to cease doing)or present and imperative) اّ–ّ ,(to continue to be) ح

.(to leave) (Al-ghalaayiinii, 1986, pp. 55-64) ع–دع، such as

in Arabic, in its simplest definition, is an extraction of one word (اق) Derivation from another provided that there is suitability () between them in meaning and structure but not in form (?ibin Jinnii died 392 A.H as cited in Hammaad, 1983, p.17;

writing) we) آ :Al-jurjaanii, 1986, p. 27). For example, from an infinitive such as

he wrote), from which we can derive the present tense) آَََ can derive the past tense

.(write) اآ he writes) from which, in turn, we can derive the imperative) َ

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:

where suitability () has to be (اقا) The small derivation (1

(to hit) ََبَ :between the two words in letters and letters' order such as

.(hitting) اب and 96

where suitability between the two words (اقا) The big derivation (2

is in form and function but not in letters' order such as: َََ (to attract) and

.(attraction) اب

where suitability between the two (اقاآ) The biggest derivation (3

-croaking) (Al) ا words is in articulation as in: َََ (to croak) and

jurjaanii, 1986, p. 87).

Philology), Waafii (1973, pp. 179-180) attempts to be more) ا In his book

أ) general in outlining the notion of derivation, He argues that every triliteral root

) 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

knowledge), for instance, correlates with the sounds of its) ا general meaning of

miim), and it can be captured in) ا laam) and) ام ,(3ayn) ا .triliteral root, i.e 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

َِ ,(knowledge) can be captured in the following derived words: ََِ (he knew) ا

they taught), َُ (he) َا ,(I know), (we know), ََ (he taught) أ ,(we knew)

م ,(they learnt), ِ (scholar) ََا ,(teaches), َُ (we teach), ََ (he learnt

the general) اقام sciences) etc. Waafii terms this sort of derivation as) derivation), and indicates that it is of two types:

(gilded) َه :such as ,(أءان) Derivation from the names of substances 1-

.gold), َ (silver-plated) fromّ(silver), etc) ذه from 97

ء by adding to words (ارا) Derivation of the synthetic infinitive 2-

(state of ignorance) هّ :taa?) such as) اء relative yaa?) along with) ا

رّ ,(god) إ or رب godhood) from) إهّ or رّ ,(ignorant) ه from

.man) etc) ر manhood) from)

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 (

.(allowed using them when necessary (pp. 179-180 (اا

the) راق Moving on to the issue of Arabic derivative forms, In his book 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 (َََ), 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

3ayn) and the third) ا faa?), the second) اء paradigm, and call the first radical of it

.(laam) (Wright, 1981, p. 30) ام

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):

fa33ala) which is coined by doubling the second radical of the basic) ََ 1-

,(to teach) دَرسَ ,(the basic verb meaning: to study) دَرَسَ :verb, for example

.(to break in pieces) آََ (to break) آَََ

faa3ala) which is coined by adding a long vowel aa after the first) ََ 2-

radical, e.g., َََ (the basic verb meaning: to sit down), ََ (to sit down

.(with someone) َََ (to kill), ََ (to fight

,.af3ala) which is formed by adding an ?alif before the first radical, e.g?) أَََ 3-

ى (to make someone talk) أََ (the basic verb meaning: to articulate) َََ

.(to make flow) أى (to flow)

tafa33ala) which is coined by adding taa? on the front of the above first) َََ 4-

(to terrify) َفَ ,(to remember) ََآَ (to remind someone) ذَآَ ,.form (ََ), e.g

.(to be afraid) ََفَ

tafaa3ala) which is coined by adding taa? in front of the above second) َََ 5-

,(to cooperate with someone) َوَنَ (to help someone) وَنَ ,.form (ََ), e.g

.(to pretend to be deceived) َدَعَ (to deceive) دَعَ

infa3ala) which is coined by adding ?alif and nuun in front of the root?) إَََ 6-

(to uncover) آَََ ,(to be broken) إَََ (to break something) آَََ ,.letters, e.g

.(to be uncovered) إَََ

ifta3ala) which is coined by adding ?alif with short vowel i in front of?) إَََ 7-

to fabricate) إَََ (the first radical and taa? after it, e.g., َََ (to do something

.(to seek for something) إَََ (something), َََ (to touch

istaf3ala) which is coined by adding ?alif with short vowel i, siin?) إََ 8-

and taa? in front of the first letter and placing a sukuun over the first root

,he took out something) (Wright, 1981) إََجَ (he went out) ََجَ ,.letter, e.g

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

.(the derivatives) ات Arabic verb, and Arabic linguists have agreed to call them

noun that expresses the doing of an) ااّة (infinitive, verbal noun) ار :They are

noun) اان (noun of place) اان (noun of kind or manner) ااع (action once

passive) اال (active participle) اا (noun of instrument) اا (of time

competitive and superlative) أا (assimilate epithet) ااّ (participle

.(intensive paradigms) (Wright, 1981; Al-bustaanii, 1963) أا (adjectives

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: ََ (to apply the Lebanese

to put Iraq in a) ااق :sample of a sectarian civil war to another country), as in

this) هارك :to copy the American style), as in) أَآ sectarian civil war). And man is copying the American style). Both words are derived by making use of the

.(Arabic derivative form َََ (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:

which is derived from the English verb (to insure) by أََ The verb •

I insured my) أَتُّر ,.e.g ,أََ using the Arabic derivative form

car).

