Idiomatic False Friends in English and Modern Standard Arabic

8/9/2019 Idiomatic False Friends in English and Modern Standard Arabic

1/24

Idiomatic false friends in English

and Modern Standard Arabic

Ahmed Seddik Al-Wahy

Ain Shams University

. Introduction

Te concept o alse riends (or faux amis, as they are also called) is one o the

most widely discussed in translation studies and language learning. Tough there

is much literature on alse riends between European languages, nothing much

has been written on alse riends in English and Arabic. Reasons or such lack o

sufficient studies are understandable. First, the study o alse riends has gener-

ally been associated with genetically related languages, where cognate terms in

different languages can semantically diverge rom their original senses and romeach others course o development. English and Arabic are not genetically re-

lated, since they belong to the Indo-European and Semitic amilies, respectively.

Second, the writing systems used in the two languages are totally different. Tus,

accidental similarity in orm due to orthographic actors, which constitutes the

source o many alse riends among languages using the same orthographic sys-

tem, is lacking with reerence to English and Arabic. False riends have also been

typically associated with single words, though the concept o alse riends is in

itsel applicable to multi-word units and even grammatical constructions. Al-

though a number o researchers have dealt with different aspects o idioms in

English and Arabic, the topic o idiomatic alse riends in the two languages has

not been covered.

Te present paper is based on the assumption that alse riends are neither

confined to cognate languages nor to single words. Te study examines alse

riends in two genetically unrelated languages (English and Modern Standard

Arabic (MSA)), with special reerence to multi-word units rather than single

words. Recent research in linguistics, particularly in phraseology and corpus lin-

guistics, has shown that set phrases o different kinds represent a greater propor-tion o the language people use than was previously assumed (e.g. Stubbs 2002,


2/24


words to the higher rank o set phrases. O the different types o set phrases, the

ocus o the study is on idiomatic alse riends (IFFs) in English and MSA.

Te methodology adopted in the study is contrastive and taxonomic. Testudy proposes a general taxonomy or IFFs and then applies it to English and

MSA.Different types o IFFs in English and MSA are contrasted to show the se-

mantic or socio-stylistic aspects o difference between them. Te study has as its

theoretical ramework the Sinclairian distinction between the open choice prin-

ciple and the idiom principle, which are both required or the production o nor-

mal texts (Sinclair 1987; 1991). Te open choice principle states that at each point

where a unit is completed (a word or a phrase or a clause), a large range o choice

opens up and the only restraint is that o grammaticalness (Sinclair 1991: 109).

According to this principle, a text is a series o slots, each o which can be filled

with virtually any word rom the lexicon, provided that the result is a grammatical

structure. Te idiom principle is that a language user has available to him or her a

large number o semi-preconstructed phrases that constitute single choices, even

though they may appear to be analysable into segments (Sinclair 1991: 110). All

set phrases, including idioms, ollow the idiom principle.

. Definitions

False riends are generally defined in terms o similarity and difference: they are

usually defined as words that are similar in orm but different in meaning. Both

in translation studies and in language learning, alse riends have typically been

associated with pairs o words rather than phrases. Nida (1964/2004: 157), or

instance, defines alse riends as borrowed or cognate words which seem to be

equivalent but are not always so. Newmark (1982: 162) deals with alse riends in

terms o language intererence, which he describes as the translators worst prob-

lem, as it is the language learners. Language intererence is responsible or creat-

ing new senses or existing words, which can ultimately result in the presence o

alse riends in cognate languages. Te examples given by Newmark are o English

words that can have other meanings when used in other languages like French or

German. Instead o acilitating communication among speakers o such languages,

the ormal similarity between alse riends makes them more opaque and non-

motivated than strictly opaque words.

According to Chamzo Domnguez and Nerlich (2002: 1834), alse riends are

words that seem to be the same or at least very similar, in orm and meaning, butin reality are not. False riends have also been defined as pairs or groups o words


3/24

Idiomatic alse riends in English and Modern Standard Arabic

other but differ to varying degrees in meaning (Nicholls 2002: 1). Tis last de-

inition highlights the act that there are degrees o difference in meaning in alse

riends, ranging between total and partial semantic dissimilarity. Other related terms are sometimes used in the literature on language interer-

ence, such as deceptive cognates and alse cognates. Granger and Swallow, or

instance, use the term deceptive cognates in ree alternation with alse riends,

defining both as reerring to those pairs o words which are etymologically re-

lated, similar in orm but semantically divergent (Granger and Swallow 1988:

108). Tis is also the position o Ferguson (1994), who confines alse riends to

deceptive cognates, excluding any other cases o ormal similarity and semantic

differences rom the range o alse riends. In Fergusons (1994: x) view, alse

riends are correctly defined as deceptive cognates. Te argument given to sup-

port this view is that it excludes cases o accidental similarity between words in

different languages, which resemble cases o homonymy in a single language, and

which are unlikely to cause conusion among language learners. Te term decep-

tive cognates differs rom alse riends in that it assumes that the words in ques-

tion are etymologically related. Te term alse riends is thus more general, since

it includes both etymologically related words and words that are related only by

accidental phonological or orthographic similarity. It is also more appropriate or

the present study since the orms being contrasted are not necessarily cognateorms. As or the term alse cognates, it reers to words that are thought to be re-

lated in terms o their linguistic origin, while in actual act they are not. Tis par-

ticularly occurs in languages that are closely related genetically, such as English

and German or French and Italian.

Tough English and Arabic are not genetically related languages, cultural con-

tact between the two languages has led to the presence o alse riends o different

types, both lexical and idiomatic. Te term lexical alse riends is used here to

reer to single words that are identical or very similar in two languages but have

a different meaning in each language. While there are English and Arabic lexic-

al alse riends, they are limited in number compared with those between English

and French or German, or instance. Tough the main concern o the present pa-

per is with idiomatic alse riends, it is relevant to illustrate the presence o lexical

alse riends in English and MSA by some examples. Te Arabic loanword

(smoking), or instance, is quoted in Hills Dictionary of False Friends(DFF) as a

alse riend o the English word smoking, since the word in Arabic is used to reer

to the kind o garment known in British English as dinner jacket.Some pseudo-

anglicisms, such as

(auto-stop), (assumingly rom the English auto-stop,and used to reer to what in English is known as hitch-hiking), have also appeared


4/24


origin in indirect loans (i.e. words borrowed rom one language through a third

language (Stubbs 2002: 183)), since Arabic is not the only language that uses the

above expressions in this way. Instead o limiting alse riends to single words, a more general definition is

suggested here that allows or including set phrases and structures o different

types. Tis definition also includes non-semantic eatures in which similar expres-

sions can be different:

Definition 1

False riends are expressions that have the same or similar orms in di-

erent languages but have different meanings or different sociolinguistic

or stylistic eatures.

