A cross-cultural linguistic analysis of the gendered representations of “Wife” in Egyptian Arabic and American English Proverbs

Abstract

This study investigates how language, gender, and culture are intertwined in two purpose-built corpora of Egyptian Arabic and American English proverbs. It discusses the ideological representations of the potentially gendered term “wife” in such proverbs, as well as the cultural affinities and discrepancies around them. The study has methodically operated at three stages, drawing on theoretical insights from feminist critical discourse analysis and conceptual metaphor theory: (1) determining the frequency of Arabic and English proverbs that represent the social actor “wife” in terms of the various socio-cultural roles assigned to them; (2) demarcating and comparing the principal themes and ideologies associated with the proverbial usage of the lexical term “wife” in Egyptian and American cultures; and (3) describing the underlying source domains that conceptually underpin and discursively legitimatize such themes and ideologies. Results revealed that, firstly, not all of the social functions associated with “wife” are covered in the American-English corpus due to cultural differences regarding the concept of the extended family. Second, the Egyptian-Arabic corpus often portrays the social actor “wife” negatively. Thirdly, to control the public mind regarding gender power dynamics, both corpora shared certain source domains. The wife’s negative portrayals are also used to justify gender hegemony and keep women suppressed, marginalized, and stigmatized.

Keywords:

• American English
• conceptual metaphor theory
• Egyptian Arabic
• feminist critical discourse analysis
• gender
• proverbs
• wife

1. Introduction

Myriads of publications addressed the relationship among language, gender, and culture, and most focused on gendered differences in patterns of language use (Cameron, 2007; Eckert & Mcconnell-Ginet, 2003; Holmes, 1998; Kendall & Tannen, 2001; Nakamura, 2014). This whole body of research has proven that diverse cultural elements are copiously deployed in language which, in specific contexts, demonstrates social practices of gender polarization (Bem, 1993) and dichotomization (Lomotey & Chachu, 2020), or more particularly, male chauvinism or misogyny (Dundes, 1975). As a universal constituent of language and culture, proverbs represent a reservoir of common social beliefs, norms, and values governing gender hierarchy and power relations. They are used in everyday interactions, movies, novels, dramas, newspapers, and many other domains of expression to argue for or against an issue, legitimize a viewpoint, create humor, impose a local ethical code, and perpetuate customs and traditions. Proverbs’ popularity resides in covering many topics shaping male-female interaction for gender construction and deconstruction. Still, as Webster (1982) maintains, proverbs should be regarded as “tantalizing shadows of the culture which spawned them.”

According to Kerschen (2012), proverbs are the finest markers of beliefs and attitudes about women, and they are an ideal subject to study in order to uncover the historical image of women. Indeed, many scholars (Lomotey & Chachu, 2020; Schipper, 2004; Webster, 1982; Zheng, 2018) assert that proverbs involve sexist tendencies concerning gender relations. Therefore, the current study focuses on the language framing women in the genre of proverbs. As language mirrors culture, any two languages would demonstrate differences concerning the representations of women in proverbs. Such representations are claimed to maintain gender-based social asymmetry and negotiate ethnic identities and power in everyday interaction.

Though different related studies revealed particular women-related ideologies in proverbs (see, Section 2), the contrastive cultural dimension between Arabic and English proverbs received little attention, particularly insofar as the social actor of “wife” is concerned. Given the potentially gendered meanings associated with this social actor, scant research has been conducted to reveal how the different representations of “wife” are ideologically constructed in Arabic and English proverbs. Therefore, the current study aims to fill in this research gap and contribute to the large literature on gender studies by answering one main question:

How are the gendered meanings of wifeliness proverbially constructed across Egyptian Arabic and American English?

The preceding main question can be subdivided into two sub-questions: (1) What is the frequency of Egyptian Arabic and American English wife-specific proverbs? (2) How is the social actor “wife” ideologically represented and cognitively framed in these proverbs? Thus, to answer this study’s main question, we need to address the proposed two sub-questions. This entails using quantitative and qualitative methods that would aid in highlighting how proverbs manifest the gendered ideologies and cultural perspectives associated with wifeliness in Egyptian Arabic and American English proverbs. This can help us detect intercultural affinities or differences regarding gender hierarchy and power structure concerning the issue of what is befitting a wife in two cultures. Furthermore, the study will demonstrate how the producers of such proverbs intended the social actor “wife” to be cognitively framed in the collective minds corresponding to both cultures.

Given the study questions mentioned above, the present study adopts a comparative, cross-cultural approach. It synergizes two analytical approaches to integrate the analysis’s discursive, social, and cognitive levels. The first is Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA; Lazar, 2005, 2007, 2008) which addresses the ideologies underlying gender hierarchy and power relations as represented in proverbs and the linguistic strategies through which such ideologies are communicated. The second is Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT; Lakoff, 1993; Lazar, 2008) which accounts for the cognitive basis of inherently metaphorical proverbs. Though the contexts of proverbs are not always definite, Schipper (2004) avers that the key message of a proverb remains relatively constant despite the changing contexts. Besides, Mieder (2004) assures that “many (cross-culturally) equivalent proverbs […] might have different images and structures, but that means the same thing!”.

The present study uses two languages: Egyptian Arabic and American English. While the former is originally a Semitic language, the latter is Germanic. Each variety is representative of its own underlying culture. The Egyptian culture is generally conservative as it is mostly shaped by the teachings of Islam, folk traditions, and conservative socialization practices that generally prioritize males, especially in rural regions. Some aspects of Christianity are easily traced in the Egyptian culture and Egyptian proverbs by an extension (e.g., جيزة نصاري ǧīzat naṣāra; A Christian marriage, i.e., an eternal relationship). However, the Egyptian culture is not only the incarnation of Christianity and Islam teachings, it is also deeply rooted in pharaonic civilization. For example, given the focus of the present study, in ancient Egypt, women were equal to men in every aspect of life except jobs. (Brier & Hobbs, 2013). Conversely, American culture is informed by the teachings of Christianity as well as folk traditions which could be traced back to ancient native Americans as well as other races that had been in contact. In this regard, Shi and Zhang (2017) regard the Bible as “the root of sexism.” Though proverbs are claimed to be too old to account for the gender hierarchy and power relations in society, they survived the ravages of time as they circulate and “remain in currency through the language” (Sil, 2019).

The remainder of the paper is structured as follows—section 2 reviews related literature about women’s ideologies in Arabic and English proverbs. Section 3 discusses the study’s theoretical underpinnings as it focuses on the cultural aspect of ideology, sexist language, and the cognitive dimension of proverbs. It also shows how the synergy of FCDA and CMT will inform data analysis. Section 4 represents the study’s methodology in terms of the data sources and collection as well as the procedure of analysis. Section 5 analyses the data. Section 6 discusses the findings.

