The simile and metaphor in translation of Yemeni spoken Arabic common names of animals and supernatural creatures into English: A socio-pragmatic approach

Abstract

This study examines the sociopragmatics of animal and supernatural creatures’ names in Yemeni Arabic (YA) and their translation into English. The study aims to identify the most effective English translations of these metaphors by sending a questionnaire to 43 native English speakers (NESs), focusing on Target Language metaphors and similes (TL) and using Abdul-Raof’s (2006) framework to classify similes. The findings indicate that YA dialects use animal and supernatural creatures’ names to convey meanings, feelings, and intents, while NESs preferred to use detailed similes that incorporate both feature and element. Unlike YA, which accepts all three types of metaphor and simile to address humans using animal and supernatural creatures’ names, most NESs rejected the metaphor, which lacks simile. These findings suggest that animal and supernatural creature names are translated differently in the two languages and cultures, highlighting potential differences in cultural aspects. Generally, this study contributes to our understanding of the sociopragmatics of language use in different cultures and their impact on cross-cultural communication. The findings suggest the need for further research into the translation of animal and supernatural creatures’ names in different languages and cultures.

Keywords:

• Animal Names
• figurative Language
• metaphor
• simile
• supernatural Creatures
• translation
• Yemeni Arabic

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

This study uses the sociopragmatic approach to investigate how cultural norms, linguistic features, and sociocultural contexts impact the use and translation of metaphors and similes in different languages. The research focuses on animal and supernatural creature names in Yemeni Arabic and their translation into English, using Abdul-Raof’s framework to classify similes. By sending a questionnaire to 43 native English speakers, the study compares their responses with the linguistic and cultural norms of Yemeni Arabic. The findings highlight the importance of considering sociocultural factors when translating metaphors and similes, particularly those related to animal and supernatural creature names. This research contributes to cross-cultural communication and promotes cultural awareness and understanding between different linguistic and cultural communities.

1. Introduction

The use of animal and supernatural creature names in different cultures is accompanied by distinct projections, images, representations, and feelings that serve to characterize the related society’s norms. Consequently, the connotative meaning of a certain animal or supernatural creature name in one culture may strike as odd to someone from a different culture. This not only affects the comprehension of animal or supernatural word usage but also creates a significant difficulty in the terms’ capacity to be translated into other languages (Li, 2019). In spoken Arabic, animal and supernatural creature names are frequently used as figurative expressions to describe individuals, behaviors, or personalities by drawing parallels between those described and particular animals or supernatural creatures. These comparisons are used to convey opinions, admiration, hatred, or dispraise (Fadaee, 2011; Jalali, 2016). The use of animal and supernatural creature names in this way is not unique to Arabic culture, as other cultures also use them symbolically to transmit different meanings. For instance, in English, the pig is revolting, the chicken is cowardly, the snake is untrustworthy, and the cat is calm. However, certain animals and supernatural creatures are associated with specific characteristics in different cultures. For instance, the wolf represents boldness, the lion represents bravery, the elephant represents size, the fox represents cunning, the donkey represents stupidity, and the snake represents deceit in Arabic culture (Miri & Soori, 2015; Rashid et al., 2012).

In Arabic culture, animal and supernatural creature comparisons may take the form of a simile or metaphor. In a simile, the attribute and ingredient of the comparison are present, whereas, in a metaphor, these elements are not specified (Abdul-Raof, 2006; Gholami et al., 2016). For example, the sentence “Ahmed is a camel” is a metaphor, and the simile form would be “Ahmed is as patient as a camel.” Animal and supernatural creature metaphors are linked to culture and gender, and the choice of animal imagery is determined by cultural norms (Rodriguez, 2009). Thus, the positive or negative traits associated with an animal or supernatural creature name may vary across cultures. For instance, dogs are viewed positively in Western countries but negatively in Arab countries. Animal and supernatural creature metaphors also have cultural significance and may be used in various contexts, including personal names, proverbs, idioms, and folk tales (Dobrovol’skij & Piirainen, 2021; Nesi, 1995).

In Arabic culture, animal and supernatural creature names are highly valued, and some parents name their children after animals or supernatural creatures to show admiration for their virtues. Ancient Arab cultures were influenced by nature and the environment, and Middle Eastern culture respects animals and forbids baiting them for gambling or entertainment. Thus, animal names are used in common phrases that compare human traits to animals. For example, “keen as a camel” and “shrewd as a fox” are common similes in Arabic culture. The transfer of animal names to human names is meaningful in many cultures (Ringmar, 2016, p. 113). However, the interpretation of animal and supernatural creature names may vary across cultures, as certain expressions that are considered complimentary in one culture may be disrespectful in another culture (Al-Harahsheh & Al-Rousan, 2020).

From a translation perspective, the retention of similes and metaphors in animal and supernatural creature names may pose challenges. For example, when analyzing simile translation options in four Persian translations of Hamlet, Shamsaeefard et al. (2013) prefer literal translation to maximize source text (ST) faithfulness. According to Husni and Newman (2015), collocation translation requires recognition, comprehension, and reproduction. Abdelaal (2020) argues that collocations with figurative and connotative meanings may be more difficult to recognize and reproduce.

Based on the sociopragmatic approach, this research aims to fill a gap in knowledge by investigating how English speakers conceptualize and translate animal names used symbolically in Yemeni Arabic (YA) into English. Translation is not just about the exchange of words between languages, but also about understanding the cultural contexts in which they are used (Robins, 2020). Catford (1965) also recognized the importance of language contact in translation, describing it as a process by which languages come into contact.

This investigation seeks to identify the most effective method of translating animal names from YA to English and help English speakers interested in studying Arabic and translation studies bridge the gap between the two languages. The study aims to address two research questions: (1) How do native English speakers render animal and supernatural creature names derived from YA? (2) What is the most efficient strategy for rendering Arabic animal and supernatural creatures’ names into their English equivalents?