The verb ََ which is derived from the English verb (to change) by •

.(to change trains) َّار ,.using the Arabic derivative form ََ, e.g

which is derived from the English verb (to cancel) by آَََ The verb •

I cancelled the) آُا ,.e.g ,أََ using the Arabic derivative form

appointment).

The verb ََ which is derived from the English verb (to send a •

message) by using the Arabic derivative form َّ, e.g., َ (send me

a message).

In addition to derivation, the other way whereby the Arabic language maintains its

Arabic relies heavily on metaphors .(از) enrichment and productivity is metaphor in producing new words, structures, and collocations with new semantic connotations.

the) را ,(the ear of the cup)أذنان :To use Hammaad's (1983) examples

the teeth of the) أنا ,(the neck of the bottle) ا,(leg of the chair

.[the eye of the needle) [my translation)اة ,(comb

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):

ابق

(Literally: the war has stood on a leg, meaning, the war has erupted) [my translation]

آاب

(Literally: the war has exhibited its leg, meaning, the war has broken up) [my translation]

أىا

(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 backup, (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

ّش two meanings only. For example, the PV balled up is glossed only as

(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

(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).

,(are given to the PVs: do by (p. 45َ،ّمَ،َ For example, the Arabic equivalents 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

(2 ,ّ،أ instance, is given the following three meanings: 1) rouse; awaken

p. 87). Whereas the PV pass away is) أره،أ exhaust (3 ,أ prepare quickly

زال، disappear; vanish (2 ,ت، given the following two meanings: 1) die

(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

for ,زار[اء] regard, to providing only the English text. The Arabic equivalent 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

.where the word (rain) typically collocates with wet through (p [ا] :as

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:

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 ُّ be out of his mind be over 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.,: ل be after do without ّ get rid of look for (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

and divided into (اً) Arabic. Unit five, for instance, is devoted to the particle off four sections. The first section is assigned for the first category of meaning of the

the second is for "Rejecting ,"اءوا particle off, which is "Leaving and beginning 194

and "اّواء the third is for "Stopping and canceling ,"اوا and Preventing

pp. 49-54). Each section contains the) "نأى the fourth is for the "Other meanings

PVs of a given category of meaning. For example, the third section of the particle off embraces the PVs break off () and call off (). Each of which is followed by some example sentences such as:

أ اةد .a- Let's break off for ten minutes ب وأً .b- He broke off and didn't start again ج ا .c- She has broken off the engagement د أواادت .d- They have broken off the negotiations (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

The garden is in progressing) إناّم :coming on nicely is translated as nicely) (p. 61), and I was surprised at how well you all get on is literally mistranslated

(I was surprised at how good your relationship is) آهآه :as

أن :p. 63), while I must brush up my French before I go to Paris is translated as)

.(I must dust off my French) (p. 135) أار

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 if the following word is (negotiations), whereas it is if the following word is (an engagement), and the Arabic equivalent

when the following word is (a change), while it is أث of the PV bring about is 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.

for instance, has literal and idiomatic/metaphorical ,اب The Arabic expression 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

he handed over/delivered what he was) ّا bucket), while in Arabic they say 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

to go to bed / to sleep) and (to) وياش/م :translated by Awwad (1990) as 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

م the reins, and he was the scape-goat, which are translated into Arabic as

he was the ram of the) آنآااء to hold the reins of the things), and) ار 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 (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

to start a) أة :branch, which are translated by Awwad (1990) into Arabic as

.(to raise the branch of the olive tree) (p. 60) ان new page), and

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

Context of Speech acts situation/Register (locutionary, (Mode-field- illocutionary and tenor) perlocutionary acts )

Functional- pragmatic equivalence

Covertly/overtly erroneous errors

Translation communicative competence

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 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 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 code number Years 49 4 4 15 7 9 6 4 7 10 6 7 of experience 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:

Text types Items Fiction novel - Conversation between friends 1,6,7,10, 18, 23, 47, 48, 59, 80, 91, 95, 98 Fiction novel – Conversation between school teachers 2, 97 Fiction novel - Conversation between classmates 5,13, 60, 77 Fiction novel - Conversation at a restaurant 94 Fiction novel - Conversation between a wife and husband 8, 31, 51, 66, 68, 96 Fiction novel - Conversation between fellow-workers 9,12, 14, 20, 24, 25, 55, 67, 70 Fiction novel - Conversation between a daughter and her 90 parents Fiction novel - Conversation between parents 11, 26, 28, 65 Fiction novel - Conversation between a patient and a 85 doctor Fiction novel - Conversation between neighbours 16, 21, 52 Fiction novel - Conversation between shoppers 84 Fiction novel - Conversation between two sisters 74 Fiction novel - Advice from parents to their children 72 Fiction novel - Advice from a school teacher to a student 71 Fiction novel - Conversation between townsfolk 56 Fiction novel - Conversation between commuters 29 Fiction novel - Advice from a factory manager to his 30 deputy Fiction novel - Advice from friend to friend 32 Fiction novel - Announcement at a meeting 41 Fiction novel - Conversation between a father and his son 38 Fiction novel - Mother's advice to her daughter 36 Fiction novel - Recount on a job interview 22 Email - Advice from a businessman to his colleague 37 Biography 33, 58 Letter – union leader to members 34 Horoscope 35 News report 3, 39, 53, 75, 79, 89 News headline 42, 64, 93 Diary entry 4, 40, 54, 81, 83, 100 Medical brochure 99 An internet advertisement for mobile phone screen savers 92 Article on an Art exhibition 15 Article on stress 88 Art review - article 19 Police interview 86 A cross examination in court 76 Parent-teacher interview 17 258