2. Literature review

The study of the linkage between proverbs and gender representations received remarkable scholarly attention. Given the present study’s focus, the bulk of related studies can be categorized into two clusters. The first cluster focuses on how men and women are ideologically represented in proverbs in Arabic (Ambu-Saidi, 2010; Belfatmi, 2013; Ennaji, 2008; Webster, 1982) and English (Kirsanova, 2018; Shi & Zhang, 2017; Zheng, 2018). The second cluster focuses on comparing the representations of ideological gender in Arabic and English (Ismael Taher, 2019). Similar studies are conducted on other languages (Lomotey & Chachu, 2020; Nakhavaly & Sharifi, 2013; Sanauddin, 2015; Storm, 1992).

Webster (1982) worked on a collection of 93 Moroccan Arabic proverbs addressing issues related to women, sex, and marriage. The study was more sociologically—rather than linguistically—oriented. Findings showed that proverbs distributed Moroccan women on a cline with three distinct phases: pre-child-bearing, during-child-bearing, and post-child-bearing, which are associated with positive, neutral, and negative attributes, respectively. Moroccan women were generally stereotyped as having insatiable sexual desires through which they could control and damage men. To intensify the Godly punishment of incest, women were equated to sacred religious sites such as Kaaba and Jerusalem.

Furthermore, proverbs were found to focus on the traits of a good wife rather than those of a husband. Relatedly, Ennaji (2008) explored the images of women in Moroccan Arabic and Berber (Tamazight) proverbs using content analysis. Moroccan proverbs represented women more negatively than Berber proverbs. Berber proverbs focused on women’s beauty, chastity, and bravery. Contrarily, Moroccan Arabic proverbs associated women with laziness, hypocrisy, and wickedness.

Similar findings are reported by Belfatmi (2013) as she explored women’s representations in Moroccan proverbs as part of popular culture using content analysis. She showed that Moroccan women are negatively perceived within the boundaries of the private domestic (rather than public) sphere, just like pets and servants. The study has demonstrated how Moroccan society—as typical of patriarchal ideologies—dominantly stereotypes women as evil, intellectually less qualified creatures on the one hand. Men have been portrayed as predators, profiteers, and tyrants, on the other hand. Furthermore, Ambu-Saidi (2010), using quantitative and qualitative methods, explored gender representations of 63 Omani Arabic proverbs as performative speech acts. Findings showed that the majority of proverbs represented women negatively. As such, proverbs were commonly used as face-threatening acts. Proverbs associate Omani women with weakness, meddlesomeness, and talkativeness. However, surveys and interviews with Omani women revealed a decline in the negative connotations attached to women in Omani proverbs.

Shi and Zhang (2017) studied linguistic sexism as manifested in the English proverbs comparing men and women based on social status, behavior, age, and marriage. Within a very limited number of proverbs, findings showed that women’s appearance is satirized, their intellect is downplayed, and their beauty is oppressed, while men are given priority. Such gender bias has been proved to be motivated by historical (patriarchy), cultural (the Bible), social (education), and psychological (submissiveness) reasons. Zheng (2018) reached similar findings, but he focused on the cultural specificity of English proverbs, and therefore they might cause intercultural conflicts if used in China.

Kirsanova (2018) compared the representations of men and women in English proverbs and anti-proverbs (i.e., proverbs that have undergone structural and semantic changes) to explore aspects of androcentric culture. Employing quantitative and qualitative methods, the study explored the lexical units describing the biological, moral, psychological, and social characteristics of men and women in a corpus of proverbs from published books and dictionaries. Findings showed that proverbs about women were much more frequent, and they emphasized their negative characteristics, especially on the moral and psychological levels. Anti-proverbs reflected women’s ironic view of men as they started having equal rights.

The only study that compared representations of women in Arabic and English proverbs is Ismael Taher (2019). She explored how the meaning of proverbs is constructed in terms of socio-cultural factors. She did not consider the representations of women in particular, but she approached women as a key component of social life. Insights from Conceptual Metaphor Theory and Conceptual Integration Theory informed the analysis. Findings showed that women are negatively represented in Arabic and English as roots of evil, the Devil’s net, and commodities.

Based on this literature review, we claim that no study has conducted a cross-cultural analysis of the gendered representation of the social actors of “woman/women” and/or “wife” in Egyptian Arabic and American English proverbs. Most of the available studies focused on the sociological aspects of proverbs as a part of folklore, and they were much concerned with the thematic views proposed in available proverbs. Even the studies that addressed gender hierarchy in other languages focused on the surface structure of these proverbs without accounting for the cognitive basis underlying their formation, i.e., how the ideological meanings associated with gendered social actors communicated via these proverbs are mentally represented in the mind of the proverbs’ producers and users. Therefore, the current study attempts to integrate the linguistic, social, and cognitive aspects of Arabic and English proverbs as a reservoir of culture.

But it should be made clear here that we will focus on the social actor “wife” to exclude other woman-specific social actors, e.g., “daughter,” “sister,” and “mother.” The reason why we elected this social actor to examine its gendered representations can be ascribed to the fact that “wife” has the potential for gendered representations. These representations emerge principally from the social contract the actor “wife” typically develops in subjugation to other social actors such as “husband” and “man”/“men”; the latter actors are historically reckoned to be part of the wide-scale patriarchal discourse and its hegemonic practices in different cultures. Another additional reason for selecting the social actor “wife” is quantitatively oriented, as shown in Table 1 (see, Section 4).

Table 1. Frequency of proverbs in the Arabic and English corpora

Egyptian-Arabic Corpus		American-English Corpus
Cluster	Frequency	Cluster	Frequency
Daughter	34	Wife	114
Wife	35	Mother	23
Mother	19	Daughter	19
Mother-In-Law	16	Mother-In-Law	9
Sister	7	Daughter-In-Law	4
Sister-In-Law	6	Grandmother	4
Co-Wife	3	Step-Mother	2
Step-Mother	3	Sister	1
Daughter-In-Law	3
Aunt	1
Total	127	Total	176

The theoretical framework adopted in the present study is outlined in the coming section with a focus on the concept of “proverbs” and the two models of Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA) Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT).

3. Theoretical framework

3.1. Proverbs: An overview

Most linguists and paremiologists agree that the term “proverb” is too complicated to define as a proverb does not keep a definite structure, content, or purpose (Gibbs & Beitel, 1995). Proverbs generally refer to traditional, pithy, succinct, colorful, formulaic, aphoristic, often figurative, and self-contained statements with a moral precept (Norrick, 1985), representing the holistic view of society toward an idea or a sentiment. The discipline that studies proverbs and proverbial expressions in terms of their origin, structure, collection, classification, and socio-historical significance is known as “paremiology.” As a universal phenomenon, the study of proverbs works on the interface of diverse disciplines, including sociolinguistics, anthropology, sociology, folkloristics, philology, and cognitive science (Mieder, 2004). Krikmann (1974) claims that proverbs are contextually specific as they “manifest themselves only in concrete actualizations” based on their “semantic potential.” Conversely, other scholars (Akbarian, 2012) argue that proverbs are not context-bound, i.e., they do not have a unitary meaning as they may develop new associations in different contexts.