While limited research has been conducted on this subject, this study will provide valuable insights into the challenges faced by translators and language learners when translating culturally significant animal names. By exploring the symbolic meanings and cultural associations of animal names in YA, the study will shed light on the sociocultural factors that influence translation. Thus, this research will contribute to the fields of translation studies and Arabic language learning by providing a deeper understanding of the challenges involved in translating animal names between Arabic and English. It will also highlight the importance of considering cultural and symbolic factors when translating language.

2. Literature review

The use of simile and metaphor is a common feature of spoken Arabic, particularly in Yemeni dialects (Al-Amer et al., 2016). However, when these expressions are translated into English, they can present a challenge to translators due to differences in cultural references and idiomatic expressions (Munday, 2016). In this study, we will adopt a socio-pragmatic approach to analyze the translation of Yemeni spoken Arabic common names of animals and supernatural creatures into English, focusing on the use of simile and metaphor.

The socio-pragmatic approach emphasizes the importance of context in language use, and recognizes that language is not only a system of rules but also a means of social interaction (Verschueren, 1999). This approach is particularly useful when analyzing the translation of idiomatic expressions, as it allows us to take into account the cultural and social factors that shape their meaning and use.

In the translation of Yemeni spoken Arabic common names of animals and supernatural creatures into English, simile and metaphor play an important role in conveying meaning and nuance. For example, the Yemeni Arabic expression “Hayawanat al-Ard” (literally “animals of the earth”) is often used to refer to domesticated animals such as cows, sheep, and goats (Kövecses, 2010). However, when translated into English, this expression loses its cultural and social connotations, and may be misunderstood by non-Arabic speakers. To address this issue, translators may use simile and metaphor to convey the intended meaning, such as “four-legged creatures of the farm”. Another example is the Yemeni Arabic expression “Jinn al-Khayal” (literally “genies of imagination”), which refers to imaginary creatures such as ghosts and spirits (Al-Amer et al., 2016).When translated into English, this expression may be confusing to non-Arabic speakers who are not familiar with the cultural context. In this case, translators may use metaphor to convey the intended meaning, such as “phantoms of the mind” (Kövecses, 2010).

In this regard, Translation is not only a linguistic process, but it also involves deeper sensations expressed through language. Translating linguistic forms from one language into another might not provide a barrier for inexperienced translators. However, translating a sense from one language into another requires a profound knowledge of the languages, cultures, and conventions that support each language. The complexity of language, including constructs, phrases, and idioms that might be difficult to understand, even with the help of a dictionary, contributes to this difficulty. Previous studies have shown that many translation strategies have been employed when translating similes. Factors such as the availability of an equivalent in the target language (TL), fidelity to the source text (ST), and the ability to meet the requirements of the TL have been suggested as possible explanations for this phenomenon (Behnamnia, 2016; Jalali, 2016; Tsepeniuk, 2018; Zohdi & Saeedi, 2011).

One interesting subject of research in translation studies is the translation of animal names employed in different linguistic structures, such as proverbs, metaphors, and similes. The translation of animal terms might result in misunderstandings because these terms fulfill sociolinguistic and semantic roles that are drawn from distinct values, either positive or negative, in each civilization (Anjomshoa & Sadighi, 2015; Nakhavali, 2011). According to Liu (2019), the two most effective strategies for translating animal names are “domestication” and “foreignization.” The former tactic serves to acquaint the readers of the TL with the foreign text, while the latter emphasizes fidelity to the process of transporting the message. For example, the metaphor “that merchant is a hyena” might be best translated as “that merchant is as greedy as a hyena” or simply “that merchant is greedy,” in which case the animating aspect would be completely removed. Several studies have investigated the translation of animal names into different languages, including Hsieh (2006) in Mandarin Chinese and German, Halupka-Rešetar and Radić (2003), and Silaški (2013) in Serbian, Landau (2015) in English, and Nakhavali (2011) in English and Persian.

There have been a few studies that have looked at how animal names translate from English to Arabic and vice versa, such as Sameer (2016). Cultural variance affects translation, and cultural specificity influences translation decisions. The specificity of animal formulations in the source language presents a challenge when attempting to translate them into the target language. Husni and Newman (2015) used the English combination “patient owl” to show how cultural specificity influences translation decisions. The cultural and figurative meanings that are communicated by this structure will be lost if it is translated into another language in a manner that is linguistically accurate. For instance, in Western culture, the owl has a positive connotation, while in Arabic culture, it is the opposite.

Cultural variance also affects the use of animal names in figurative language. Rodríguez (2008) culturally explored how teenage and women’s magazines employ linguistic metaphors to describe women, including animal names. She divided women as animals into three categories: women as pets, such as bitches, cats, and kittens, women as farmyard animals, such as hens and chicks, and women as wild animals, such as foxes and vixens. Rashid et al. (2012) also studied farm animal analogies in Malay and Arabic figurative idioms, describing horses, cows, donkeys, and goats with positive and negative associations. Horses are associated with positive values in Arab society, such as loyalty and fast movement, while donkeys have both positive and negative associations. In negative connotations. They can represent stupidity or stubbornness, but also endurance and strength. Cows are usually associated with wealth and abundance, while goats are often seen as dirty and stubborn animals.

Understanding the cultural associations and meanings attached to animal names in a particular language is crucial when translating idioms, metaphors, and other figures of speech that involve them. As noted by Sameer (2016), translators must be aware of the different values and beliefs associated with animals in different cultures to avoid misunderstandings and inaccuracies in their translations. Moreover, as pointed out by Rodríguez (2008), the use of animal metaphors to describe human behavior can also perpetuate negative stereotypes and reinforce gender roles in society. In this way, the translation of animal names and their cultural associations is a complex task that requires a deep understanding of both the source and target languages and cultures. Various translation strategies can be employed depending on the context and purpose of the translation. However, translators must be careful not to perpetuate negative stereotypes or misunderstandings when translating figures of speech that involve animal names. Further research is needed to explore the translation of animal names and their cultural associations in other languages and cultures.