An advertisement for a weight loss product 82 Advice from a doctor to parents in an article in a coffee 73 table magazine Article on death penalty 69 Transcription of a public speech in the Opening of Law 63 Term Dinner Background feature article - Conversation between 62 political figures Article on Ash Wednesday 61 Question in a chat-room 43 Joke 50, 78 Notice on a shop 44 A note written on a flower stall 87 Advice in an article on well-being in a coffee table 57 magazine Advice from a trade union official to a trader 49 Disclaimer - Medical brochure 46 Women’s magazine article 27

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 91-100 coined) PVs 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 آنازنار He was shopping around 33 عأاً Don't let anyone egg you on 35 آنأنأآا while I had to make do with her 40 cast-offs اار The party brightened up 47 اء because he doesn't tidy up 88 آةات I'm partied out 91 أًهاق I'm really shopped out 96 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 دراًاأوادراآ He won't cotton on 32 اد My hopes of a better job damped 54 down اااتاار to use up sugar 73 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.

Subject Correct Incorrect Unanswered Code Very good Satisfactory Overtly Covertly Number erroneous erroneous error error 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 Covertly unanswered erroneous erroneous errors errors Total 43.35% 15.39% 33% 8% 0.58% Average 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 Correct Incorrect Unanswered Code Number Very good Satisfactory Overtly Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly unanswered erroneous erroneous errors errors Total 32% 16% 40% 6% 6% Average 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 Percentage Difference of of functional- functional- pragmatic pragmatic equivalent / equivalent/ Professionals Students Total 43.35% 32% 11.35% Average 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 Percentage Difference of of unanswered unanswered items / items / Professionals Students Total 0.58% 6% -5.42% Average 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 Category Percentage of Percentage of Difference Number functional- functional- pragmatic pragmatic equivalent / equivalent/ Professionals Students 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 Average of Difference functional- functional- pragmatic pragmatic equivalent / equivalent/ Professionals Students 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 Average of Difference functional- functional- pragmatic pragmatic equivalent / equivalent/ Professionals Students 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 Category Percentage of Percentage of Difference Number functional- functional- pragmatic pragmatic equivalent / equivalent/ Professionals Students 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 هداًإاوإوا She always looks up to her parents 58 أنوااسآا to take in old ladies 84 هَا\أء\ا The party brightened up 47 فا but they will grow on you in the end 87 294

اُو I ran into my wife 83 أءريء\أّءريء I'm tied up with something urgent 68 ذاما ?what are you giving up for Lent 61 لإارض .will bring him down to earth 18 فلآناب he'll come down on you like a ton of 20 bricks الآم ?Why are the children all dolled up 28 فدلا You're going to drive me around the 6 bend! ا\اي\ا My eyes popped out 7 اراء put back the clock 3 ُ I could have bitten my tongue off 4 ووآنم he got down to brass tacks 22 ف will be taken down 86 آنىاءاوواة He was shopping around 33 ّتُّ I've cleaned up my act 79 ءرا to build up skills 74 اُرًن I'm partied out 91 اادا chilling out at the beach 89 أرأنأهاًاى I want to fatten it up as fast as possible 50 ارااق Latham sexed up Iraq brief 93 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

Similarly, in the second example (item 84) the IEPV .إ ا literally translated as take in was translated as 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

while the particle up was ignored. In ه \َ أء\ا erroneously translated literally as the same way, the first part of the IEPV sex up in the last example (item 93) was literally translated as 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 ذو / but there are two other students 17 breathing down his neck اا\زها I'm fed up to my back teeth with 9 work مأف goes over her head 11 21 but he fell down on the job. آُأولآة I used to wolf my food down so 27 quickly فناً It's going to be a walk-over 36 فناً .It'll be a total wash-out 37 دل a political stand-off 39 أنأآ while I had to make do with her 40 cast-offs ز to work it out 75 و The teacher told me off 90 زوّد\أل Funk up 92 اإرا passed away 85 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) 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

which not only covered الا is the correct one for it has the root echoing ة the required part of the meaning but also gives an air of idiomaticity to the Arabic

أ equivalent. The same argument applies to the second example (item 9) where

was not the right mach of I'm fed up to my back teeth with work as semantically ا and pragmatically there is something missing in this translation, that is, the sense of

can be considered ا exaggeration of the boredom. The Arabic fixed expression 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 ذاآ \ goes over her head 11 انا\اناآاي I'll have to pull up my socks 12 أدريإذاآنهااوع but I don't know if it will ever get 23 off the ground. أّوأروأمام to have it out with him 25 \ما 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

رب subject has to resort to the Arabic one-to-one equivalent of the item, which is

. اااراء

or هوراام In the second example (item 11) the Arabic fixed expressions

seem to be the perfect functional-pragmatic equivalents, which deliver آشا 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 أنّ he was falling for her 8 ا will bring him down to earth 18 أَان you've let the cat out of the bag 2 أاإءاار Net closes in on £50m robbers 64 أُاّق I'm really shopped out 96 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

:literally) أنّ mistakenly translated into Arabic by a sentence of future tense 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.