Tis definition has the advantage o providing an accurate ramework or dealing

with idioms, which, as multi-word expressions, display a peculiar orm-meaning

relationship. Idioms are exceptions among other combinations o words, whose

meanings can be deduced rom the meanings o individual words. Seen more gen-

erally, however, they are in consistency with the principle o arbitrariness o lan-

guage. Just as there is normally nothing natural about the way sounds combine

together to make meaningul units (morphemes), so words in idioms combine

together to orm unpredictable meanings. Following is the definition o idiomsadopted here:

Definition 2

Idioms are set phrases whose meanings cannot be derived rom the liter-

al meanings o their constituent elements. Being set phrases, idioms are

multi-word units which are relatively fixed and conventionalized in the

speech community in which they are used.

Idioms are characterised by duality o meaning: they potentially have a literal

meaning and an idiomatic one. Te relation between an idiom and its idiomat-

ic meaning is arbitrary and conventionalized in the speech community. Idioms,

thereore, ofen reflect aspects o the culture in which they emerge. As in lexical

alse riends, IFFs are similar in orm but different in meaning. Te ollowing de-

inition is proposed or IFFs:

Definition 3

Idiomatic alse riends (IFFs) are pairs o set phrases that have the same

literal meaning in two languages but differ as regards their idiomaticmeaning or their sociolinguistic and stylistic eatures.


5/24


. Review of literature on idioms and false friends

Te possibility o having idiomatic alse riends has been recognized by a numbero phraseologists and translation studies theorists. For instance, Vinay and Dar-

belnet (1995/2004: 130) observe that fixed calques may become an integral part

o the borrowing language afer a period o time and may undergo some seman-

tic change, turning them into faux amis. Similarly, Fernando and Flavell ob-

serve that lexical and structural similarity o expressions across languages does

not necessarily entail correlation o meaning. As they put it, the faux amisbe-

loved o textbook writers are to be ound as much among idioms as in single lex-

ical items (Fernando and Flavell 1981: 83). Tough Baker does not use the terms

alse riends or aux amis, she observes that superficially identical or similar

idioms which have different meanings in the source and the target languages lay

easy traps or the unwary translator who is not amiliar with the source-language

idiom and who may be tempted simply to impose a target-language interpretation

on it (Baker 1992: 67).

Other linguists have dealt with the relationship between idioms and alse

riends, though their main concern remains with a single word within an idiom

rather than the idiom in its entirety. Stubbs (2002: 1858) shows that the semantic

changes that can occur to loan-words may lead to the ormation o alse riends.Tough he reers to collocations, it is only to show how loan-words can have new

meanings in the borrowing language by ocusing on the context o other words

with which they co-occur. Stubbs is not concerned with cases in which a collo-

cation as a whole is misunderstood in another language because a similar col-

location is used there with a different meaning, but he reers to cases where the

loan-word in a collocation acquires a meaning that is different rom its normal

meaning in its source language. For example, in German, the word blitzoriginal-

ly means lightening. However, since it was borrowed into the English language

it has acquired new senses in new collocations, such as advertising blitzor media

blitz. It has also been used as a verb, as in the ories are to blitz seats in Scot-

land (Stubbs 2002: 186). Tis is different rom the treatment o alse riends in

the present study, which is concerned with the different interpretations o entire

idioms in two languages.

Similarly, while Chamzo Domnguez and Nerlich deal with the relationship

between idioms and alse riends, their main ocus is on single words. In their

study, they reer to words which are not alse riends at all when they are consid-

ered in isolation, but which become alse riends when they are part o an idiom(Chamzo Domnguez and Nerlich 2002: 1845). Teir concern, thereore, is with


6/24


idioms, according to this understanding, would include alse riends, since words

in idioms rarely keep their ordinary, literal sense which they have in other combi-

nations. Tis, again, is different rom the present study, which is concerned withexpressions that have the same wording in two languages and are used idiomatic-

ally in both, but differ in their idiomatic meaning.

Like lexical alse riends, IFFs can cause problems or translators, who may be

inclined to impose on them the meanings and stylistic eatures which such expres-

sions have in the target language. It is important, thereore, to recognize different

types o IFFs in different language pairs. Te recognition o IFFs is also important

or language teaching, since they can be a source o communication breakdown

between language learners and native speakers. While or Cornell the main prob-

lem that idioms present or the language learner is semantic opacity, he suggests

that parallels between idiomatic expressions in the learners source language and

target language can play a role in the process o language learning. In most cases,

this role is a positive one, since similarity o idioms between languages can acili-

tate learning, though there are cases in which superficially similar idioms have di-

erent meanings, which can hinder communication. However, he believes that it

would be an exaggeration to say that such alse riend idioms are very many in

number, and that a greater problem is presented by idioms that have a substan-

tial measure o similarity but enough divergence to make the task o memoriza-tion significant (Cornell 1999: 910). Tis may be true o etymologically related

languages (like English and German, with which Cornell is concerned), but in the

language pair discussed here, IFFs outnumber lexical alse riends. Tey represent

pitalls or the language learner as well as the translator, hence the importance o

recognizing the differences between them in the two languages.

. Idioms and multiple meanings

Te presence o IFFs among different languages is mainly due to the semantic pe-

culiarities that characterise idiomatic expressions. Reerence has been made to the

semantic duality o idioms, by virtue o which an idiom can have both a literal and

an idiomatic meaning. Apart rom this duality, which is typical o all idioms, an

idiom can potentially have more than one idiomatic meaning, some o which are

related (with a situation resembling polysemy in single words) and some unrelat-

ed (with a situation resembling homonymy). An example o the ormer case is at

home, which can mean ready to receive a visitor (as in We are always at home forour neighbours), or comortable and amiliar (as in Ive never been at home with


7/24


to the commissioners), or accuse o, (as in He was charged with creating a distur-

bance) (AHDI).