3. Methods

3.1. Hypothesis

This sociopragmatic study aims to explore how Native English speakers (NESs) translate animal and supernatural creature names from other languages. Specifically, the study examines whether NESs use metaphors and similes in translating such names and whether a detailed simile is a more effective translation strategy than a single simile.

The hypothesis of the study is that some animal and supernatural creature names used in young adult (YA) literature may not be translated literally into English. Instead, NESs may use metaphors and similes to render them in English. In such cases, the particles of simile (like or as) and the attribute of likeness are not presented. For instance, the name “Ahmed” might be translated as “a lion,” without the use of the simile particle or the attribute of resemblance. Similarly, a “single simile,” in which the simile particle is described but the attribute of resemblance is omitted, would not be effective in translating animal names. An example of this would be translating the name “Yasmin” as “a snake.” However, such translations may not only be inappropriate but also misleading. Thus, the study suggests that a detailed simile, which describes both the simile particle and the feature, could be a more effective translation strategy. For example, translating “Ahmed” as “having the bravery of a lion” would be a more accurate and effective translation.

To test these hypotheses, the study selected 43 NESs from the United Kingdom and Australia to fill out a questionnaire that included nine situations in which animal and supernatural creature names were mentioned. The findings of the study can shed light on how NESs perceive and translate animal and supernatural creature names and can inform translation strategies for YA literature

3.2. Data and research tool

Utilizing a sociopragmatic approach, the researchers in this study devised a nine-question questionnaire to collect data on the acceptability of translations for a corpus of supernatural creatures, including reptiles, mammals, cats, and dogs. The main objective of the questionnaire was to determine the stylistic representation of the translations, and it was designed with both quantitative and qualitative questions. Multiple-choice questions were used to generate quantitative data, while open-ended questions were utilized to gather qualitative results.

The survey was divided into nine sections, each focusing on one of the top nine animals or supernatural entities that are commonly discussed in daily conversations. To ensure dependability and to obtain an adequate number of responses, the questionnaire was made available online. The translations used in the survey were provided by the researchers who conducted the study, and were evaluated on a four-point scale, with responses ranging from completely acceptable to completely unacceptable.

In translating the three possible meanings, the researchers employed three different approaches: metaphor, single simile, and elaborate simile. Participants were given ample time to reflect on the translations and provide their feedback. Overall, the study aimed to explore the acceptability of translations for supernatural creatures and shed light on the stylistic representation of such translations. By employing a sociopragmatic approach, the researchers were able to gather valuable data on this important topic.

3.3. Participants

Adopting a sociopragmatic approach, this study examines the participation of 43 non-Arabic-speaking NESs aged 19 to 48 years old, comprising of 17 females and 26 males. The respondents were categorized based on their educational qualifications which comprised of 29 individuals holding a Bachelor’s degree in English Language and Literature, Political Sciences, Social Studies, Pharmacy, International Law, Theology, Chemistry, and Engineering. Additionally, nine respondents held a Master’s degree in Social Studies, Humanities, Law, or English, while two held a PhD in English. Moreover, 13 respondents had no degree.

This categorization of participants based on their academic qualifications is essential in highlighting the diversity of the sample and its potential impact on the findings of the study. By examining the educational background of the participants, the study can effectively investigate how academic qualifications may influence the language use of the participants. Thus, this sociopragmatic approach allows for a nuanced understanding of the study participants and the implications of their diverse educational qualifications on their language use.

3.4. Analysis procedures

On a scale of one to four, the translations were ranked as follows: totally acceptable, fairly acceptable, totally unacceptable, and fairly acceptable. The researchers were influenced by Abdul-Raof’s (2006) classification of different forms of similes. As a result, they separated the three possible translations into metaphor, single simile, and detailed simile categories. This framework, in particular, was created from the ground up with the sole intention of translating all simile types from Arabic into English. The participants were provided with a window of time during which they may offer their comments and suggestions.

According to the sociopragmatic approach, language use is shaped by social and cultural factors and communication is context-dependent (Blum-Kulka et al., 1989). In the realm of translation studies, the sociopragmatic approach has been used to examine how translations are evaluated by target language readers in various cultural contexts (House, 2006).

In a recent study, researchers used a sociopragmatic approach to evaluate the acceptability of Arabic to English simile translations (Mohammed, 2017). The translations were ranked on a scale of one to four, with the categories of totally acceptable, fairly acceptable, totally unacceptable, and fairly unacceptable. This evaluation process was informed by Abdul-Raof’s (2006) classification of different forms of similes, which allowed the researchers to separate the translations into three categories: metaphor, single simile, and detailed simile.

The framework used in this study was specifically designed to translate all types of similes from Arabic into English. The researchers aimed to evaluate the acceptability of the translations from the perspective of target language readers, considering the cultural and social context in which the translations would be read. This approach is in line with the sociopragmatic perspective, which emphasizes the importance of understanding the context in which communication occurs.

In order to gather feedback on the translations, the participants were given a window of time during which they could offer their comments and suggestions. This feedback was used to refine the translations and improve their acceptability to target language readers. This process highlights the importance of engaging with target language readers in the translation process, as their feedback can be invaluable in producing translations that are effective and culturally appropriate. Therefore, the sociopragmatic approach provides a valuable framework for evaluating translations and understanding the social and cultural factors that shape language use. By considering the context in which communication occurs and engaging with target language readers, translators can produce translations that are more effective and better suited to their intended audience.

4. Findings

This section presents the findings on translating Yemeni Spoken Arabic Names of Animals and Supernatural Creatures into English. Names include both natural and supernatural beings. This is Inspired by Abdul-Raof’s (2006) classification of similes, and the researchers categorized the three possible translations into metaphor, single simile, and detailed simile. Specifically, this framework is designed to translate all Arabic similes and metaphors into English.