Most proverbs are easily memorized due to their specific linguistic structure. Litovkina (1996) maintains that proverbs are structurally identified in terms of a set of phonological (e.g., rhyme, alliteration, etc.), lexical (e.g., archaic lexemes), syntactic (e.g., parallel syntax and conditional clauses), and semantic (e.g., metaphor, irony, etc.) markers. Still, the same proverb may have variant forms within the same language. They can be “added to, transformed, and abbreviated” (Akbarian, 2012). For instance, based on the proverb “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” the proverbs “Every mother’s child is handsome” and “No mother has a homely child” are co-variant in English. Similarly, القرد فى عين أمه’ Il-ʾird fy ʿīn ʾumuh ġazāl’ (In the eyes of its mother, a baby monkey is a cute fawn) and خنفسة شافت ولادها علي الحيط قالت ده لولي فى خيط “Ḫunfisah šāfit wilādha ʿala al-ḥīt ʾālit dah lūly malḍūm fy ḫīt” (A ladybug saw its offspring on the wall, she said, “This is a pearl tied with a thread”) are co-variants in colloquial Egyptian Arabic.

While Akbarian (2012) regards proverbs as an ornament of language, Tair and Edwards (2006) assure that they are not “folkloric relics, verbal decorations, or collector’s items.” Indeed, proverbs are reported to serve diverse strategic sociolinguistic and cultural functions. They are intended to perform social functions, including asserting social norms, values, and beliefs and highlighting the governing moralist code and related socially accepted behaviors. Furthermore, Webster (1982) considers proverbs as clues about people’s “character and culture” as they “open paths of communication.” In communication, proverbs are strategically manipulated to support arguments, rationalize pitfalls, satirize problems, persuade the masses, and express generalizations (Mieder, 2004). Tair and Edwards (2006) add that proverbs can “propose a course of action, affect a change of attitude, or provoke a change in perspective” as they represent a society’s wisdom and record of experience. In this context, Lomotey and Chachu (2020) state that proverbs create ideologies and stereotypes effectively since they are “true reflections of a society’s values and are accepted as authoritative creeds that cannot be challenged.”

Tair and Edwards (2006) stress that the semantic complexity of proverbs is due to their metaphorical or figurative basis that is initiated in the mind of the proverb’s producers and narrators. Furthermore, proverbs form a part of “the cognitive system of the culture in which they occur” (Webster, 1982). Based on this understanding, the theoretical framework offered by Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT; Gibbs, 1994; Lakoff, 1993; Lazar, 2008) may adduce a better understanding of the cognitive basis of proverbs as metaphors. In this regard, Gibbs and Beitel (1995, p. 139) argue against the typical paraphrases of proverbs, and they assure that proverbs “are partly motivated by conceptual metaphors.”

In its simplest form, CMT proposes that in a metaphor, two conceptual spheres interact, i.e., one generally abstract concept (target domain or vehicle) is understood in terms of another concrete concept (source domain or tenor) usually associated with everyday experiences. According to Lakoff (1993), the general metaphor theory characterizes what is technically termed “cross-domain mapping.” Crucially, a metaphorical expression indicates “a linguistic expression (a word, phrase, or sentence) that is the surface realization of such a cross-domain mapping” (Lakoff, 1993). Recognizably, underlying systematic correspondences or metaphorical mappings experientially arise between source and target domains. A conceptual metaphor is phrased as TARGET DOMAIN IS SOURCE DOMAIN; it is situationally manifested in interaction through diverse linguistic expressions. In our case, proverbs are regarded as linguistic expressions. Gibbs and Beitel (1995) demonstrate that the proverb “A rolling stone gathers no moss” is motivated by two conceptual metaphors applicable in different contexts: LIFE IS A JOURNEY, and PEOPLE ARE INANIMATE OBJECTS. As metaphors differ cross-culturally, proverbs behave as such. The present study is confined to exploring the source domains that proverbs’ producers (consciously or unconsciously) used to represent “wife” as a target domain. These source domains will contribute to revealing the cognitive basis of the target proverbs.

3.2. Proverbs, culture, and gender ideologies

Culture is deeply rooted in any human language. Through language, social relations are marked, and identities are established (Ahearn, 2001). Any culture has its motivated gender hierarchy, i.e., how men and women are represented. “Representations of aspects of the world which contribute to establishing and maintaining relations of power, domination, and exploitation” are known as ideologies that are essentially cultural beliefs (Fairclough, 2003). Granbom-Herranen (2010) argues that most recent research on women’s representations in proverbs showed that they are underestimated and stereotyped as “the object of negative proverbial speech.”

Similarly, Yksel (1993) states, “Almost every proverb that touches on women contains a severe negation of the value of women in society.” Furthermore, Kerschen (2012) maintains that proverbs about women are characteristically derogatory as they portray them as “sharp-tongued, long-winded, empty-headed, toy-like creatures,” thereby reflecting a typical patriarchal worldview. Therefore, proverbs are critiqued for motivating “a system of gender hegemony that supports masculine superiority and feminine subordination”. Schipper (2004) and Granbom-Herranen (2010), among others, ascribe these negative representations to the fact that most of the available proverbs originated from men who controlled everything for ages.

Accordingly, such proverbs could be claimed to be underlain by a sexist ideology that forms the basis for reproducing unequal gender relations. Sexism represents a system of beliefs governing the behavior, language, and perception of men and women in society. Sexist ideology constitutes an aspect of sexist (or gendered) culture that is perpetuated, propagated, and reproduced by language (i.e., linguistic sexism). Atkinson et al. (1993) approaches linguistic sexism as “a wide range of verbal practices, including not only how women are labeled and referred to, but also how language strategies in mixed-sex interaction may serve to silence or depreciate women as interactants.” Eagleton (2007) offers a set of discursive strategies through which gender hierarchy and power structure in society are maintained. Through the discursive strategies of legitimization, rationalization, naturalization (stereotyping), and universalization, oppression is internalized; a superordinate-subordinate position is justified; social roles are stereotyped, and ideologies are universalized, respectively.

Feminists identify societies accepting male domination as patriarchal. The concept of “patriarchy” (Walby, 1990) is intended to describe all sorts of gender inequality, discrimination, marginalization, and prejudice in favor of men. It starts during socialization and is then affirmed in education and employment. Related to the concept of patriarchy are the concepts of “hegemonic masculinity” and “hegemonic femininity” (Connell, 1995) that configure the social practices legitimizing patriarchy and sustaining “the dominant position of men and the subordination of women” (Schippers, 2007). Such androcentric and misogynous ideologies are sustained as women accept them and are then “integrated with laws, rules, norms, habits, and even a consensus” (Van Dijk, 2001).