Accordingly, the ambiguity o idioms is not only a theoretical assumption butalso an actual act both across languages and within the same language. For in-

stance, in English, in the darkis ambiguous: it can mean either in secrecy, as inAll

his dealings were done in the dark, or in ignorance, as in We were all kept in the dark

about what was happening in the prison.Te corresponding Arabic idiom

(lit., in the dark) means only in secrecy. Such idioms would be considered trans-

parent by the native speakers o each language. Tis again proves that transparen-

cy is not determined by the lexical or grammatical structure o the idiom, but by

the way native speakers interpret such structures according to the meaning they

already know.

In this context, it can be seen how comparative phraseology can contribute

to psycholinguistic research on idioms. Results o some psychological research

on the comprehension o idioms suggest that any idiom is potentially ambigu-

ous. Among the different possible meanings it can carry, it is given the meaning

(or meanings) that the speakers o the language in question happen to assign to

it. Keysar and Bly argue that judgements o the transparency or opacity o the re-

lationship between an idiom and its meaning depend mainly on the way it is con-

ceived by the language user. An idiom can theoretically have different, and evenopposite, meanings. Once one meaning is selected by the native speaker as the

right meaning o the idiom, it will be perceived as transparent, i.e. the speaker

will try to establish a logical relation between the literal and idiomatic meanings

o the idiom. Te reason why native speakers would regard any different interpret-

ation o idioms as opaque is that they already know what the idiom actually means;

or idioms could have transparently meant the opposite o what they mean i

they did not have the current idiomatic meaning (Keysar and Bly, 1999: 1566).

. A taxonomy for idiomatic false friends

Given the diversity o IFFs, it is useul to classiy them into different categories

based on the different ways they relate to each other in the language pair in which

they occur. Te taxonomy o IFFs proposed here is based on evidence rom Eng-

lish and MSA, but it can also apply to pairs o IFFs in other languages.

IFFs can be classified into two major groups: related IFFs and unrelated IFFs.

Related IFFs are those which have the same origin, either because the idioms inboth languages are taken rom one source or because one o the idioms was bor-


8/24


or a different kind o use. Most related IFFs are partial alse riends: though they

express a given common meaning, they are not totally identical semantically, since

there are areas which the idiomatic expressions in the two languages do not share.

Semantic differences, however, are not the only type o difference between related

IFFs. Even those related IFFs that show total semantic similarity can differ as re-

gards their cultural or stylistic aspects o use. Where such aspects are crucial or

translation and/or appropriate communication (which they usually are), such idi-oms are not equivalent in the two languages, and it is in this sense that they are

considered alse riends.

Unrelated IFFs are those that developed independently in the two languages

concerned, without there being a common source or the idiom or any influence

rom either language on the other. Similarity in orm in unrelated IFFs is merely

accidental. Te IFFs belonging to this category are typically total alse riends: their

idiomatic meanings in the two languages are typically different. Te only kind o

meaning they have in common is the literal meaning. Tese are similar to what

Chamizo Dominguez and Nerlich call chance alse riends. Tis term, however,

is not used here, first, because it has been suggested or single-word alse riends as

defined by Chamizo Dominguez and Nerlich (2002: 1836), and, second, because it

is opposed to semantic alse riends, a term which may overlap with differences

in meaning that may exist between both related and unrelated IFFs. In the present

taxonomy, the term semantic alse riends is opposed to cultural and stylistic

alse riends. Te classification o IFFs proposed here is illustrated by Figure 1.

.. Related IFFs

IFFs

Related

Semantic

otal Partial

Unrelated (typically total)

Cultural and stylistic (typically partial)

Figure 1. A general classification or idiomatic alse riends


9/24


by MSA borrowing rom English through loan-translation. Tey are divided here

into two types: semantic IFFs (which are either total or partial) and cultural and

stylistic IFFs (which are typically partial). Each o these types is discussed below.

... otal IFFs: Calques with a change of meaning

MSA has calqued a large number o idiomatic expressions rom English. Tough

most o these calques are used in the same sense as they are in the English lan-

guage, some o them have acquired a different meaning in the MSA speech com-

munity. Sometimes in this kind o semantic change the shif is towards a more

transparent meaning o the expression. Tis kind o change toward a more literal

meaning is present in (lit., moment o truth), an MSA idiom that was

calqued rom English with a change o meaning. Te English idiom means a crit-

ical or decisive time, at which one is put to the ultimate test (AHDI). It is defined

in MEDAL as the time when you will find out i something has succeeded or hap-

pened. Te origin o this idiom may also shed light on the way it is used in English.

Tis idiom is originally a loan-translation o the Spanish expression el momento de

la verdad(lit., the moment o truth), which signifies the point in a bullfight when

the matador makes the kill (AHDI). In MSA, the meaning is more transparent;

it reers to a moment when one is honest with onesel or with others. At the same

time, it implies that such honesty is temporary and that in other circumstancesone would not be so candid or open. Tis is shown by the ollowing example:1

(1) .

Furthermore, at a moment of truth(= at a moment o honesty and can-

didness), Bush admitted that he had distorted the beautiul image o

America. (Al-Ahram20 Jan. 2005)

Similarly, the idiom to pull someones legmeans to play a joke on or tease some-

one, and is understood as alluding to tripping someone by so holding a stick or

other object that one o his legs is pulled back (AHDI). BEI gives two meanings

o this idiom: to say something that (1) beools, deceives, or is intended to de-

ceive, a person; or (2) is not intended to be taken seriously: a sort o joke. Accord-

ing to PDEI, the idiom means to play a joke on someone, to tell someone a mis-

leading story that momentarily shocks or rightens him or her but which amuses

everybody else. PDEI also gives an idiomatic nominal group based on the idiom:

a leg-pull, which is a joke or untrue story, with the same meaning as the verbal

idiom. Te corresponding MSA idiom (lit., to pull someones leg) re-

ers to tricking someone into doing something, usually by dishonest means, as in


10/24


(lit., to pull the customers leg), i.e. to deceive the customer by mak-

ing him/her buy something, even though it may not be in his/her interest. It is not

exactly related to teasing or playing jokes on someone, and is not intended to pro-duce amusement, but rather to achieve some serious objectives. It can also mean

to implicate someone (in something). Sentences (2) and (3) below are examples:

(2) :

Te Arab residentpulled the citizens leg(=implicated the citizen) during

the investigation, saying, He is my accomplice in drug-dealing. (Al-Rai

Al-Aam, 22 Oct. 2004)

(3)

.