4.1. The She-camel الناقة

She-camel is a desert-dwelling animal. It is patient and can survive without water because its hump holds water. Because of their patience and neck length, long-necked people are compared to she-camels. Bedouins and desert police ride the she-camel with male camels carrying hefty loads (camel brigades). Almuwayne (2008) called it the desert ship سفينة الصحراء. In sympathy, friends call a man with a long neck “the she-camel,” which he accepts. However, this man has a limit and complains about the القشة التي قصمت ظهر البعير “straw that broke the camel’s back” when he can no longer carry weight. English uses similar expressions. In the Arab World, the she-camel symbolizes humiliation because it turns into one. Arabs also say لا ناقَةَ له فيه ولا جَمَل [مثل]: لا شأن له فيه He has neither a camel nor a she-camel [proverb]: He has nothing to do with it (Almuwayne, 2008). The word “camel” refers to men in Arabic, even though “she-camel” is used for female camels. However, this animal (camel) is only native to Australia in English. English sayings and proverbs rarely utilize it. “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven” and “It is the last straw that breaks the camel’s back” are English examples.

The metaphor “He is a she-camel” was rejected by 32 of 43 participants. 26 respondents accepted the sole simile “He is like a she-camel,” whereas 17 rejected it. To clarify, 19 subjects thought it fairly acceptable, and 10 found it fairly unacceptable. Similarly, seven found it entirely acceptable, and seven totally unacceptable. The detailed simile “‘His neck is as long as a she-camel” was accepted by 32 responders. The animal-free phrase “‘His neck is long’” was accepted by 35 respondents. These statistics are in Table 1.

Table 1. (Un)acceptability of the Yemeni Spoken Arabic names of animals/supernatural creatures related renditions

Animals/Supernatural Creatures	The Simile and Metaphor	Rendering of Yemeni Spoken Arabic Names of Animals and supernatural creatures into English	(Un)Acceptability of the Yemeni Spoken Arabic Names of Animals/Supernatural Creatures Related Renditions
			Totally Acceptable		Faily Acceptable		Totally Unacceptable		Fairly Unacceptable		Total
			F	%	F	%	F	%	F	%
1. She-camel	Metaphor	He is a she-camel	5	11.6	6	13.9	22	51	10	23.2	43
	Single Simile	He is like a she-camel	7	16.2	19	44	7	16.2	10		43
	Detailed Simile	‘His neck is as long as she-camel.’	32	74.4	4	9.3	2	4.6	5	11.6	43
2. Cow	Metaphor	He is a cow	9	20.9	4	9.3	12	27.9	18	41.8	43
	Single Simile	He is like a cow	22	51	10	23.2	6	13.9	10	23.2	43
	Detailed Simile	He is as stupid and stubborn as a cow	25	58	11	25.5	5	11.6	2	4.6	43
3.Al Tays (The Goat)	Metaphor	He is a goat (Al Tays)	5	11.6	3	6.9	19	44	16	37.2	43
	Single Simile	He is like a goat (Al Tays)	14	32.5	12	27.9	4	9.3	13	30.2	43
	Detailed Simile	He is as stupid as a goat (Al Tays)	25	58	13	30.2	3	6.9	2	4.6	43
4. The Sheep/Lamb الخروف (Colloquial: الطلي Attali)	Metaphor	He is a lamb	7	16.2	5	11.6	19	44	12	27.9	43
	Single Simile	He is like a lamb	8	18.6	17	39.5	3	6.9	15	34.8	43
	Detailed Simile	He is as keen as a lamb	16	37.2	18	41.8	6	13.9	3	6.9	43
5. Al Asad (the Lion)	Metaphor	He is a lion	7	16.2	9	20.9	18	41.8	9	20.9	43
	Single Simile	He is like a lion	22	51.1	8	18.6	3	6.9	10	23.2	43
	Detailed Simile	He is as brave as a lion	21	48.8	19	44.1	1	2.3	2	4.6	43
6. Alsugbi الصعبي: Colloquial (The Donkey)	Metaphor	He is a suʕbi	16	37.2	4	9.3	17	39.5	6	13.9	43
	Single Simile	He is like a suʕbi	13	30.2	15	34.8	7	16.2	8	18.6	43
	Detailed Simile	He is as stupid as a suʕbi	23	53.4	12	27.9	3	6.9	5	11.6	43
7. Kalb (The Dog)	Metaphor	He is a Kalb (The Dog)	5	11.6	8	18.6	22	51.1	8	18.6	43
	Single Simile	He is like a Kalb (The Dog)	20	46.5	9	20.9	6	13.9	8	18.6	43
	Detailed Simile	He is as loyal as a Kalb (The Dog)	23	53.4	16	37.2	2	4.6	2	4.6	43
8. Ħaya (Snake)	Metaphor	She is a ħaya (snake)	6	13.9	8	18.6	18	41.8	11	25.5	43
	Single Simile	She is like a snake	13	30.2	8	18.6	5	11.6	17	39.5	43
	Detailed Simile	She is as cunning as a ħaya (snake)	20	46.5	16	37.2	4	9.3	3	6.9	43
9. Jinn (جنيʤeni: Colloquial)	Metaphor	He is a jinni	7	16.2	6	13.9	19	44.1	12	27.9	43
	Single Simile	He is like a jinni	14	32.5	15	34.8	9	20.9	5	11.6	43
	Detailed Simile	He is as powerful as jinn	19	44.1	17	39.5	4	9.3	3	6.9	43