However, with the increasing rise of feminist movements and social shifts since the publication of Lakoff’s Language and Woman’s Place (1975), which propagated the deficiency of female speech, the concepts of patriarchy and hegemonic masculinity became relatively historical as women are now getting socially empowered. Therefore, such terms have been criticized as they ignore the power dynamics in a society, i.e., men and women are powerful in different senses. Based on this viewpoint, new critical discourse analytic approaches emerged to defy patriarchal societies by revealing all biased gender differences. In fact, every theoretical framework that falls under the purview of critical discourse analysis (CDA) affirms that discourse both reflects and shapes social activities. CDA is mainly concerned with reproducing social problems in discourse, e.g., inequality, racism, discrimination, power abuse, etc. (Fairclough, 2007; Litosseliti, 2006; Sunderland, 2004; Van Dijk, 2001). As feminist studies received their due attention, the paradigm of CDA has been extended to cover social problems from a feminist perspective (Diabah & Appiah Amfo, 2015), and it came to be known as Feminist CDA (FCDA; Lazar, 2005, 2007, 2008).

FCDA works at the interface of critical discourse studies and feminist studies. Within the frame of FCDA, gender is not approached as an isolated phenomenon. Rather, it is envisaged as a link among identity, sexuality, ideology, and social class. It is mainly concerned with the reproduction, negotiation, and contestation of gender-based ideologies and power relations in discourse. It “critiques from a feminist perspective hierarchically ordered gender structures sustained in/through language and other forms of communication” (Lazar, 2008).

Furthermore, it examines how gendered assumptions are discursively produced, reproduced, and challenged. It addresses discourses that privilege men as a social group to sustain a patriarchal social order (Lazar, 2005) where women are marginalized, segregated, and disempowered. Lazar (2005) avers that by rendering such gender ideologies transparent, they would be socially contested and resisted.

As mentioned in section (3.1), proverbs are employed to communicate meanings and beliefs that cannot be voiced directly since each discourse has its hidden agenda. Therefore, FCDA fits the main objective of this study, as it can reveal both explicit and implicit hegemonic ideologies espoused in proverbs.

4. Methodology

4.1. Data

The Arabic and English proverbs used in the present study are culled from published books and encyclopedias. On the one hand, Egyptian Arabic proverbs are collected from Mawsūʿat Al-ʾAmṯāl Al-Šaʿbīyah Al-Miṣrīyah wa Al-Taʿbīrāt Al-Sāʾirah (Encyclopedia of Egyptian Colloquial Proverbs and Dictums; Šaʿlān, 2003). This five-volume encyclopedia has been particularly selected as all the included proverbs are collected from almost all previously published sources of Egyptian proverbs, including books, anthologies, newspapers, periodicals, books, and manuscripts. Also, all proverbs are thematically categorized (e.g., money, family, love, etc.). On the other hand, American English proverbs are collected from American Proverbs about Women (Kerschen, 2012) and Never Marry a Woman with Big Feet: Women in Proverbs from Around the World (Schipper, 2004). These two books offer an encyclopedia on women-related proverbs in American English. Kerschen (2012) classifies American proverbs about women into clusters about their nature, roles, and qualities. Schipper (2004) clusters proverbs into five groups: the female body, phases of life, basics of life, female power, and messages of metaphors. These Arabic and English sources of proverbs offer detailed spatiotemporal information (place and time) on the actual context marking their use.

To avoid overgeneralized representations, the present study does not target general proverbs about women (i.e., WOMAN or WOMEN do not appear as keywords) since, for instance, mothers and wives are not assumed to be represented similarly. Therefore, the data is confined to explicit proverbs about women’s specific social role as a “wife.” The rationale for selecting the social actor “wife” is twofold. On a qualitative level, as explained above (Section 4), there are potentials for the gendered representations underlying the use of “wife.” Such representations stem from a socio-culturally given social contract whereby “wife” is typically subjugated to other social actors such as “husband” and “man”/“men.” Also, on a quantitative level, the gender term “wife” has had top frequency in the two data sets of Egyptian Arabic (35 occurrences) and American English (114 occurrences); this may prove the thematic saliency of “wife” as a prestigious sign in the proverbial discourse of both Egyptians and Americans.

In addition to the above qualitative-quantitative parameter for selecting “wife,” there is another parameter for selecting the proverbs themselves for analysis. They should be culturally significant; all of them should have a gender component represented by explicit lexemes showing social roles and kinship terms used as keywords. Proverbs that are not motivated by gendered ideologies are discarded (e.g., الراجل ومراته زي القبر وزمامه Ir-ragil wi-mirātuh zai il-ʾabr wi zimāmuh—A husband and his wife are like the grave and its affairs). Yet, if a proverb includes more than a social role or a kinship term, it will be considered relevant to the scope of our analysis accordingly. Based on these parameters, the final data is subdivided into two sets of proverbs on the social actor’ wife,’ namely, an Egyptian-Arabic corpus set consisting of 35 proverbs and an American-English corpus of 114 proverbs.

As displayed in Table 1, both corpora share seven clusters of proverbs, including (1) Mother, (2) Wife, (3) Daughter, (4) Mother-In-Law, (5) Daughter-In-Law, (6) Step-Mother, And (7) Sister. Since the present study seeks a cross-cultural analysis of the gendered representations underlying the term “wife” in Egyptian Arabic and American English proverbs, data analysis will be confined to examining such wife-bound representations.

4.2. Procedure

The present study adopts a quantitative-qualitative method for investigating how the social actor “wife” is represented across Egyptian Arabic and American English proverbs. The data analysis relies on insights from FCDA and CMT. The procedure of the current study methodically operates in three stages. Firstly, both corpora will be initially investigated to calculate the frequency of proverbs associated with each of the gender term “wife” shown in Table 1, and then the term’s key themes, as covered in each corpus, will be explained and compared. Secondly, a feminist critical discourse analysis approach will be adopted to reveal the ideologies associated with “wife” in Egyptian and American cultures.

Representative proverbial examples of “wife” from both corpora will be offered and discussed. Dynamic equivalents for the Arabic proverbs (if any) will be provided. Otherwise, communicative translations will be provided. Also, Egyptian Arabic proverbs will be given in (colloquial Egyptian) Arabic and then transliterated using Brill’s simple Arabic transliteration system (Rietbroek, 2010; cf. Table A1). Thirdly, how wife-specific gendered ideologies are mentally represented in the proverbs producers’ minds will be examined by exploring the source domains projected via mappings with the target domains represented by the output clusters of wife’s social roles and kinship terms, thereby comprehending the cognitive basis of these proverbs. These source domains will be compared and contrasted to highlight positive, negative, and neutral representations.

5. Data analysis

Let us begin our analysis by offering a general view of the social roles assigned to the generic term “women” and its related social actors in the present data sets. Both corpora show that the Egyptian and American cultures acknowledge specific social roles for women. The Arabic corpus shows ten clusters of women-related social roles, while the English corpus shows eight. The mutual clusters are (1) Mother, (2) Wife, (3) Daughter, (4) Mother-In-Law, (5) Daughter-In-Law, (6) Step-Mother, And (7) Sister. The cluster of Co-Wife is only covered in the Arabic corpus, as Islamic teachings allow polygamy, while Christian teachings prohibit having a co-wife.