Te Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu managed to pull the leg

of(= to cunningly persuade) his ex-Minister o Foreign Affairs, David

Levi, to the government once again. (Al-Bayan, 6 Nov. 1998)

Baker (1992: 67) observes that the idiom to pull someones legis identical on the

surace to the idiom

(pull his leg) which is used in several Arabic dia-

lects to mean tricking someone into talking about something s/he would have ra-

ther kept secret. Tis usage is colloquial and its meaning is different rom the MSAversion

(lit., to pull someones leg) reerred to above. It is also differ-

ent rom the Colloquial Egyptian idiom (lit., to bring someones leg),

whose meaning is similar to the MSA version. Bakers idioms, however, would

represent English and Colloquial Arabic IFFs as the term is used here.

A similar case is observed in the idiom to pull the rug out from under some-

ones feet. Tis idiom reers to removing all support and assistance rom someone,

usually suddenly (AHDI). Te expression metaphorically illustrates a situation in

which a rug is pulled suddenly rom under someone standing on it, with the ex-

pected result o his/her alling down. PDEIs definition o the idiom is to take

ones opponent by surprise by suddenly depriving him o his advantage. Both

definitions have the idea o surprise action to the effect o depriving someone o

some advantage. Tis idiom, which appeared in English in the mid-1900s (AHDI),

was calqued into Arabic, but its original meaning does not seem to be recognized

by Arab users or lexicographers. Te MSA version, (lit.

to pull the rug rom under someones legs), is defined in an MSA monolingual

dictionary o idioms as to remove someone rom a position o influence and take

his place (Dawood 2003 [my translation]). Te MSA loan-translation does nothave the same meaning as its source language idiom. While the English idiom o-


11/24


idiom is also ofen used with reerence to non-human entities, which is a case o

personification since the metaphor in the idiom is associated with human entities.

Te idea o replacement is present in the ollowing example: (4) .

In addition, I dont agree to the ofen-made claim that television has

pulled the rug from under(= has taken the place o) the radio. (Al-Watan,

11 Nov. 2003)

Te same idea applies to the English idiom to lose ones nerve, which has almost

the same lexical and grammatical structure as the MSA

(lit., to lose ones

nerves), the only difference being that the MSA orm uses the plural o the noun

(nerve). Tough the MSA version is a loan-translation o the English idiom,

the two idioms differ in meaning: while the English idiom means to be rightened

or to lose ones courage or audacity to do something, the MSA idiom means to

lose sel-control or to give way to ones anger. According to AHDI, the English

expression employs the word nervein the sense o courage or boldness. In this

sense, the noun nerveis uncountable, and it is used in other idioms such as to have

the nerve to do somethingand to have a lot of nerve. Te corresponding MSA noun

(nerve) is not used in this sense. A translator working rom Arabic into Eng-

lish, thereore, should not translate

(lit., to lose ones nerves) into the su-perficially similar idiom to lose ones nerve. A more appropriate idiom would be to

lose ones temper, since it has the same idiomatic meaning as the MSA expression.

On the other hand, a translator working rom English into Arabic should not use

the MSA idiom as a translation equivalent or the English lose ones nerve.A more

appropriate rendition would be

(lit., to lose control o ones heart),

which is used idiomatically to mean lose ones courage and audacity.

(5) .

He started to lose his nerves(=to lose his temper) and knock at the doorwith his fists. (Akhbar Al-Adab, 10/12/2000)

(6)

.

Te US Secretary o State Collin Powell lost his nerves(=lost his temper)

and his calm while deending the decision o the US President George

Bush to invade Iraq. (Al-Watan, 13 Feb. 2004)

Te above cases o IFFs affirm the idea that when an expression is borrowed into aoreign language, it can develop a new sense that the expression does not have in


12/24


... Partial IFFs: Calques of a single meaning

Tis category includes related IFFs which share one meaning but differ in one

or more other meanings. In most o these cases, an English idiom with multiplemeanings is calqued into MSA but used in only one o its different senses in Eng-

lish. Calqued idioms, in this context, resemble loan-words, which, according to

Newmark (1982: 163) take up one sense, sometimes the less common one, and

leave others behind. Tis shif rom polysemy to monosemy is typical o most par-

tial IFFs in English and MSA.

A case in point is the English idiom blind trust. Te orm trusthas two distinct

senses, resulting in two different meanings o this set phrase. Te word trustcan

mean either confidence in someones honesty or reliability or money or proper-

ty that someone manages or a person or an organization according to a legal ar-

rangement (also an organization that manages money or property so that it can

help other people or organizations) (MEDAL). Tus, according to PDEI, to have

blind trust in someonemeans to trust someone absolutely and without question,

in which sense it has the idiomatic synonym blind faith. In the same dictionary, it

is noted that the idiom a blind trusthas acquired an additional meaning, namely

a trust which manages a politicians private capital, making sure that there is no

link between policy and donation, and thus preventing a conflict o interest. It is

only this recent meaning o the idiom that is cited by CED, MEDAL, and CCD.

Asar as MSA is concerned, the corresponding orm (lit., blind trust) is used

only in the sense o blind faith. Te two orms can be distinguished grammatically

on the grounds that trustis uncountable i the idiom means blind aith but count-

able in the other sense. In addition, the prepositional phrase in someoneonly oc-

curs when the idiom is used in the first sense.

A similar case is the idiomatic expression cover story. In one sense it reers

to the eatured story in a magazine that concerns the illustration on the cover.

In another, less requent sense, a cover storyis a alse story intended to mislead

or deceive or an alibi (AHDI). Tere is no MSA idiomatic equivalent to this

latter sense, though the ormer sense is normally translated into the MSA

(lit., the cover topic), which cannot reer to a alse story or an alibi. wo

points are worth reerring to here. First, the word storyin the sense o newspaper

or magazine account is typically translated into MSA as (typically, topic),

though in the other sense it is translated as

(typically, story). Second, the

word coveris polysemous in the sense that it can mean the cover o a magazine or

something that conceals the truth, which are translated into MSA as (cover)

and

(cover), respectively. It is this kind o polysemy that causes alse riend-ship between the MSA expression and the English idiom in the second sense.