Based on the sociopragmatic approach, the findings suggest that the translation of Yemeni Spoken Arabic common names of animals and supernatural creatures into English through similes and metaphors may pose challenges due to cultural differences and varying perspectives. The study reveals that some participants rejected the metaphor “He is a she-camel” as it may be considered insulting or offensive in English, while it is acceptable in Arabic culture. This highlights the importance of considering the social context and cultural norms when translating idiomatic expressions and figurative language. Moreover, the study shows that the sole simile “He is like a she-camel” was more widely accepted than the detailed simile “His neck is as long as a she-camel.” This implies that simpler and more straightforward translations may be preferred over complex and elaborated ones. However, it should be noted that the acceptability of the translations may vary depending on the specific audience and the context of use. Furthermore, the findings demonstrate that animals and their symbolic meanings may differ across cultures. While the she-camel is highly valued and respected in Arabic culture, it is not commonly used in English idiomatic expressions or proverbs. This highlights the need to understand the cultural significance and connotations of animal names and their associations in different languages and societies to avoid misinterpretations and miscommunications. It is to say that the sociopragmatic approach emphasizes the importance of considering the social and cultural context when translating idiomatic expressions and figurative language. The findings of this study suggest that simpler and more straightforward translations may be preferred over complex and elaborated ones, and cultural differences in the symbolism and connotations of animal names should be taken into account.

4.2. The cow البقرة

In Arabic, calling someone a cow is an insult. Cows and other animals are typically foolish and stubborn in Arabic culture (HM Helmy, 2018). It’s rude to call a weak student “a cow in his study” in Arabic (HM Helmy, 2018). Cows are also derogatory terms for obese women (This woman is a cow). It is rude to call hard-working folks “working cows or oxen,” even while they are positive. However, “do not have a cow” is used in English to calm down. In British English, “til the cow come home” refers to an unspecified period of time.

As the word implies, ox/bull refers to men only. In Arabic, an ox or bull is a male cow symbolizing folly, power, and stubbornness (Al Issawi, 2021). This animal belongs in an English-speaking country, nevertheless. English sayings and proverbs rarely utilize it. English examples “Someone who boasts or falsehoods constantly, generally to comedic effect” is a bullshit artist. Intentional or accidental.”

The metaphor “He is a cow” was completely acceptable to 9 responders and fairly acceptable to 4. 12 felt it totally unacceptable, and 18 found it fairly unacceptable. 32 accepted, and 11 rejected the single comparison “He is like a cow.” 36 and 41 accepted the detailed simile “He is as stubborn as a cow” and the animal-free paraphrase “He is foolish.” Only 7 people deemed the latter objectionable. Table 1 displays these verdicts.

From a sociopragmatic perspective, it is important to consider the cultural values and social norms that are associated with the use of animal names as metaphors and similes in both Arabic and English cultures. In Arabic culture, calling someone a cow is generally considered an insult as cows are perceived as foolish and stubborn. Similarly, calling a woman a cow can be seen as derogatory. However, in English, the phrase “do not have a cow” is used to calm someone down, and the term “bullshit artist” refers to someone who boasts or lies constantly. The findings suggest that the use of the metaphor “He is a cow” was not widely accepted by the participants, with many finding it either totally or fairly unacceptable. This could be due to the negative connotations associated with cows in Arabic culture. On the other hand, the comparison “He is like a cow” was more widely accepted, with a majority of the participants finding it acceptable. The use of the detailed simile “He is as stubborn as a cow” was also accepted by most participants, which could reflect the cultural association of cows with stubbornness in Arabic culture. It is interesting to note that the animal-free paraphrase “He is foolish” was widely accepted, with only a small number of participants finding it objectionable. This could reflect the participants’ preference for more direct and explicit language, as well as the negative connotations associated with using animal names as insults in Arabic culture.

4.3. Al tays (the goat)

On the basis of its conduct, this animal is used as a metaphor in Arabic to symbolize people who do as they are told without questioning what they are being instructed to do (Al Issawi, 2021). A good illustration of this would be the expression, “My coworkers are (like) Al Tays (The Goat); they accept anything the boss says.” According to Al tays, Arab culture should be referred to as the “dumb person” who has difficulty understanding things (the goat). This meaning is inferred from earlier Arabic proverbs mentioned in Arabic literature, such as the ones presented below. تيس في سفينة (goat is on the ship) (goat is in the ship). The word “al tays,” which translates to “the goat,” carries a strong connotation of naiveté and folly in Arabic culture. A person who has trouble grasping concepts quickly or who struggles in other ways with their education is sometimes referred to by the name of an animal. It eventually became ingrained in the various cultural terms utilized by Arabs daily. Another interpretation of the term “al tays,” which translates to “the goat,” is that it refers to the dishonest behavior of a person. According to the following proverb, a person is said to turn into a goat whenever they cannot respond appropriately. Another way of putting this is as follows: تيس فلان (someone became a goat). A goat, in this sense, is an attribute that refers to a person whose misbehavior is comparable to that of a goat. Even though this word can have some different culturally specific meanings, the ones that have already been discussed are the most prevalent in Arab society. It is also used to characterize people, especially males, who are easily led or “as a symbol of meekness or innocence,” The former usage is more common than the latter (Al Issawi, 2021; Al Salem et al., 2022).

According to the questionnaire findings, the metaphor “He is a goat” is not appropriate for use in the English language. The single simile “He is like a goat (Al Tays)” is close to equally acceptable and fairly unacceptable in today’s culture. The detailed simile “He is as stupid as a goat (Al Tays)” was approved by 38 of the subjects, whereas the animal-free paraphrasing “He is meek” was accepted by 35 of the subjects (See Table 1 above).