Also, the Egyptian culture supports extended families allowing brothers to share the same house with their wives, so sisters-in-law are often in contact. Even if brothers have separate houses, they regularly gather in their parents’ houses. Conversely, the American culture supports having separate houses for most family members. This may justify the absence of proverbs under the cluster of Sister-In-Law in the English corpus. Moreover, the cluster of Aunt does not appear in the English corpus. Though grandmothers have a special position in the Egyptian family, no proverbs addressed them. We may argue here that this might be ascribed to their highly-esteemed position, and therefore no gender components are associated with them. Table 2 below shows the frequency of the seven mutual clusters of proverbs in the Arabic and English corpora.

Table 2. Frequency of mutual clusters of women-related proverbs in the Arabic and English corpora

Cluster	Arabic corpus		English corpus
	Frequency	%	Frequency	%
Wife	35	29.91%	114	66.27%
Daughter	34	29.05%	19	11.04%
Mother	19	16.23%	23	13.37%
Mother-In-Law	16	13.67%	9	5.23%
Daughter-In-Law	3	2.56%	4	2.32%
Step-Mother	3	2.56%	2	1.16%
Sister	7	5.98%	1	0.58%
Total	117	100%	172	100%

Now, let us focus on the social actor “wife” as the focus of the present analysis. While the Arabic corpus has around 35 (29.91%) proverbs covering diverse themes about wives, the English corpus has 114 (66.27%) proverbs. In colloquial Egyptian Arabic proverbs, wife is referred to as المره’ il-marah’, وليه’ wilīyah,’ or المتجوزة’ il-mitgawizah.’ A good wife is described as بنت الأصول “bint il-ʾuṣūl” (cf. خد بنتالأصول مع الزمن تدور Ḫud bint il-ʾuṣūl maʿa az-zaman tidūr—Marry a highbred wife who bears life hardships) and “bint il-ḥarāyir” (cf. بناتالحراير دخاير Banāt il-ḥarāyer daḫāyir—Highborn wives are savings). A bad wife is described as بنت الهفاية “bint il-hifāyah” (cf. ما تشربش الصفاية ولا تاخد بنتالهفاية Mātišrabš iṣ-ṣifāyah wa-lā taḫud bint il-hifāyah [Don’t drink settlings, nor marry an ill-bred wife]). Similarly, in the American culture, marriage is seen as a matter of luck, and the wife is viewed as her husband’s best or worst fortune (e.g., A good wife and health are a man’s best wealth). Egyptian wives are suppressed and silenced by their husbands. Consider the following proverbs.

• (1) إن كان المره لها كانون فى البيت هده

In kān il-marah lihā kānūn fy il-bīt hiduh (If your wife has a clay-made stove in the house, destroy it)

• (2) إن كان لسان المره جهر اقطعه

In kān lisān il-marahǧahar iʾtaʿuh (If your wife’s voice becomes mannishly loud, make her dumb)

In proverb 1, husbands are recommended not to make their wives independent just to keep them subservient. Such a form of independence is motivated by having a source of power represented by الكانون “il-kānūn” (a clay-made stove) that is a marked cultural indicator of the rural regions in Egypt. Further to this, the clay-made stove is viewed as a substantial sign of sharing money and also as a source of power for the wife to have control over her husband. In destroying a clay-made stove, a husband will not be indebted for his wife. Proverb 2 urges husbands to silence their wives by symbolically cutting their tongues. However, suppressing wives is not fully supported in American culture. Although cutting a wife’s tongue is used figuratively to secure that she does not talk nor discuss any issues with her husband, physical aggression against wives is recommended (e.g., Wring a wife’s and a hen’s neck, if you want them good). Moreover, dogs are regarded as more sensitive than wives, and therefore a relentless husband who “kicks” a dog would “beat” his wife (e.g., A man who kicks his dog will beat his wife). If a woman is married to a young man, she is explicitly represented as a “slave” for a young husband (e.g., A wife is a young man’s slave and an old man’s darling). Unlike the Egyptian corpus, most of the American proverbs motivate wives to control the house (e.g., The husband is the head of the house, but the wife is the neck—and the neck moves the head) and her husband (e.g., The cunning wife makes her husband her apron). But, one proverb considers husbands accepting their wives’ mastery as fools (e.g., When a man’s a fool, his wife will rule).

• (3) اللي يسكت وميسألش المره ليه؟ رحمة الله عليه

Ili yuskut wi maiyʾulš li-mirātuh līh? raḥmatu Allah ʿalīh (A husband who remains silent and does not ask his wife why he is no longer a man)

In proverb 3, husbands should always follow-up their wives, who might be disloyal. If not censored, wives might negatively compare their husbands to other men. Still, one solution for a disloyal wife is to grant her much freedom (e.g., المره الخاينة إديلها المفاتيح Il-marah il-ḫaiynah idilhā il-mafātīḥ—A faithless wife should be given the house keys). Conversely, the American culture stigmatizes wives as it regards their disloyalty as the norm, especially when the husband is outside the house (e.g., When the husband’s away, the wife will play), thereby causing the downfall of the family (e.g., A faithless wife is the shipwreck of the home). Only old wives, like old dogs that are common constituents of American families, are faithful (e.g., There are three faithful friends—an old wife, an old dog, and ready money). Contrarily, husbands are generally faithful, and their faithfulness is their wives’ responsibility (e.g., A kind wife makes a faithful husband).

• (4) بوس مراتك فى الفرشة ولا تبوسهاش فى الجلسة

Būs rās mirātak fy il-faršah wa-lā tibushāš fy il-ǧalsah (Kiss your wife’s head in bed, but never in public)

• (5) ابنك على ما تربيه ومراتك على ما تعودها

Ibnak ʿala mā trabīh wi-mirātakʿala mā tiʿawdha (Your son copies your model just as your wife follows your lifestyle)

In proverb 4, a true Egyptian husband does not express his feelings toward his wife publicly. Conversely, American husbands are recommended to always praise their wives (e.g., The man who never praises his wife deserves to have a poor one). To avoid any mismatch between husbands and wives, proverb (5) invites husbands to get their wives accustomed to their lifestyle as they do with their kids. Equated to kids, wives are represented as intellectually inferior to their husbands. Accordingly, Egyptian wives should not be consulted as their bits or pieces of advice seldom lead to success (e.g., اللي يسمع كلام مراته تكتر نكباته Illy yismaʿ kalām mirātuh tiktar nakbātuh -Husbands who listen to their wives will always suffer). Perhaps, in this way, wives are used as scapegoats to justify men’s failures. In fact, proverb 5 has the same structure of another proverb calling upon wives to get their husbands accustomed to their lifestyle, ابنك على ماتربيه وجوزك على ماتعوديه Ibnak ʿala mā trabīh wi-ǧuzik ʿala mā tiʿawdiha (Your son copies your model just as your husband follows your lifestyle). This juxtaposition highlights the clashing societal views on who should be responsible for the family. Conversely, husbands of American wives are recommended to consult them (e.g., A man must ask his wife to thrive). In return, bad wives do not accept their husbands’ advice (e.g., A no-accountwife takes advice from everyone but her husband). Another proverb regards American wives as fools (e.g., He who wishes to chastise a fool gets a wife).