13/24


idiom means understand or begin to understand something or see the merits o

anothers explanation or decision, and has its origin in the idea o religious con-

version, where lightmeans true religion. MEDAL defines to see the lightas tosuddenly realize or understand something or to start to have strong religious be-

lies. Te English idiom can also be regarded as a shortened version o to see the

light of day, which means to start to exist (MEDAL). It is only in this latter sense

that the MSA idiom (lit., to see the light) is used. It is used to reer to an

idea or a project that starts to be realized (Dawood 2003). Tis use is illustrated by

the ollowing example:

(7) .

Tey did not orget his benevolence to them and support o many otheir [literary] works, which saw the light(= came into existence) by vir-

tue o his sponsoring and encouragement. (Al-Ahram, 24 Jan. 2005)

(8)

.

He presented me with Te Memoirs of Fakhry Bek Abdul-Nour, the book

which saw the light(=came into existence) by virtue o his dedication,

keenness on politics, and loyalty to his great athers message. (Al-Ahram,

22 May 2003)

I a orm used in the idiom has two distinct meanings related by homonymy,

this can lead to different meanings o the same expression within one language.

Since homonymous words do not normally have the same orm when translated

into another language, a loan translation o such an idiom will result in partial

idiomatic alse riendship. Tis applies to the English idiom an elastic term. Te

word termcan mean a word or expression, especially when used in a particular

field or a division o the academic year in schools and universities. Tus, PDEI

(2001) provides two unrelated meanings o this idiom, which can be attributed to

the homonymy relation between the above senses o term. With reerence to aca-

demic lie, an elastic termis a school or university term that is flexible, possible to

extend. Applied to a word or expression, it means not fixed; may be stretched to

mean many things. It is in the latter sense that the idiom was borrowed into Arab-

ic through loan translation as (lit., an elastic term). Te word

(term) corresponds to the English termin the sense o word or expression used

in a particular field, but not in the sense o division o the academic year, which

is translated into Arabic as

(lit., a study term). Te kind o difficultythis situation may cause to translators or language learners is unidirectional. I


14/24


orm corresponding to the Arabic idiom. I, on the other hand, the translation is

rom English into Arabic, the translator should pay special attention to the exact

meaning o the idiom, since the Arabic calque corresponds to only one o the twosenses o the idiom. Sentence 9 is typical o the MSA use o the idiom:

(9)

Under the current circumstances, this is an elastic term; or what does

the term national leadership mean? (Al-Sabah, 9 Sept. 2003)

Partial similarity is also present between the English idiom in the same breath

(also in one breath) and its MSA counterpart

(lit., in one breath). Te

English idiom is given two distinct meanings in AHDI.Te first, at or almost at

the same time, overlaps with the MSA version, though even in this sense the two

orms are not identical. Te Arabic idiom is used to reer to two people saying the

same thing at the same time. While the English idiom shares this meaning with

the Arabic version, it can also be used o one person saying contradictory things

at the same time. AHDIs example is Ed complains about having too much home-

work and in the same breath talks about going out every night. Tis meaning o the

idiom is not included in the MSA version. Te second meaning given in AHDI

is used only in the negative: not in the same breath asmeans not to be compared

with, as in Karens a good runner, but you cant speak of her in the same breath asan Olympic athlete.Again, the MSA idiom is not used in this way. Tis is a case o

partial similarity where the English idiom has three distinct senses o which only

one sense is shared by the ormally identical MSA idiom.

Another example o partial IFFs is the English idiom head over heelsand its

MSA counterpart (lit., a head over a heel), which is a loan-translation

o the English idiom. Head over heelshas more than one sense. First, it can mean

in a state o reversal or utter conusion. Second, it can mean totally or complete-

ly (especially in head over heels in love). It is only the second sense that is given

by dictionaries which tend to give the current meanings rather than the histor-

ical ones, such as PDEI, CALD, and CCAL, which indicates that it is the more

common o the two senses. Furthermore, in all the examples given in CCAL five-

million-word corpus (based on the COBUILD Bank o English), the idiom is used

in the sense o alling in love with someone. However, Arabic has taken up the

earlier sense o the idiom (the sense o complete reversal and conusion) and lef

out the currently more common one. Te English and MSA versions are thus IFFs

in a twoold manner. First, there is a semantic area which they do not share. Sec-

ond, the meaning which they share differs as regards current use in the two lan-guages. While (lit., a head over a heel) has currency in MSA, the Eng-


15/24


Te illogicality o the orm o this idiom in the sense o reversal has been not-

ed in ODI.

Since the normal position is or the head to be over the heels, it would

be more logical to say heels over headi one wants to express the meaning o re-versal and conusion. AHDI states that the idiom originated in the 14thcentury as

heels over head, and meant literally being upside down. Te current orm (head

over heels) and the current meaning (being completely in love) are much more

recent. It is observed that the MSA calque observes the ordering o the English

idiom, even though it is not logical. Tis affirms the arbitrariness and non-deriva-

bility o idiomatic expressions in general.

Partial similarity is also present in the idiom conspiracy of silence, which has

been calqued into MSA as (lit., a conspiracy o silence). Te English

idiom means an explicit agreement to keep something secret (AHDI). Tis is

also the only sense o the idiom given in MEDAL, where it is defined as an agree-

ment between people to keep secret acts that should be publicly known. How-

ever, there is another, earlier sense which is now not very common in English. Ac-

cording to AHDI, this idiom was first used as a complaint about lack o attention,

but today it more ofen reers to remaining silent about something unavorable or

criminal. It is the ormer sense (deliberate lack o attention) which has been bor-

rowed into MSA.Te explanation here is that MSA calqued the earlier meaning o

the idiom, which then acquired a new sense that became more dominant in Eng-lish but did not enter MSA.

Partial alse riendship also occurs when there is a single orm in one language

that corresponds to two orms in the other. Tis applies to the MSA idiom

-(lit., a happy accident/event), which ormally corresponds to the English idi

oms a happy accidentand a happy event.Semantically, however, the MSA orm is

only equivalent to a happy event, since both mean the birth o a child. As or the

English idiom a happy accident, it means an unplanned pregnancy (PDEI), and

has no idiomatic equivalent in MSA.A urther pitall or the translator and the lan-

guage learner is that the Arabic orm(accident/event) is more typically trans-

lated into accidentthan event, which is typically translated as (event). Tis

regularity is not observed in the case o

(lit., a happy accident/event).