. ُُإا Arabic native speakers would more likely use

The third example (item 2) illustrates a morphologically incorrect translation, where the

by adding to it أحَ was erroneously spelt as حَ form of the past tense of the Arabic verb

.أ the consonant

The rest of the examples (items 64 and 96) exemplify the wrong usage of the Arabic

in example 64 was used mistakenly because it delivers the wrong أا verbs. The verb meaning, which is to monitor, oversee, supervise etc, the correct Arabic verb which can 302

meaning: they are about to). The) أوا or را be used in such a context is

. أُ in example 96 which has to be أُ same argument applies to

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

آان collocations, which are illustrated by Baker (1992) in the Arabic translation

(literally: to break the law) provided to the English collocation break the law, as

(literally: to contradict the law) ان opposed to the common Arabic collocation

(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

and the IEPV put away a big piece of meat , أ Arabic by one of the subjects as

.أ item 82) was rightly translated into Arabic as)

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 كا to use up sugar 73 ارواح dag out 98 آنوسا He was shopping around 33 ه cut her down to size 5 إ !You're going to drive me around the bend 6 أاه My eyes popped out 7 أاًااض has never stopped throwing her weight around 14 ّنرا to build up skills 74 ا passed away 85 فإا but they will grow on you in the end 87 رقأ I'm fed up to my back teeth with work 9 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

ك first example (item 73), the IEPV to use up sugar was translated into Arabic as

literally: to consume sugar) which is wrong due to the fact that consuming sugar) ا 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

.(to burn sugar) قا

In the second example (item 98), the IEPV dag out was erroneously translated into

literally: in prattle and joyfulness) these two words do not) ارواح Arabic as

اح collocate in the Arabic language. Arabic native speakers would more likely say

to be happy and in joy) should) حوح happiness and joyfulness). Therefore) واح

احbe used in this instance which is a derivative from the common Arabic collocation

.(happiness and joyfulness)واح 305

In the third example (item 33), the IEPV shopping around was inaccurately translated

literally: to step on pulse) Arabic native speakers do not say) وسا into Arabic as

literally: to feel pulse). The same argument is) ّا they instead say وسا 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 ُ\دُه\ذه My eyes popped out 7 أان I'm tied up with something urgent at the 68 moment ه\رُ we were slagged down 100 اطً He flared up at me 70 أّآ I've cleaned up my act 79 ً،ُذرًّق I'm really shopped out 96 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

I was shocked / surprised / astonished) wherein) ُ\دُه\ذه above (item 7) were 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

(I have desisted from) أُ ,(to burst with anger) اطً above, where

I have no patience with) were give as equivalents to the everyday) ُذرandً 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 دإذةأآ ,We are not going into that again 76 are we? رءًآوًوا And go easy on the salt, please 94 ُ I could have bitten my tongue off 4 أالا You're going to drive me around the 6 bend! اُرًن I'm partied out 91 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

literally: we will not return to that matter) (دإذةأآ) Table above 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

literally: don’t say to me that we are going) أدعة:could be 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 أآأآءا -Where were you during the cave 38 in? ةُّارأأو a cooling-off period 43 امر 312

ّو she took up with Tim 60 ّاواااء she got so carried away she began 10 to cry ُةاوتُإريأوو I've cleaned up my act 79 ُتآةاًويا I'm partied out 91 ادةأوا 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.

أآ In item 38 in the Table above, the noun derived from PV cave-in was rendered as

literally: everything started collapsing) where there is a one-word Arabic) ءا

.(the collapsing) ار :equivalent for it which is

Similarly, in item 43, the expression contains a noun derived from a PV a cooling-off

ةُّ period which means a period to consider, was translated into Arabic as

literally: a period of time given to someone) ارأأوامر 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

ةإل\ة \ expression. Suggested alternatives for such an expression are

.(see Appendix 2) ولااء

ّو Likewise, in item 60 the IEPV took up with was translated into Arabic as

(literally: she was introduced to and went out with) where there is a one-word

took him as a boyfriend). The same argument)ت:Arabic equivalent for it, which is 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 آّا brought the house down 19 ّرأ he'll come down on you like a ton of 20 bricks. وأناجرام Bill must have got up on the wrong side 24 of the bed today ّار to have it out with him 25 اع You can't skirt round the matter 30 هآآنراآً Did you notice the way he bossed his wife 31 زو around 314

66 to take it out on me ا to take in old ladies 84 ا Funk up 92 إء we were slagged down 100 ذاا and make up 77 ي I'm partied out 91 46 Handout أنُروا Hard to figure out 78 Table 5.28 Examples of usage of Arabic colloquial and regional dialects (for suggested Arabic functional-pragmatic equivalents see Appendix 2)

literally: broke the) آّا In items 19 and 20, the high informal Arabic expressions

literally: he'll break your head into pieces) were) ّرأ world into pieces) and 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).