The Arabic corpus confirms that Egyptian women, be they married or unmarried, are emotionally unstable and always complain (e.g., جت العزبة تشتكي لقت المتجوزة بتبكي Gāt il-ʿāzbah tišky laʾat il-mitgauwizah bi-tibky—A single woman came to a married woman to complain; she found her crying). Furthermore, relying on the source domain of WAR, wives are negatively represented as inborn enemies (e.g., صديقك الكلب وكتام أسرارك الحمار وعدوتك مراتك وإن الملح دَوّد البغلة تولد Ṣadīʾak il-kalb wa-kattām asrārak il-ḥumār wi-ʿaduwitak mirātak wi-ʾin il-malḥ dawid il-baġlah tiwlid [The dog is your friend; the donkey is the keeper of your secrets; your wife is your enemy. If salt catches worms, a female mule may foal]). That is, while dogs and donkeys might be good friends and secret keepers, respectively, women cannot behave as such. American proverbs regard husbands disclosing everything to their wives as inexperienced (e.g., He that tells his wife news is but newly married). Furthermore, based on the frame of the snakes and ladders game that is common in the American culture, one proverb represents having a wife as moving down the ladder while having a friend as going up (e.g., Go down the ladder when you choose a wife; go up when you choose a friend).

Furthermore, in case of a husband’s death, old Egyptian wives would be sad, i.e., a young wife might seek another husband (e.g., المره ما تحزن على جوزها إلا إذا كان فرط فيه الفرط Il-marah mā tiḥzan ʿala guzhā ʾilā ʾizā kān farraṭ fīhā il-farṭ [A wife never feels sad for her ceased husband except if she is old]). In the American culture, wives who joy after their husband’s death are bad wives (e.g., A bad wife likes to see her husband’s heels turned to the door). However, in both corpora, in case of a wife’s death, husbands would lead a happy life as in بعد ما ماتت مراته أحمرت مخداته’ Baʿd mā mātit mīrātuh iḥmarat maḫadātuh’ (After his wife passed away, his pillows turned red) and “Two good days for a man in his life: when he weds, and when he buries his wife.” Losing a wife—especially a nagging wife (e.g., It’s a sweet sorrow to bury a nagging wife)—is as much welcomed as having a mare foaling (e.g., When the wife dies and the mare foals, prosperity begins). It is noteworthy that breeding foals are a common practice in American culture. Conversely, to some Egyptian husbands, a wife’s death is a disaster, especially if she is obedient (e.g., موت المره اللي مش موافقة مصيبة إيش حال الموافقة Mūt il-marah illy miš muwafʾah muṣībah iš ḥāl il-muwāfʾah—A nagging wife’s death is a disaster. What about an obedient wife?).

Though it is scientifically confirmed that men’s chromosomes identify the sex of the baby, the Arabic corpus holds women responsible for giving birth to girls (أم البنات ʾum il-banāt and مخلفة البنات miḫalifah il-banāt). Giving birth to girls is socio-culturally unwelcomed as they are perceived as هم للممات’ ham lil-mamāt’ (a burden to death), especially for mothers (e.g., أمالبنات شايلة الهم للممات ʾUm il-banāt šaiylah al-ham lil-mamāt—Girl’s mothers will be distressed until death(. Furthermore, Egyptians believe that a motherless person is dejected (اللى من غير أم حاله يغم illy min ġair ʾum ḥaluh yi-ġum) as mothers shoulder the responsibility of all family members, especially her children. Conversely, American mothers feel happy as they care for their daughters even after they get married (e.g., A daughter is a daughter all the days of her life, but a son is a son until he gets him a wife) as they become weaker in her husband’s house (e.g., A diamond daughter turns to glass as a wife).

In the Arabic corpus, good wives belonging to good families are regarded as savings (daḫāyir) that would help husbands in hard times (e.g., بناتالحراير دخاير Banāt il-ḥarāyer daḫāyir [Highborn wives are savings]). Therefore, a wife belonging to a notorious family is not recommended (e.g., ما تشربش الصفاية ولا تاخد بنتالهفاية Mā tišrabš iṣ-ṣifāyah wa-lā taḫud bint il-hifāyah—Don’t drink settings, and don’t marry an ill-bred wife); but, if a husband decides to marry her, he should avoid her family (e.g., خد بنتالندل وخاصمه Ḫud bint an-nadl wi-ḫāṣmuh [Marry a villain’s daughter and then regard him as an adverse]). Hence, wives are judged in terms of their families rather than their personal qualities. Still, some Arabic proverbs represent wives positively as a resource of emotional support and security. Consider the following proverbs.

• (6) إذا كان الراجل بحر تكون المره جسر

ʾIzā kān ir-rāgil baḥr tikūn il-marahǧisr (If a husband is a sea, a wife is a bridge)

• (7) اللي ملوش مره ميسواش مره

Illy malūš marah mā yiswāš marah (A wifeless man is not equal to a woman)

• (8) مراتي دفايا وغطايا

Mirāty dafāyā wi-ġaṭāyā (My wife is my shelter)

• (9) بلدك فين يا جحا؟ اللي فيهامراتي

Baladak fīn ya-ǧuḥā? ʾāl illy fīhā mirāty (Where are you from Juha? From my wife’s town)

In proverb 6, based on the source domain of NATURE, a wife is metaphorized as a bridge that leads to safety in her husband’s troubled life, which is metaphorized as a sea. Though proverb 7 seems to favor wives, it denigrates them. That is, a husband without a wife is inferior to a woman. While proverb 8 represents a wife as a source of warmth, proverb 9 represents her as the homeland of her husband.

Furthermore, the Arabic corpus affirms that happy marriage relies on mutual love. Based on the source domains of NATURE and HEAVEN, happy marriage is metaphorized as having a sunny day (e.g., اللي جوزها يحبها الشمس تطلعلها Illy ǧuzhā yiḥibhā iš-šams tiṭlaʿlahā [She whose husband loves her, the sun will rise for her]) and a paradise (e.g., إن حبتك البنتوأمها لك الجنة كلها ʾIn ḥabatak il-bint wi-ʾumahā lak il-ǧanah kulahā [If your wife and her mother love you, you will live in paradise]). Families should support the husband’s and wife’s independence to sustain this happy life. Having an independent life is spatially metaphorized as a small wringing room (il-maʿṣarah) only accommodating husband and wife (e.g., إن كانت الأودة أد المعصرة ماتسعش غير الراجل والمره ʾIn kānit il-ʾuḍah ʾad il-maʿṣarah ma tasaʿš ġair ir-raǧil wi-il-marah—If the room is just like a wringing room, it only accommodates a husband and a wife).