... Cultural and stylistic IFFs

In addition to the above types o alse riends, whose source is either ull or partial

difference in meaning, there are some IFFs that display cultural or stylistic differ-

ences, even though they have the same idiomatic meaning. Similar idioms across

languages can differ in such aspects as whether the idiom is ormal or inormal,technical or non-technical, dated or modern, humorous or serious, politically cor-


16/24


crucial to the message being conveyed. Knowledge o such differences can help the

translator choose the right rendition o the idiom being translated. Similarly, the

language learner should be aware o such differences in order to avoid inappropri-ate use o idioms in the oreign language.

Differences between English and Arabic cultures can lead to IFFs o the above

type. One example is the English idiom to live in sinand its corresponding MSA

(lit., to live in the sin). Both the English and MSA expressions carry

the meaning o cohabitation outside the ramework o marriage. Te English ver-

sion is labelled inormal in CED.According to AHDI, the English idiom, which

dates rom the early 1800s, is mostly used in jocular ashion today, when customs

and views are more liberal in this regard. By contrast, the MSA version is neither

inormal nor jocular. Te customs and views o the Arabic speech community

in this regard are not so liberal as they are in the western culture. It would not be

appropriate to translate the English expression into its MSA counterpart i its SL

context was used to express inormality or humorous usage.

Most English and MSA similar idioms that differ in the degree o ormality are

inormal or spoken in English but ormal or typically written in MSA.For instance,

to liquidate someone(i.e., to kill him/her) is inormal in English (MEDAL), while

the corresponding orm in MSA,

(lit., to liquidate someone), is or-

mal and typical o written language, especially with reerence to eliminating polit-ical opponents. Te same applies to other pairs o lexico-grammatically identical

idioms. Examples include the English over my dead body(which is described as

ofen used jokingly (AHDI)), though its Arabic calque

(lit., over my dead

body) is not normally used jokingly, but is rather used to denote strong commit-

ment not to allow something to happen.

Also related to cultural differences are expressions which may be politically in-

correct in one language but acceptable in another. For instance, the English idio-

matic expression Red Indiansis now regarded as offensive and politically incorrect

(e.g. MEDAL, CED). Its MSA counterpart, (lit., the Red Indians) is not

unacceptable in the MSA speech community. Tough the MSA version is origin-

ally a loan-translation o the English expression, it has not acquired the same con-

notations as the English original. Te expression that is preerred in English now is

Native Americans, which is used to reer to the original inhabitants o America or

their descendants. Te distinction does not exist in MSA, since its historical rea-

sons are lacking in the Arab culture.

A similar case is the English idiom the weaker sexand its MSA counterpart,

(lit., the weak sex), which has also entered MSA via loan-translation.Te English expression, which appeared beore movements o equality between


17/24


the West, the MSA expression (lit., the weak sex) is so ar not general-

ly regarded as offensive. Related to this is the English idiom the fair sex, which is re-

garded in English as old-ashioned (MEDAL). Te MSA translations (

(lit., the delicate sex) and (lit., the air sex) are commonly acceptable.

Another pair o cultural IFFs is the English man of the houseand the MSA

ormally equivalent expression

(lit., the man o the house). While at the

ormal and semantic levels the two expressions are equivalent, at the cultural lev-

el they display some difference. Te English version is now rather old ashioned

(MEDAL), while the MSA version can still be used without sounding outdated.

Te reason is that, in western culture, the role o the man as the only person re-

sponsible or earning the living and taking the important decision in the am-

ily has diminished. Tis role is still the norm in the Arab world. Tereore, i an

English writer intends to use the expression man of the houseto play on its old-

ashioned connotations, an MSA translation would lose these connotations i it

simply gave the literal equivalent. Te translator should resort to an expression

that sounds equally old-ashioned in MSA, such as(lit., the master o the

house) to convey the connotations intended by the English expression.

It is relevant in this context to reer to expressions that, due to different cul-

tural contexts, have the same orm and denotation in the two languages but differ

as regards their reerential meaning. Semanticists contrast denotation and reer-ence as two types o meaning, where the ormer indicates the general class (o per-

sons, things, etc.) represented by an expression while the latter indicates the actual

entity (the actual person, thing, etc.) represented by the expression in a particular

context (Palmer 1981: 18). It is occasionally the case that two expressions in Eng-

lish and MSA have the same denotation, but due to culture-specific eatures, their

intended reerence in each language is different. Tis can be illustrated by the Eng-

lish expression weekend, which has been calqued into MSA as (lit., the

end o the week). While the two expressions have the same denotation (general-

ly, the last two days o the week, in which one does not go to work), the cultural

context in which the expression is used determines its reerential meaning, i.e. the

actual days to which the expression reers. Within the English speech community,

the expression weekendnormally reers to Saturday and Sunday (this is how the

expression is defined in MEDAL, CCAL, CED, CALD), while in the MSA speech

community, (the end o the week) is typically Tursday and Friday or

Friday and Saturday. Te same holds true or midweekand the MSA correspond-

ing expression (lit., middle o the week). Tese phrases resemble

deictic expressions, whose exact interpretation depends on the context o situationin which they occur.


18/24


has two corresponding English phrases. Used literally and technically, it is equiva-

lent to the English spinal column.Idiomatically, however, it can only be translated

as backbone.Te choice is to be made by the translator working rom Arabic intoEnglish, since in English-into-Arabic translation the target expression is the same,

whether it is interpreted literally or idiomatically. For instance, in He had a spinal

column injuryand Oil is the backbone of Saudi economy, the expressions spinal col-

umnand backbonewill be translated into(lit., the spinal column). On

the other hand, the MSA expression should have two English translations in the

ollowing two sentences:

(10) .

Industry represents the backbone ofthe Qatari economy. (Al-Watan,10 Apr. 2005)

(11) .

He is perorming his duties just as he used to beore the spinal column

injury. (Al-Ahram, 10 Jul. 2004)

.. Unrelated IFFs

As noted above, unrelated IFFs are those that appeared independently in the two

languages concerned. Unlike related IFFs, they do not have their origin in bor-

rowing, but simply happened to be identical in orm in the two languages. Teir

identity o orm can cause them to be pitalls or translators and language learners.

Unrelated IFFs are normally ull alse riends.

Te Englishfor your eyes onlyand the MSA(lit., or your eyes) be-

long to this type. Te English idiom means that the person being addressed is al-

lowed to only see something, such as a letter or a document (MEDAL). Te MSA

idiom means or your sake and implies that the addressee is so dear to the addres-

sor that something is being done only exceptionally or him/her. An example is:

(12)

.