Sociopragmatics is the study of how social and cultural factors influence language use and interpretation. In the case of the Arabic metaphor “Al Tays,” it is clear that the cultural values and beliefs surrounding goats have shaped the meaning of the term in Arabic society. The metaphor is used to symbolize people who are obedient and compliant, without questioning the instructions given to them. The connotation of naiveté and folly associated with goats in Arabic culture is transferred to individuals who exhibit similar behavior. Furthermore, the interpretation of the term “Al Tays” as a symbol of dishonest behavior also reflects the cultural values of Arabic society. The association of misbehavior with goats is demonstrated by the proverb that suggests a person turns into a goat when they cannot respond appropriately. This interpretation shows that goats are seen as deceitful and unreliable animals in Arabic culture. The findings of the questionnaire regarding the use of animal metaphors in English language further highlight the importance of sociopragmatic analysis. The metaphor “He is a goat” is deemed inappropriate for use in English because the cultural values and beliefs associated with goats in Arabic culture are not present in English-speaking societies. The use of animal metaphors, such as “He is like a lamb,” is also influenced by cultural factors. The single simile “He is like a lamb” is close to equally acceptable and fairly unacceptable in today’s culture. This suggests that the interpretation of animal metaphors is influenced by cultural values and beliefs, and their use may be subject to change over time.

In this regard, the analysis of the Arabic metaphor “Al Tays” and the use of animal metaphors in English language demonstrate the importance of sociopragmatic analysis in understanding how cultural values and beliefs influence language use and interpretation. The meanings of words and phrases are not fixed, but rather subject to change and adaptation in different cultural contexts.

4.4. The sheep/lamb الخروف (Colloquial: الطلي Attali)

This animal is used as a metaphor in Arabic to depict those who will obediently carry out whatever orders are given to them without questioning or challenging their authority. A good illustration of this would be the expression, “My coworkers are (like) lambs; they accept whatever the boss says.” It is also used to characterize people, especially males, who are easily led or “as a symbol of meekness or innocence,” In both of these contexts, the word “sheep” is employed. (For more information, consult the online version of the Oxford English Dictionary.) One possible illustration of this might be the phrase, “He is a lamb; he never says “no” to his wife.“The term “lamb” describes a male infant or toddler who is overweight and continues to nurse or consume excessive food. This designation is based on size and shape. It is common practice to use the metaphor “(like) a lamb to the slaughter” to refer to those about to engage in risky behavior without being aware of the potential consequences. These examples demonstrate that the lamb is utilized inappropriately with adults and even with youngsters who are gluttonous. On the other hand, it has a good application in certain situations (Al Issawi, 2021; Al Salem et al., 2022).

Thirty-one people who responded to the questionnaire found the metaphor “He is a lamb” fairly unacceptable or unacceptable. Eight of the respondents found the single simile “He is like a lamb” completely acceptable. In contrast, 17 respondents found it to be fairly acceptable, and 15 respondents found it to be fairly unacceptable. Only three people said that they thought it was completely unacceptable. Both the detailed simile “He is as eager as a lamb” and the animal-free paraphrase “He is keen” were judged to be acceptable in an equal and completely satisfactory manner by 34 and 33 respondents, respectively.

A sociopragmatic approach involves analyzing language use in terms of social and cultural context. In the case of the Yemeni spoken Arabic common names of animals and supernatural creatures translated into English, the use of similes and metaphors is particularly relevant to understanding the social meanings of these terms. The example of the sheep/lamb as a metaphor in Arabic is a good illustration of how language reflects cultural values and norms. The metaphor is used to depict those who are obedient and meek, and it is often applied to males who are seen as lacking in assertiveness or independence. This reflects a cultural norm that values obedience and conformity over individualism and autonomy. The fact that some respondents found the metaphor “He is a lamb” to be unacceptable suggests that these cultural norms may not be universally accepted or valued. It is possible that some individuals view the metaphor as demeaning or insulting, particularly if they place a high value on assertiveness and independence.

On the other hand, the fact that other similes and paraphrases were judged to be acceptable suggests that there are alternative ways to express similar ideas that may be more socially appropriate or less likely to cause offense. This highlights the importance of considering cultural and social context when translating idiomatic expressions or metaphors from one language to another.

4.5. Al Asad (the Lion)

Lions are revered in Arab culture because they represent valiance, bravery, monarchy, and fury, in addition to the great qualities already mentioned. Therefore, many Arabs were motivated to name their children after this creature because of this reason. According to the definition provided by Stevenson (2010), Al Asad (the lion) is a wild animal that can cause much damage. Such a definition conveys the denotative meaning of the word. However, it can be interpreted symbolically in several different ways. In most Arab civilizations, the term “al-Asad” (which translates to “the lion”) carries a good meaning. According to Al Issawi (2021), a person is said to be similar to a lion if they are bold and fearless. Prophet Muhammad’s use of the name Hamzah (Asad Allah) for his uncle reflects the latter’s reputation for strength and bravery. As a family member, Hamzah was likely a prominent figure in the community and had earned his name due to his courageous and mighty nature. The ruthless demeanour of lions is the primary inspiration for the connection between the name of this animal and bravery. Al Asad, “the lion,” refers to great and crucial people who can lead. One of the qualities of the word used in (Maani, n.d.. Mojamh AL Maani) is the quality of leadership, as illustrated by the following proverb: (they are the lions among their colleagues). The preceding proverb has a positive connotation because it compares courageous and influential people to lions. The implication of the adage is also that they are the most significant persons in their immediate environment. The allusion to the animal name Al Asad (the lion) can also be found in Al-Maydaniy et al. (2013), one of the most well-known Arabic proverbs. In this particular proverb, the phrase is used to suggest that the son and the father are similar. The similarity is not just limited to the subject’s outward look; it may also be due to similarities in the characteristic. Take a look at the Arabic proverb that is provided below. هذا الشبل من ذاك الأسد (this little lion from that lion). According to the aforementioned proverb, the term “Al Asad,” which translates to “the lion,” refers to the son’s comparable personality and characteristics to those of his father, which are typically considered favorably. In most cases, it is employed when there are obvious parallels between the father and his son, whether those similarities be in terms of physical characteristics or personality characteristics. The term “lion” is used in American English to refer to a variety of giant wildcats related to each other, such as the cougar and a guy who possesses great strength, courage, etc. It can also refer to a person of high importance, influence, charisma, etc., often regarded as a celebrity due to their widespread admiration (Dictionary, 2016).