In the American corpus, lenience is the basis of happy life between husbands and wives who should forgive the blemishes of one another (e.g., A deaf husband and a blind wife are always a happy couple). Approaching the notions of mutual forgiveness through the source domains of DEAFNESS and BLINDNESS implies that wives are always complaining and husbands’ actions are not always satisfying. Forgiving one another’s faults will support compatibility (e.g., A warm-back husband and a cold-footwife should easily lead a compatible life). Also, based on the source domain of ANIMALS, respect is highlighted as a basis of communication between a husband and a wife (e.g., If you make your wife an ass, she will make you an ox). Husbands are responsible for keeping such balance (e.g., If the wife sins, the husband is equally guilty). Otherwise, clashes among them would remain (e.g., Give your wife the short knife, keep the long one yourself); still, the upper hand would be to the husband.

Like the Arabic corpus, the English corpus represents wives as the basis of homes (e.g., Where there is no wife, there is no home) as she cares for her husband and compensates for any fault in his personality (e.g., A man without a wife is but half a man). Even if a husband is wealthy, his life without a wife would be meaningless (e.g., A good wife and health are a man’s best wealth). Equally important, American proverbs are much concerned with the qualities of good and bad wives. Consider the following instances:

• (10) Three things are as rare as gold: a good melon, a good friend, and a good wife.

• (11) There is one good wife in the country, and every man thinks he hath her.

• (12) He that has a good wife has an angel by his side; he that has a bad one has a devil at hiselbow.

• (13) Who has a bad wife has purgatory for a neighbor.

• (14) A true wife is her husband’s better half/a flower of beauty/heart’s treasure

Proverbs 10 to 11 affirm that it is hard to have a good wife. Proverb 14 regards a good wife as rare as a good melon and a good friend. The same idea is affirmed in proverb 15, as each man thinks that his wife is the best, while other wives are not. Bad wives are like devils (see proverb 12), and hence they would offend their husbands and neighbors (see proverb 13). The lexical item “purgatory” has Catholic Christian associations, as it recalls where dead people suffer their sins before they go to heaven. Another proverb affirms that wives, in general, render life an inescapable hell (e.g., If you take a wife from hell, she will bring you back). However, a good wife saves her husband from hell (e.g., When a man takes a wife, he ceases to dread hell). Proverb 14 holds that a true wife is her husband’s beauty and heart treasure. God supports husbands who have angelic wives who—if lost—much of God’s graces will vanish (e.g., A good wife lost is God’s gift lost).

Moreover, based on the source domain of INDUSTRY, good husbands are perceived as the creations of good wives (e.g., A good wife is the workmanship of a good husband) and vice versa (e.g., Good wives and good plantations are made by good husbands). Additionally, a good wife is stereotypically represented as a “lady” in a living room, a “cook” in the kitchen, and a “whore” in bed (e.g., A wife should be a lady in the parlor, a mother in the kitchen, and a whore in bed). It is noteworthy that the Arabic corpus never represented wives as sex objects due to the generally conservative ideologies marking the Egyptian culture.

Unlike the Arabic corpus, some proverbs in the English corpus are more concerned with wives’ physical beauty and their personality features. Consider the following instances:

(15) A hairy man’s rich. A hairy wife’s a witch.

(16) If you marry a beautiful wife, you marry trouble.

(17) If you want to know a bad husband, look at his wife’s countenance.

(18) Choose a wife on a Saturday rather than on a Sunday.

(19) The blind man’s wife needs no make-up.

Proverb 15 denigrates hairy wives, describing them as witches, and favors hairy husbands. In proverb 16, a beautiful wife is a curse that brings trouble to her husband. Proverb 17 holds that a husband’s ill-treatment affects his wife’s beauty. Yet, wives’ beauty might be unreal and deceptive, and therefore, in Proverb 18, husbands are advised not to choose wives on Sundays when women are well-dressed before going to church. Proverb 19 affirms that wives use make-up only to amuse their husbands rather than themselves. Therefore, wives whose husbands do not care for their wives do not need to wear make-up. Also, wives who are always occupied with their beauty are not skillful in doing housework (e.g., The wife who loves the looking glass hates the saucepan). Therefore, their house would always be messy and unclean (e.g., When the housewife is a slattern, the cat is a glutton). Furthermore, pretty wives are stereotyped as so thriftless they cause their husbands to be poor (e.g., A nice wife and a back door oft do make a rich man poor). Therefore, wives are advised to be good planners (e.g., Wife, make thine own candles, spare penny to handle).

6. Findings and conclusion

The analysis of proverbs showed a discrepancy in the frequency of proverbs in each of the clusters of women-related proverbs in both Arabic and English corpora. In both corpora, the most frequent proverbs fall under the cluster of Wife. This affirms the social weight of wives in the Egyptian and American cultures, as women spend most of their lives as wives. In the Arabic corpus, the least frequent proverbs fall under the clusters of Step-Mother and Daughter-In-Law since their relationship with other family members is generally limited. However, in the English corpus, the least frequent proverbs fall under the cluster of Sister due to the lack of the concept of extended family in American culture. Furthermore, the analysis showed that there are notable differences in the representations of women regarding their social roles in Egyptian and American cultures.

Synergizing FCDA and CMT proved to be empirically successful in revealing the representations of women in Egyptian and American proverbs. Based on the propositional meaning and the marked context in which each proverb is used, Table 3 below shows the frequency of positive, negative, and neutral representations of women distributed over the clusters of social roles marking them in both corpora.

Table 3. Frequency of positive (+), negative (-), and neutral (±) representations of women in the Arabic and English corpora

Cluster		Arabic corpus				English corpus
		Frequency	+	-	±	Frequency	+	-	±
1	Wife	35	12	23	0	114	46	57	11
2	Daughter	34	12	22	0	19	9	7	3
3	Mother	19	11	2	6	23	13	6	4
4	Mother-in-law	16	4	12	0	9	0	8	1
5	Daughter-in-law	3	0	3	0	4	1	0	3
6	Step-mother	3	0	3	0	2	0	2	0
7	Sister	7	2	5	0	1	0	1	0
Total		117	41	70	6	172	69	81	22

The proverbs that propagate neutral representations are context-based, i.e., they may have positive or negative associations based on the context, e.g., اكفي القدرة على فمها تطلع البنت لأمها Ikfy il-ʾidrah ʿala fumahā tiṭlaʿ il-bint lumahā (Like mother, like daughter). Furthermore, proverbs classified as neutral might include a description of two contrastive states (e.g., He that has a good wife has an angel by his side; he that has a bad one has a devil at his elbow), or are simply descriptive (e.g., When the husband earns well, the wife spends well).