Te US has its own economic, political, and social interests, and does not

workfor the eyes of(=or the sake o) the movement or the government.

(Al-Rai Al-Am, 3 Apr. 2004)

Similarly, to take ones chances means to accept the risks or to resign onesel

to whatever happens, whereas to take a chancemeans to risk something or togamble (AHDI). Tis is entirely different rom the ormally similar MSA idioms


19/24


Other unrelated alse riends are the English white waterand the MSA

(lit., white water). According to CED, the expression white waterhas two mean-

ings: 1. a stretch o water with a broken oamy surace, as in rapids. 2. light-col-oured sea water, esp. over shoals or shallows. Neither o these two meanings can

be expressed by the MSA idiom, which is another, non-technical expression or

the ophthalmologic disease cataract. It is interesting that cataractis also used in

English or waterall (MEDAL).

Another clear example is the MSA idiom (lit. a white night), which

has two different idiomatic meanings. One is taken rom the colloquial varieties,

meaning a happy night. Te other, rarely used, sense is inherited rom Classical

Arabic, and means a night in which the moon is shining. Te English counterpart,

which is itsel a calque o the French une nuit blanche(see Fernando and Flavell

1981: 84), means a sleepless night. Tus the translator who encounters either the

MSA or English expression should provide the semantic equivalent rather than

the ormal one.

Another pair o unrelated alse riends is rom the ootball terminology. Te

MSA terminological idiom

(lit., the penalty point) reers to what in Eng-

lish is known aspenalty spot, which is the point in the penalty area rom which

the ball is kicked when a oul is made in the penalty area o the deending team.

Te English idiompenalty point, on the other hand, reers to an endorsement on adriving license due to a motoring offence (CED). Tis is a total alse riend o the

MSA idiom (lit., the penalty point), since both have the same orm but

completely different meanings.

Proper names can also be a source o IFFs. I a proper name used in an idiom

has different connotations in two languages, the idiomatic expressions will be ull

alse riends. One such example is the Cinderella of, meaning the least admired

(PDEI), which is quite the opposite o its meaning in MSA.Te appearance o

these IFFs in English and MSA is not the result o language intererence. Te id-

ioms are related only in source, both alluding to the tale o beautiul Cinderel-

la, who is orced by her stepmother to do housework while her stepsisters spend

the time partying. Tis tale seems to have lef different impressions on the Arab

and English audiences. Te Arab audience seems to ocus on Cinderellas beauty

and good nature. Tis is clear rom the expression (the Cinderella o

the screen), which is used avourably to reer to a amous Arab actress. Te Eng-

lish audience, on the other hand, ocuses on the undeserved, bad treatment o

Cinderella at the hands o her stepmother and stepsisters. Tis is also the sense

in which the word Cinderella is used in some compounds, such as a Cinderelladisease(i.e. one which receives less attention and unding than it deserves (PDEI)).


20/24


Where proper names are treated purely connotatively, e.g. He is a Croesus, She is a

Niobe, the proper name is normally translated by its connotation, unless it also has

the same sense in the L.

Some proper names have the same connotations in both English and Arabic (such

as Romeo, Don Juan, and Job (as in the patience of Job). Cinderella, as has been

seen, does not belong to this category. Tereore, the translator (whether working

rom English into Arabic or vice versa) has to resort to paraphrase to provide the

intended meaning in the SL.

Language learners should also be made aware o this

difference to assure clearer understanding and to avoid wrong use o the idiom in

speech or writing.

. Conclusion

I idioms in general represent one o the most problematic areas or translators,

idiomatic alse riends are doubly difficult. Unless he/she is aware o the differ-

ent meanings and stylistic eatures o such idioms, the translator may assume that,

since the SL and L idioms are identical in orm, they must also be identical in

meaning and stylistic effect. Tis paper has proposed a general taxonomy or IFFs,

which have been defined as pairs o set phrases that have the same literal mean-ing in two or more languages but have different idiomatic meanings or different

cultural and stylistic conditions o use. According to the proposed taxonomy, IFFs

all into two categories: related and unrelated. Related IFFs, which result rom lan-

guage intererence, are usually partial, and they differ semantically or stylistically.

Unrelated IFFs are those that have appeared independently in each language, and

they are typically total alse riends.

Most English and MSA IFFs are partial alse riends. In this case, there is one

semantic area shared by the similar idioms in the two languages, while there is

one or more other meanings that an idiom has in one language (usually MSA in

our case) but not in the other. Te explanation suggested here is that many MSA

idioms calqued rom English pick up only one o two or more meanings o the

English idiom, leaving out the other(s), with the result o partial similarity. Gen-

erally, partial IFFs can be more deceptive than ull IFFs because in the ormer the

meanings are usually so close that the context may not provide any clue or the

right interpretation.

Te examples given here suggest that partial IFFs have a pattern o semantic

overlap in which the MSA idiom is included in the English one. One explanationis that the borrowed sense may have been common in English at the time o bor-


21/24


over a heal) and conspiracy of silence/ (lit., a conspiracy o silence) .

Cultural considerations can also prevent the use o a borrowed idiom in one o its

senses in the donor language. Tus, the religious meanings o to see the lighthavenot been included in the MSA (lit., to see the light). In addition, the pres-

ence o a homonymous orm can lead to the use o the idiom in two senses in the

donor language. When such an idiom is calqued into another language, only one

sense o the homonymous orm is used in the calque and the other sense is lef out.

Tis is the case in the English expressions an elastic termand blind trust.Tese are

the main actors that can lead to partial idiomatic alse riends in the light o the

English and MSA idiomatic expressions discussed above.

Like most studies on alse riends, the present contribution is applicable to

a variety o language-related fields. Primarily, it has its implications or transla-

tion studies and language learning, since the recognition o IFFs is essential or

the right interpretation and production o idiomatic orms and or avoiding com-

munication breakdown. Te results o the study are also applicable to other fields,

such as lexicography, semantics, and sociolinguistics. In addition, urther research

on IFFs in other language pairs is needed or testing the universality o the taxon-

omy proposed in this study.

References

Books and articles

Baker, Mona. 1992. In Other Words: A Coursebook on ranslation.London: Routledge. xii+304

pp.

Butler, Christopher. 2003. Multi-word sequences and their relevance or recent models o unc-

tional grammar. Functions of Language10: 2.179208.