ي In addition, in items 91, 46 and 78, the Arabic regional dialect expressions

(I have had enough – Iraqi colloquial), (A printed material – Moroccan colloquial)

hard to be guessed - Iraqi colloquial) were given as equivalents to) أنُروا and 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:

Subject Years Correct Incorrect Unanswered Code Of Very Satisfactory Overtly Covertly Number Experience good erroneous erroneous error error 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:

Subject Subject Correct Incorrect Unanswered Code Stage Very Satisfactory Overtly Covertly Number of Study good erroneous erroneous error error S1 Year 9% 14% 73% 4% 0% S2 one 18% 11% 35% 2% 34% S3 Year 41% 24% 32% 2% 1% S4 two 50% 14% 30% 6% 0% S5 Year 39% 19% 40% 2% 0% S6 Three 23% 20% 31% 7% 19% S7 Graduate 27% 21% 43% 6% 3% S8 Diploma 24% 20% 52% 4% 0% S9 MA 20% 15% 49% 4% 12% S10 46% 15% 34% 5% 0% S11 PhD 27% 14% 47% 12% 0% S12 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: ………………

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 داعنّداً Don't keep talking about that letter. I 1

know I shouldn't do it, but there's no

need to rub my nose in it. [Fiction

novel - Conversation between friends]

أا\ا\آا Father wasn't supposed to know about 2

his birthday surprise – now you've let

the cat out of the bag. [Fiction novel -

Conversation between two brothers]

رباااراء The 'Daily Mirror' says nobody can 3

put back the clock and get rid of

decimal currency. [News report]

َُِأنأ\ When I realized that her husband was 4

اارصوا listening to what I was saying to her, I

could have bitten my tongue off.

[Diary entry]

\ا\ .Mary thinks too highly of herself 5

ا\فره .Someone should cut her down to size

[Fiction novel - Conversation between

classmates]

ا\ّا\ Slow down this instant, Percy! You're 6

going to drive me around the bend! 394

[Fiction novel - Conversation between

friends]

أّقّ My eyes popped out when I saw 7

Miriam. I hadn't seen her in years. She

has aged a lot since then. [Fiction

novel - Conversation between friends]

آ\وأا\و The first time Max saw Edna he knew 8

he was falling for her. [Fiction novel -

Conversation between a wife and

husband]

أما\اإ I've been working for the last eight 9

روا\أأا\ hours and now I'm fed up to my back

ا\اا\ .teeth with work

ا\أا Fiction novel - Conversation between]

ا [fellow-workers

تآاًاأأء When we gave Dorris a gift she got so 10

carried away she began to cry. [Fiction

novel - Conversation between friends]

آشا \هوراام \ Poor Penelope. Mathematics has never 11

\قىادراآ 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] 395

أّي\أآو\ I'll have to pull up my socks if I'm 12

أنألرىي .going to finish my work today

[Fiction novel - Conversation between

fellow-workers]

أاي\أّ \ .I played when I should have studied 13

أآيراه Now I'm stewing in my own juice

trying to pass my examinations.

[Fiction novel - Conversation between

classmates]

اااّفوآااه \ She used to be so gentle but since 14

اف\الٍ \ .being appointed supervisor Mrs

ء\ Wilson has never stopped throwing

her weight around in our office.

[Fiction novel - Conversation between

fellow-workers]

ذهأدراجاح\ى George has been planning the 15

exhibition for months but, because of

the workman's strike, the whole thing

has fallen about his ears. [Article on

an Art exhibition]

اذنل\اذن ,If you think that I was responsible 16

then you are barking up the wrong

tree: I am completely innocent.

[Fiction novel - Conversation between

neighbours] 396

وهكاً\ةً \ Tom is top of the class, but there are 17

دانأناا\نا two other students breathing down his

neck. [Parent-teacher interview]

إ\اأرضاا \ :He is not at all a practical person 18

وا\ً perhaps having to earn his living will

bring him down to earth. [Fiction

novel - Conversation between friends]

أاراةاب\أ The young singer's performance 19

ار\لاب\أ brought the house down: the applause

ااه lasted for about twenty minutes. [Art

review - article]

م\ًأّ \ If Mr. Brown finds out that you have 20

لًة been leaving the office early, he'll

come down on you like a ton of

bricks. [Fiction novel - Conversation

between fellow-workers]

وأذ\وازذ He said he would have the whole 21

house decorated by Christmas, but he

fell down on the job. [Movie script -

Conversation between neighbours]

داع \قاا We had a few minutes of polite 22

ااع\أا 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 397

interview]

وأفإذاآاة \ ,John has an idea for a new tennis club 23

ىار\ّا but I don't know if it will ever get off

the ground. [Fiction novel -

Conversation between friends]

أنناجاهاا \م وأن Bill must have got up on the wrong 24

اداوي side of the bed today: he has been very

nasty to me all day. [Fiction novel -

Conversation between fellow-

workers]

ا\اطاوف Mr. Brown keeps interfering with my 25

\ار work: I'm going to his office now to

have it out with him. [Fiction novel -

Conversation between fellow-

workers]

أأتة\ز Jason is striving for his best. I expect 26

تة he'll clock up quite a few successes in

the next year or two. [Fiction novel -

Conversation between parents]

اتأنأ\ّدتأنأأآ I used to wolf my food down so 27

quickly that I didn't have time to enjoy

it. [Women’s magazine article]