Many of the cultural signs in the Arabic corpus, including clay-made stoves, donkeys, mules, clay-made drinking vessels, etc., show that most of the proverbs are created and used in the rural, rather than urban, regions in Egypt. In general, both corpora represent wives, mothers-in-law, step-mothers, and sisters negatively. All in all, comparing the total number of positive, negative, and neutral proverbs in both corpora, it becomes clear that the Egyptian Arabic corpus is more negative about “wife” as far as the representations of the mentioned clusters are considered.

Unlike the Arabic corpus, the English corpus relies on the positive source domains of FOOTWEAR (e.g., A bad wife likes to see her husband’s heels turned to the door), DEAFNESS AND BLINDNESS (e.g., A deaf husband and a blind wife are always a happy couple), INDUSTRY (e.g., A good wife is the workmanship of a good husband), WEALTH (e.g., A good wife and health are man’s best wealth), HUMAN BODY (e.g., Husband and wife are one flesh), CUTLERY (e.g., A man without a wife is like a fork without a knife), BUILDING (e.g., Where there is no wife there is no home), and PLANTS (e.g., A true wife is her husband’s flower of beauty).

Unlike the English corpus, the Arabic corpus relies on particular source domains that support the wife’s negative representations, BUILDING (e.g., إن المره لها كانون فى البيت هده ʾIn kān il-marah lihā kānūn fy il-bīt hiduh—If your wife has a clay-made stove in the house, destroy it), COLOUR (e.g., بعد ما ماتت مراته احمرت مخداته Baʿd mā mātit mīrātuh ʾiḥmarat maḫadātuh—After his wife passed away, his pillows turned red), CRISIS (e.g., اللي يسمع كلام مراته تكتر نكباته Illy yismaʿ kalām mirātuh tiktar nakbātuh—Husbands who listen to their wives will always suffer), ENEMY (e.g., صديقك الكلب وكتام أسرارك الحماروعدوتك مراتك, وإن الملح دَوّد البغلة تولد Ṣadīʾak il-kalb wa-kattām asrārak il-ḥumār wi ʿaduwitak mirātak wi-ʾin il-malḥ dawid il-baġlah tiwlid—The dog is your friend; the donkey is the keeper of your secrets; your wife is your enemy. If salt catches worms, a female mule may foal), BURDEN (e.g., أم البنات شايلة الهم للممات ʾUm il-banāt šaiylah il-ham lil-mamāt—Girl’s mothers will be distressed until death), FOOD (e.g., ماتشربش الصفاية ولا تاخد بنت الهفاية Mā tišrabš iṣ-ṣifāyah wa-lā taḫud bint il-hifāyah—Don’t drink settings, nor marry an ill-bred wife), GHOSTS (e.g., البنات تحتهم عفاريت Il-banāt taḥtihum ʿafārīt—Daughters are surrounded by ghosts), and COVER (e.g., جواز البنات سترة Ǧawāz il-banāt sutrah—Girls’ marriage is a shelter).

Maintaining the same negative representations of “wife,” the English corpus, unlike the Arabic corpus, relies on the source domains of CLOTHES (e.g., The cunning wife makes her husband her (an) apron), PROPERTY (e.g., Generally when a man feels the need of economy he thinks it ought, to begin with, his wife), WAR (e.g., Give your wife the short knife, keep the long one yourself), DEVIL (e.g., He that has a bad one has a devil at his elbow), HOUSEWARES (e.g., The wife who loves the looking-glass hates the saucepan), GAME (e.g., Go down the ladder when you choose a wife; go up when you choose a friend), NATURE (e.g., Mother-in-law and daughter-in-law are a tempest and a hailstorm), MATERIALS (e.g., A diamond daughter turns to glass as a wife), and FURNITURE (e.g., A father to his desk, a mother to her dishes).

In conclusion, most of the proverbs in both corpora represent the social actor “wife” as belonging to a socially inferior and non-dominant group with less power and lower social status. The sources mentioned above are employed to manipulate the public mind regarding the socially acceptable position of women. It can be argued that negative representations are manifested through various discursive strategies, including marginalization, stigmatization, pejoration, hegemonization, moralization, stereotypification, and scapegoating. Though in modern Egyptian and American societies, women in general, and wives in particular, have already gained much of their freedom and empowerment, proverbs are still circulated, and related ideologies might be rekindled or reinvented. Women could construct and negotiate their identities by highlighting the ideologies underlying the negative gendered representations of wives in Egyptian and American cultures. Therefore, gender relations could be socio-culturally restructured.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The author received no direct funding for this research.

Notes on contributors

Waheed M. A Altohami

Waheed M. A Altohami is currently an assistant professor of linguistics in the Department of English, College of Science and Humanities in Al-Kharj, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia. I am a standing lecturer of linguistics and English language in the Faculty of Education, Mansoura University, Egypt. In 2015, He got PhD in linguistics from Egypt. Since then, he has published in international journals like Studies About Languages, Journal of English Language and Linguistics, International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and its Applications, Educational Research International, and World Journal of English Language. My research interests are general linguistics, cognitive linguistics, critical discourse analysis, and translation.

Appendix

Table A1. Brill’s simple Arabic transliteration system (Rietbroek, 2010) with phonetic description

1. Consonants
Arabic letter	Transliteration symbol	Phonetic description
ء	ʾ	voiceless glottal stop
ب	b	voiced bilabial stop
ت	t	voiceless dental stop
ث	ṯ	voiceless dental fricative
ج	ǧ	voiced post-alveolar fricative
ح	ḥ	voiceless pharyngeal fricative
خ	ḫ	voiceless uvular fricative
د	d	voiced dental stop
ذ	ḏ	voiced dental fricative
ر	r	voiced alveolar trill
ز	z	voiced dental fricative
س	s	voiceless dental fricative
ش	š	voiceless palatal fricative
ص	ṣ	voiceless (emphatic) dental fricative
ض	ḍ	voiced (emphatic) dental stop
ط	ṭ	voiceless (emphatic) dental stop
ظ	ẓ	voiced (emphatic) dental fricative
ع	ʿ	voiced pharyngeal fricative
غ	ġ	voiced velar fricative
ف	f	voiceless labiodentals fricative
ق	q	voiceless uvular stop
ك	k	voiceless velar stop
ل	l	voiced alveolar lateral
م	m	voiced bilabial nasal
ن	n	voiced alveolar nasal
هـ	h	voiceless glottal fricative
و	w	voiced bilabial glide
ي	y	voiced palatal glide
2. Vowels
Arabic symbol	Transliteration symbol	Phonetic description
ى	á	front-open long slightly rounded vowel
-ُ	u	half-close back short rounded vowel
-ِ	i	close-front short unrounded vowel
-َ	a	half-front open short unrounded vowel
-ُو	ū	close-back long rounded vowel
ـِي	ī	close-front long unrounded vowel
ـَا	ā	back-open long unrounded vowel