According to the data presented in Table 1, seven of the individuals surveyed find the metaphor “He is a lion” to be completely appropriate. In contrast, nine find it to be at least fairly acceptable. Similarly, 9 people considered it unacceptable overall, while 18 considered it completely unacceptable. Eight respondents found the single simile “He is like a lion” acceptable, while the remaining 22 found it completely appropriate. Ten of them felt it to be somewhat unacceptable, while three of them found it to be totally unacceptable. The detailed simile “He is as brave as a lion” and the animal-free paraphrase “He is brave” were both accepted by 40 and 41 subjects, respectively.

A sociopragmatic analysis of the use of the lion metaphor in Yemeni Spoken Arabic reveals that the lion is a symbol of bravery, valiance, and leadership in Arab culture. The use of the lion metaphor is culturally appropriate in most instances, as it carries positive connotations associated with strong and courageous individuals. However, the acceptability of the metaphor varies depending on the context of the situation and the degree of the metaphor’s similarity. For example, the metaphor “He is a lion” was completely acceptable to seven respondents, while it was completely unacceptable to 18 respondents. Furthermore, the use of animal-free paraphrases, such as “He is brave,” was more acceptable to respondents than the use of detailed similes such as “He is as brave as a lion.” This suggests that while the lion metaphor is culturally significant, there are situations where it may be more appropriate to use an animal-free paraphrase. Overall, the sociopragmatic analysis highlights the importance of cultural context in the use of animal metaphors and the need for translators to consider cultural appropriateness when translating animal metaphors into different languages.

4.6. Alsuʕbi الصعبي: Colloquial (the donkey)

A significant insult in Arabic is to refer to a person as “a donkey.” In Arabic culture, donkeys have a reputation for being stupid and obtuse most of the time. Some people may refer to a student struggling academically as a “donkey in his study” in spoken Arabic; this is an extremely insulting term (Alshibami, 2003). In addition to this, donkeys are known for the loud braying that they do. This is something that was mentioned in the Holy Quran. It is common practice to compare people who speak loudly while their voices are already too noisy for donkeys, yet this comparison is extremely insulting for some reasons. People who can put in a lot of effort or work for an extended period are often called “working donkeys.” It is unacceptable for them to be classified as such, and they may find it insulting; it suggests that they are hard-working idiots. Even though this is an example of positive people, it is improper for them to be described as such. However, in English, a donkey is hard-working animal humans ride and utilize for various purposes, including drawing a plough and transporting goods. In British English, “donkey work” is sometimes used to refer to laborious and monotonous work. English similes and metaphors typically utilize the donkey to depict stubbornness, stupidity, and difficulty. However, these bad preconceptions are not always true, and donkeys can be bright, diligent, and beneficial animals in specific situations (Dictionary, 2016).

16 respondents accepted the metaphor “He is a suʕbi (donkey)” and 4 accepted it fairly. 17 thought it fairly unacceptable and 6 totally unacceptable. 28 accepted and 15 rejected the comparison “He is like a suʕbi (donkey)”. 35 accepted the detailed simile “He is as stupid as a suʕbi (donkey)” and 40 the animal-free paraphrase “He is stupid.” Only 3 participants thought it unacceptable. Table 1 above shows these statistics.

Based on the given information, the use of the simile and metaphor in translation of Yemeni spoken Arabic common names of animals and supernatural creatures into English can be analyzed using a sociopragmatic approach. Sociopragmatics refers to the study of language use in social contexts and how language is used to convey social meaning and to achieve social goals. In this case, the use of animal names in Arabic culture and their translation into English can have different social connotations, and understanding these connotations is essential for effective communication. The analysis shows that the use of the donkey as a metaphor in Arabic culture is considered an insult, and it is associated with negative traits such as stupidity, obtuseness, and loudness. In contrast, in English, the donkey is often associated with hard work, and the term “donkey work” is used to refer to laborious and monotonous work. These cultural differences in the use of the donkey metaphor can lead to miscommunication and misunderstanding between Arabic and English speakers. Moreover, the sociopragmatic analysis reveals that the acceptability of using the donkey metaphor in translation depends on the social context and the audience. For instance, the use of the metaphor “He is a suʕbi (donkey)” is considered unacceptable by many Arabic speakers as it is considered insulting. However, the animal-free paraphrase “He is stupid” is more acceptable to both Arabic and English speakers. This shows that the translation of animal names into English requires careful consideration of the social connotations and the intended audience. In conclusion, the use of animal names in translation requires a sociopragmatic approach that takes into account the social context, the audience, and the cultural connotations associated with the animal’s name. The analysis of the donkey metaphor in Arabic and English shows that cultural differences can lead to miscommunication and misunderstanding, and understanding these differences is essential for effective communication.

4.7. Kalb (the dog)

Arab culture quietly respects dogs. Dogs were used for hunting in ancient Arabia. Dogs are mammals with large noses and strong smells. Different meanings are attached to this animal’s name. Some are good, and some are bad. Loyalty is a positive connotation of the word kalb (dog). The following classic Arabic passage symbolizes this idea. أنت كالكلب في حفاظك للود وكالتيس في قراع الخطوب (You are like a dog in your preservation of love and a goat in the area of engagement) (You are like a dog in your preservation of love and a goat in the field of engagement). The Arab poet Ali ibn Al Jahim praised al-Mutawakkil in the line above. The verse may seem rude to non-Arabs who don’t understand animal names’ pragmatic function. The widespread use of kalb (the dog) as a symbol of faithfulness and constancy (Al Issawi, 2021; Al-Harahsheh & Al-Rousan, 2020). The word “kalb,” which was previously used to refer to a dog and had a pleasant connotation, now also has a negative connotation and is used to refer to those who return things. The Prophet Mohammad criticized a certain trait, describing it as a bad one. He even compared the people who displayed this trait to a dog that eats its own vomit. Although this view is not as commonly held, it does reveal an aspect of Arab society that is considered undesirable (Al-Harahsheh & Al-Rousan, 2020). The domesticated canine animal Canis familiars, which is found in many breeds and exhibits considerable variation in size and form, is referred to as the dog in British English. It can also refer to masculine members of the dog family (Dictionary, 2016).