النوآذاهنإزف؟ \ Why are the children all dolled up? Is 28

ذاالأ؟ someone important coming? [Fiction

novel - Conversation between parents] 398

ولاراأر\ I was accustomed to the old train 29

schedule. The new one has balled me

up. [Fiction novel - Conversation

between commuters]

ّبا\اع You can't skirt round the matter, you'll 30

have to give the workers a satisfactory

answer. [Fiction novel - Advice from a

factory manager to his deputy]

هااّزو؟ I'm shocked at Joseph's attitude. Did 31

هزوّ you notice the way he bossed his wife

around. [Fiction novel - Conversation

between a wife and husband]

ا\ّ .Don't bother asking Dean for support 32

He won't cotton on, he's too involved

with his own affairs. [Fiction novel -

Advice from friend to friend]

آنّىار\ّاال\ He was shopping around to see what 33

اراء\ا .support he could get for his proposals

[Biography]

اا\\آآآً I know you are so upset about that 34

matter. Don’t bottle it up, speak out.

[Letter – union leader to members]

عأاًك\ّك 35 Aquarius (Jan 21 - Feb 19)

The erratic behaviour of Uranus this 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]

نانأء\ً Now, stop worrying about those 36

\ا .exams. You've revised well, so relax

It's going to be a walk-over.

[Fiction novel - Mother's advice to her

daughter]

اذر\ن ,If you launch a sales campaign now 37

وال when there's so little money about, it'll

be a total wash-out. [Email - Advice

from a businessman to his colleague]

أآأءار؟ I've been so worried about you. Where 38

were you during the cave-in? Everyone

has been looking for you.

[Fiction novel - Conversation between a

father and his son]

ااا \ Najaf is at the heart of a political 39

اوا .stand-off

US troops earlier drove through the 400

centre of the holy city and used loud

speakers to order militiamen to leave

and urge civilian to flee. [News report]

آنأنأآراء ,My sister always had new clothes 40

ا\أ -while I had to make do with her cast

offs. [Diary entry]

ّاربازاي I want to propose a vote of thanks to 41

Sergeant Wilson for an excellent

mock-up of a boat. [Fiction novel -

Announcement at a meeting]

\ّ\ّددةارااة .Revised UN draft sets pullout date 42

ارب\ادةاّ The United States would withdraw its

ارااةراب troops from Iraq by the end of 2005

under a new draft of a resolution

before the United Nations Security

Council. [News headline]

ةإل\ة\ولااء I bought a house last week, and I 43

requested three weeks as a cooling-off

period. [Question in a chat-room]

ااعارا I went to the shop to buy some 44

groceries. I found a sign on the display

window saying " The shop is closed

due to the black out ".

[Notice on a shop].

اراءناضا -Managers concerned by a recent drop 45 401

ات\اط\اا [off in sales. [News headline

هاةرةّاآر This handout is a summary of Dr 46

James' Method provided for

information purposes only without the

assumption of a duty of care.

[Disclaimer - Medical brochure]

داةا The party brightened up when the pop 47

group arrived. It would have been so

boring without them. [Fiction novel -

Conversation between friends]

هدأنم؟\ه You've had a long day today. Would 48

واش؟ال you like to freshen up? The bathroom

واش؟ - is upstairs. [Fiction novel

Conversation between friends]

وإا Don't put your prices too high or you'll 49

frighten the customers off. [Advice

from a trade union official to a trader]

أرأنأهدع\أرأن Two smart, attractive, well-educated 50

أع\أرأنأه ,young law graduates, Sally and Edith

هع .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. 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]

ذاام؟آ :Jasmine cried out to her husband 51

Why fasten on me? It's not my fault.

[Fiction novel - Conversation between

a wife and husband]

وأنأهّئأ \ أّ I tried to calm him down after the bad 52

news, but his emotions got the better

of him. [Fiction novel - Conversation

between neighbours]

أدواااا\أا They have just warmed up the same 53

اا old plan, because it has always been

successful. [News report]

ء\\ّدتال My hopes of a better job damped 54

أ \ ذهأدراجاح .down after six years' waiting

[Diary entry]

ار\\\دد\ار Harry thinks he is unique, but in fact 55

اا he is just warming over ideas he's

heard from other people. [Fiction

novel - Conversation between fellow-

workers] 403

\د\ّاا The craftsman fined the wood down 56

very gently. His boss told him to

smoothen it out as much as possible.

[Fiction novel - Conversation between

townsfolk]

أنااو It will not be easy for you to change 57

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]

وااههداا\وا Sandra knows that she can trust her 58

داًوة parents and count on them to make her

proud. She always looks up to her

parents. [Biography]

أنى\در\\ Michael is a well mannered young 59

ر\ر man. You shouldn’t look down on him

just because he left school at 16.

[Fiction novel - Conversation between

friends]

اتً\أ \ I've never been able to come at 60

ت\ار .Isabella since she took up with Tim

[Fiction novel - Conversation between

classmates]

أيءنلةام؟ A popular question among Christians 61

at this time of year is 'what are you 404

giving up for Lent?'

[Article on Ash Wednesday]

ّ Bill and William became very 62

successful in their political life since

they made away with their opponents.