Chamzo Domnguez, Pedro. J. and Brigitte Nerlich. 2002. False riends: Teir origin and se-mantics in some selected languages.Journal of Pragmatics34: 18331849.

Cornell, Alan. 1999. Idioms: An approach to identiying major pitalls or learners. IRAL37:

1.122.

Ferguson, Ronnie. 1994. Italian False Friends. oronto: University o oronto Press. xi+123 pp.

Fernando, Chitra and Roger Flavell. 1981. On Idiom: Critical Views and Perspectives.Exeter Lin-

guistic Studies. Ed. R.R.K.Hartmann. Exeter: University o Exeter. iii+94 pp.

Granger, Sylviane and Helen Swallow. 1988. False riends: A kaleidoscope o translation diffi-

culties. Le langage et lhomme23: 2.10820.

Keysar, Boaz and Bridget Martin Bly. 1999. Swimming against the current: Do idioms reflect

conceptual structure?Journal of Pragmatics31: 15591578.Newmark, Peter. 1982.Approaches to ranslation. Oxord: Pergamon Press. xiii+200 pp.

Nicholls Diane 2002 Friend or oe? False riends and the language learner MED Magazine


22/24


Nida, Eugene. 1964/2004. Principles o correspondence. In Te ranslation Studies Reader.2nd

ed. Ed. Lawrence Venuti, 15367. New York: Routledge.

Palmer, F.R. 1981. Semantics. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. viii+221 pp.

Sinclair, John. 1987. Collocation: a progress report. In Language opics: Essays in Honour of

Michael Halliday. Ed. Ross Steele and erry Treadgold. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Vol. II: 31933.

Sinclair, John. 1991. Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxord: Oxord University Press. xviii

+ 179 pp.

Stubbs, Michael. 2002. Words and Phrases: Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics.Oxord: Black-

well. xix+200 pp.

Vinay, Jean Paul and Jean Darbelnet (1995/2004). A methodology or translation. rans. J. C.

Sager and M.-J.Hamel. In Te ranslation Studies Reader.2nd ed. Ed. L.Venuti, 12837.

New York: Routledge.

Wray, Alison. 2002. Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press. xi + 332 pp.

Dictionaries

AHDI.Te American Heritage Dictionary of Idioms. 1997. Christine Ammer. Boston: Houghton

Mifflin. v+729 pp.

BEI.A Book of English Idioms. 1958. 3rd ed. V.K.Collins. London: Longman. xiii+258 pp.

CALD.Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary. 2003. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press. xii+1550 pp.CCAL.Collins COBUILD Advanced Learners English Dictionary. 2003. Glasgow: Harper Col-

lins. xxiv+1712+30 pp.

CED.Collins English Dictionary. 2003. 6th ed. Glasgow: Harper Collins. xvi+1872 pp.

DFF. A Dictionary of False Friends. 1982. Robert Hill. London: Macmillan Press. viii+319 pp.

MEDAL.Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners. 2002. Oxord: Macmillan.

xiv+1692 pp.

ODI.Te Oxford Dictionary of Idioms. 1999. Ed. Jennier Speake. Oxord: Oxord University

Press. iv+395 pp.

PDEI.Te Penguin Dictionary of English Idioms. 2001. Ed. Daphne M.Gulland and David Hinds-

Howell. London: Penguin. vii+378 pp.

Arabic reerences

..:...

(Dawood, Mohamed. 2003. Dictionary o Idioms in Contemporary Arabic. Cairo: Gharib.

687 pp.)

Abstract


23/24


differ as regards their idiomatic meaning or their sociolinguistic and stylistic eatures. Te study

proposes a taxonomy or IFFs based on data rom English and Arabic, though it may also apply to

IFFs in other language pairs.

In the case o English and Arabic, IFFs are either related (typically partial) or unrelated (typ-

ically total). Related IFFs have their origin in loan-translation, with idioms being borrowed rom

English into Arabic and then taking a different course o semantic development in each language.

Tere are also cases in which the selection o a single sense o a polysemous idiom can be attribut-

ed to social and cultural actors.

It is shown that, i idioms in general are among the most challenging units or translators, IFFs

can be doubly difficult. Te translator may assume that since the source and target language idi-

oms have the same orm, they can also have the same meaning or stylistic eatures.

Rsum

Cet article examine les aux amis idiomatiques, dans deux langues nayant aucune parent gn-

tique, langlais et larabe. Les aux amis idiomatiques sont dfinis comme des syntagmes fixes dans

deux langues. Leur signification littrale est la mme mais ils diffrent par leur signification idio-

matique ou leurs caractristiques sociolinguistiques et stylistiques. Ltude propose une taxono-

mie pour les aux amis idiomatiques, base sur des donnes de langlais et de larabe, bien quelle

puisse galement sappliquer des aux amis idiomatiques dans dautres combinaisons linguis-

tiques.

Dans le cas de langlais et de larabe, les aux amis idiomatiques sont soit apparents (typique-ment partiels), soit non apparents (typiquement totaux). Les aux amis idiomatiques apparen-

ts trouvent leur origine dans une traduction demprunt, des idiomes tant emprunts langlais

par larabe avant de suivre une voie de dveloppement smantique diffrente dans chaque langue.

Dans certains cas, la slection dun seul sens pour un idiome polysmique peut tre attribue des

acteurs sociaux et culturels.

Larticle montre que si les idiomes en gnral comptent parmi les units les plus complexes

pour les traducteurs, les aux amis idiomatiques peuvent tre doublement difficiles. Le traducteur

peut supposer que puisque les idiomes ont la mme orme dans la langue source et la langue cible,

ils peuvent galement avoir la mme signification ou les mmes caractristiques stylistiques.

About the author

Dr. Ahmed Seddik Al-Wahyis associate proessor o Linguistics, Faculty o Languages (Al-Al-

sun), Ain Shams University, Cairo. He also worked as assistant proessor o Linguistics, Riyadh

Community College, King Saud University (20036). He has published a number o translations,

articles and book reviews in English and Arabic. His research interests include translation stud-

ies, phraseology, lexicography, and comparative linguistics.

Address: Dept. o English, College o Languages (Al-Alsun), Ain Shams University, Abbassia,

Cairo, Egypt.E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]


24/24

Date post:	01-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	ramzan-nizam
View:	221 times
Download:	0 times

Idiomatic False Friends in English and Modern Standard Arabic

Documents