[Background feature article -

Conversation between political

figures]

وّاأنّهاا \ Commencing with my very first 63

أنهاا 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]

64 The police are confident that the gang ﻴﻀﻴﻕﻋﻠﻰﺴﺎﺭﻗﻲﺍﻝﺨﻤﺴﺔ ﻤﻼﻴﻴﻥﺠﻴﻨﻴﻪ ﺍﻝﺨﻨﺎﻕ who carried out the robbery will be \ﺍﻝﺩﺍﺌﺭﺓﺘﻀﻴﻕ\ﺍﻝﻁﻭﻕﻴـﺸﺘﺩ\ﻴـﺩﺍﻝﻌﺩﺍﻝـﺔ caught. The Guardian therefore, has 405

ﺃﻭﺸﻜﺕﺃﻥﺘﻁﺒﻕﻋﻠـﻰ\ﺒـﺩﺃﺍﻝﻌـﺩﺍﻝﺘﻨـﺎﺯﻝﻲ this headline: 'Net closes in on £50m robbers'. [News headline] ﻝﻺكراﻤﻼﻴﻴﻥﺠﻴﻨﻴﻪ

رووحاا \ Robin is going all out to pass his final 65

لرىة\ examination. He really wants to get

his Bachelor's degree. [Fiction novel -

Conversation between parents]

أن Vickie: Jack, can you do the dishes 66

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]

هأناع؟أنب I have a tight schedule tomorrow. Can 67

اع؟ ?you fill in for me at the meeting

[Fiction novel - Conversation between

fellow-workers]

أانل Priscilla: Rich, can you come 68

downstairs for a minute right now?

Richard: I'm sorry I can't. I'm tied up 406

with something urgent at the moment.

[Fiction novel - Conversation between

a wife and husband]

اءاام The death penalty has been done away 69

with in many European countries.

However, it's still being carried out in

many other countries.

[Article on death penalty]

اً .Judy: you look like you're fuming 70

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]

ّ I hear you're always getting into 71

trouble. Keep out of what doesn't

concern you. Curiosity killed the cat.

[Fiction novel - Advice from a school

teacher to a student]

إذاأنهاا\إذاأرد ,If you want to get ahead in this world 72

اً\أناً .you've to work, work and work

[Fiction novel - Advice from parents

to their children]

اا Kids have gone overweight from 73 407

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]

را \آبرات Sarah: I've managed to learn typing on 74

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]

\\ادا They finally realized that there is an 75

urgent need for the health promotion

program. They will have a special

meeting to work it out. [News report]

أدعة\أر Accused: I wasn't at that market last 76

أندإاعةأى 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]

و؟\وااار You are making a big fuss out of 77

nothing. Why don't you two kiss and

make up? [Fiction novel - Conversation

between classmates]

ا\\ Men are like computers: Hard to 78 408

اه figure out and never have enough

memory. [Joke]

اتا \ أتاآ Mr. Crutcher is working in a 79

\ أتء\ Starbucks coffee shop. He says that he

ا\تُإاا 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]

ا\ا This is a nice tune and I think it'll catch 80

on quickly. [Fiction novel -

Conversation between friends]

أ\ا\با My neighbour had a bad car accident 81

yesterday. After the accident he

blacked out and couldn't remember

what happened. [Diary entry]

آأ\آةا Five or six years ago I'd put away a 82

big piece of meat most evenings. Now

I just eat a bit of chicken or fish. [An

advertisement for a weight loss

product]

دزو\زو I was busy paying lots of bills this 83

morning, and I ran into my wife at the

post office [Diary entry]

أنعا The salesman finds it easy to take in 84

old ladies and persuade them to give 409

him their money. [Fiction novel -

Conversation between shoppers]

\زال\ا I had a bad pain in my stomach last 85

night. It was severe to begin with, but

it soon passed away. [Fiction novel -

Conversation between a patient and a

doctor]

و I must warn you that anything you may 86

say will be taken down and used in

court as evidence against you.

[Police interview]

ولااف\ن You may not like our flowers, but they 87

ااف\وق will grow on you in the end. [A note

اف [written on a flower stall

م\اّ \ One woman says that her boss is 88

ّ\ي\ 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]

نا\نا \ It's spring break in Florida and 89

نوًا\ونأ \ students are chilling out at the beach

ناا .and partying late into the night 410

[News report]

وّاّّة \ أّارّسّة \ One day, I went over to my Uncle 90

ز\ّ 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]

أا\هّا\ت ?Chris: you want to come out tonight 91

Adam: I've had enough, I'm partied

out. [Fiction novel - Conversation

between friends]

زّ\ّث\اهأآً Funk up your mobile with cool screen 92

ا savers [An internet advertisement for

mobile phone screen savers]

كاااضا \ .Latham sexed up Iraq brief 93

ااا 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]

ّ\ ارءً ?Waitress: Are you ready to order now 94

Maria: Yes. I'll have some salad, roast

beef, and mashed potatoes.

Waitress: How do you want the 411

beef? Rare, medium, or well-done?

Maria: Well-done. And go easy on

the salt, please. [Fiction novel -

Conversation at a restaurant]

اةثت Bill: Where did you get this article 95

from?

Jack: I googled around for three hours

to get the site on which it was

published. [Fiction novel -

Conversation between friends]

أهاّق\اياّق \ I've spent four hours doing my late night 96

آةاّ .shopping. I'm really shopped out

[Fiction novel - Conversation between a

wife and husband]

تاهروا How about we get the students of 97

floral art from the Tech to fang up a

few arrangements using roses and

jasmine? [Fiction novel –

Conversation between school

teachers]

\حوح When I mentioned it, they all looked at 98

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] 412

اآاولران Human beings run into trouble when 99

اا\اا arterial walls guck up with cholesterol

ول .and blood can't easily flow

[Medical brochure]

ّ \ ادو We had built up this cult following 100

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]

413

APPENDIX 3 FULL DETAILS OF THE RESULTS OF THE TRANSLATION TESTS

Subject Number: P1

Q Correct Incorrect Unanswered Very good Satisfactory Overtly Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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 Covertly erroneous erroneous error 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

Question Category Total of Total of Unanswered Percentage Average Standard number correct incorrect of the deviation answers answers correct 1 c 0 12 0 0% 2 c 8 4 0 66.66% 3 c 10 2 0 83.33% 4 c 3 9 0 25% 5 c 9 3 0 75% 6 c 3 9 0 25% 7 c 3 9 0 25% 8 c 11 1 0 91.66% 9 c 3 9 0 25% 10 c 8 4 0 66.66% 11 c 8 4 0 66.66% 12 c 7 5 0 58.33% 13 c 3 9 0 25% 14 c 7 5 0 58.33% 15 c 2 10 0 16.66% 16 c 9 3 0 75% 17 c 4 8 0 33.33% 18 c 10 2 0 83.33% 19 c 4 8 0 33.33% 20 c 8 4 0 66.66% 21 c 6 6 0 50% 22 c 6 6 0 50% 23 c 11 0 1 91.66% 24 c 5 7 0 41.66% 25 c 4 8 0 33.33% 50.66% 0.256748 52 de 12 0 0 100% 53 de 7 5 0 58.33% 54 de 11 1 0 91.66% 55 de 6 6 0 50% 56 de 9 3 0 75% 75% 0.212453 47 den 8 4 0 66.66% 48 den 10 2 0 83.33% 49 den 9 3 0 75% 50 den 10 2 0 83.33% 51 den 6 6 0 50% 71.66% 0.139435 469

36 dnp 8 4 0 66.66% 37 dnp 4 8 0 33.33% 38 dnp 5 6 1 41.66% 39 dnp 4 8 0 33.33% 40 dnp 5 7 0 41.66% 41 dnp 10 1 1 83.33% 42 dnp 12 0 0 100% 43 dnp 6 6 0 50% 44 dnp 11 1 0 91.66% 45 dnp 12 0 0 100% 46 dnp 8 4 0 66.66% 64.39% 0.275136 26 dpn 12 0 0 100% 27 dpn 7 5 0 58.33% 28 dpn 3 9 0 25% 29 dpn 9 3 0 75% 30 dpn 10 2 0 83.33% 31 dpn 7 5 0 58.33% 32 dpn 3 9 0 25% 33 dpn 6 6 0 50% 34 dpn 8 4 0 66.66% 35 dpn 5 7 0 41.66% 58.33% 0.261125 65.32% 0.229834 91 p 2 9 1 16.66% 92 p 7 5 0 58.33% 93 p 5 7 0 41.66% 94 p 9 3 0 75% 95 p 7 5 0 58.33% 96 p 6 6 0 50% 97 p 0 12 0 0% 98 p 0 12 0 0% 99 p 3 9 0 25% 100 p 0 11 1 0% 32.50% 0.27902 73 sva 8 4 0 66.66% 74 sva 9 3 0 75% 75 sva 2 10 0 16.66% 77 sva 11 1 0 91.66% 78 sva 9 3 0 75% 79 sva 5 7 0 41.66% 80 sva 5 7 0 41.66% 81 sva 9 3 0 75% 82 sva 3 9 0 25% 84 sva 6 6 0 50% 85 sva 11 1 0 91.66% 86 sva 12 0 0 100% 88 sva 8 4 0 66.66% 89 sva 6 6 0 50% 90 sva 3 9 0 25% 59.44% 0.261381 57 svap 0 12 0 0% 470

58 svap 5 7 0 41.66% 59 svap 12 0 0 100% 60 svap 7 5 0 58.33% 61 svap 9 3 0 75% 62 svap 9 3 0 75% 63 svap 10 2 0 83.33% 64 svap 8 3 1 66.66% 65 svap 9 3 0 75% 66 svap 6 6 0 50% 67 svap 12 0 0 100% 68 svap 11 1 0 91.66% 69 svap 11 1 0 91.66% 70 svap 8 4 0 66.66% 71 svap 12 0 0 100% 72 svap 11 1 0 91.66% 72.91% 0.264398 76 svp 2 10 0 16.66% 83 svp 8 4 0 66.66% 87 svp 2 10 0 16.66% 33.33% 0.288675 63.48% 0.281305

Arabic translation students' group

Question Category Total of Total of Unanswered Percentage Average Standard number correct incorrect of the devation answers answers correct 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 Total of Unanswered Percentage of correct incorrect the correct answers answers 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 Total of Unanswered Percentage of correct incorrect the correct answers answers 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%