As indicated in Table 1, the metaphor “He is a Kalb (The Dog)” is completely acceptable to 5 participants and fairly acceptable to the remaining 8. Similarly, 8 thought it was somewhat unacceptable, and 22 thought it was completely unacceptable. The single comparison “He is like a Kalb (The Dog)” was considered acceptable by 9 people and completely acceptable by 20. 8 thought it was somewhat unacceptable, and 6 thought it was really unacceptable. The animal-free paraphrase “He is fearless and self-reliant” and the detailed simile “He is as faithful as a Kalb (The Dog)” were both acceptable by 39 and 40 subjects, respectively.

In the Arab culture, the dog has both positive and negative connotations, with loyalty being one of the positive associations. The pragmatic function of animal names in Arabic culture is evident in the use of “kalb” to symbolize faithfulness and constancy. However, the word can also have a negative connotation and be used to refer to those who return things, which is deemed an undesirable trait in Arab society. In the context of the study’s participants, the metaphor “He is a Kalb (The Dog)” was fairly or completely acceptable to 13 out of 35 respondents. This suggests that the use of the animal name “kalb” in metaphorical expressions may not be as offensive as some may perceive it to be. However, a significant number of participants (30 out of 35) found it somewhat or completely unacceptable. The comparison “He is like a Kalb (The Dog)” was found to be acceptable or completely acceptable by 29 out of 43 respondents. This indicates that the use of animal names in comparisons may be more acceptable than in direct metaphors. However, a sizeable number of participants (14 out of 43) found it somewhat or completely unacceptable. Interestingly, the animal-free paraphrase “He is fearless and self-reliant” and the detailed simile “He is as faithful as a Kalb (The Dog)” were both acceptable to a vast majority of respondents, with 39 and 40 out of 43 finding them acceptable or completely acceptable, respectively. This suggests that the use of animal names in similes and paraphrases may be more acceptable than in direct metaphors or comparisons. Overall, the sociopragmatic analysis of the use of the animal name “kalb” in Arabic culture and its translation into English highlights the importance of considering cultural connotations and pragmatic functions in language use. The findings of the study suggest that the acceptability of animal names in metaphorical expressions varies among individuals and that the use of animal names in similes and paraphrases may be more acceptable than in direct metaphors or comparisons.

4.8. Ħaya (snake)

A reptile with a deadly bite is the literal definition of ħaya (snake). Among the prominent Arabic animals with symbolic meaning is the ħaya (snake). However, this animal name is one of the most commonly used in Arab culture, with several connotations. Ħaya (snake) is a person who is both inelegant and brilliant. In the following Arabic adage, Al Issawi (2021) compares the knowledgeable person’s head to the snake’s. رأسه رأس حية (his head is like a head of a snake) (his head is like a head of a snake). This is not a physical description but relates to the described person’s mental state as intelligent and cunning. However, the term may not always have a favorable connotation. Another less prevalent meaning of the word is the person’s destruction, which is connected to the word ħaya (snake). Consider the following Arabic proverb from (Maani, n.d..), which can serve as evidence. سقاه الله دم الحيات (Allah (God) watered him with the blood of the snake). According to the saying, if the person was symbolically watered with the snake’s blood, he would be destroyed. In other words, this idiom refers to people who take chances and engage in risky behaviors without fear of repercussions.

Cunning is one of the qualities associated with brilliant people in Arabic culture. The Arabic language is abundant in sayings that convey this idea, such as the one below. هم حيات الأرض (they are the snakes of the earth). The animal term ħaya (snake) is employed as a positive distinction of the knight person in the preceding phrase. A knight is considered a crafty individual, making him a great candidate to be assigned by ħaya (snake). The term ħaya (snake) also alludes to the positive personal quality of nobleness. In Arabic culture, a person with a good attribute is frequently referred to as ħaya (snake), as shown in the example below. هو حية ذكر (he is a male snake). However, gender does play a role in the symbolic connotations of the word ħaya (snake), which has a negative connotation when it is used to assign a woman. This is because the word has a negative connotation when it is used. Snakes poison with their fangs, whilst women poison with their tongues, according to a famous comparison made by an Arabic scholar named Ezuruike (2017). This comparison is notable because it compares snakes and women as poisoned creatures.

In the investigation, the participants did not find the metaphor “She is an ħaya (snake)” acceptable to a noticeable extent; 29 deemed it either fairly or completely unsuitable. Thirteen participants found the single simile, “He is like an ħaya (snake),” to be completely appropriate, while eight found it fairly acceptable. The animal-free paraphrasing “She is cunning” was accepted by 37, but the detailed simile “She is as cunning as an ħaya (snake)” was accepted by 36.

A sociopragmatic approach to analyzing the use of animal names as similes and metaphors in Yemeni spoken Arabic involves examining the social and cultural context in which these expressions are used. This approach considers the social factors that influence the meaning and interpretation of animal names in Arabic culture. The study reveals that the use of the term ħaya (snake) in Yemeni spoken Arabic has multiple connotations, ranging from positive to negative, depending on the social and cultural context in which it is used. The term is often used to describe people who are intelligent, cunning, and noble. However, it can also have negative connotations when used to describe risky behavior or poisonous behavior, particularly when assigned to women.

The study also highlights the importance of gender in the symbolic meanings of animal names in Arabic culture. The comparison between snakes and women as poisonous creatures, made by the Arabic scholar Ezuruike, reveals the gendered nature of the symbolism of animal names in Arabic culture. Furthermore, the study indicates that the acceptability of animal-based similes and metaphors in translation depends on the context and audience. While the single simile “He is like an ħaya (snake)” was deemed acceptable by a significant number of participants, the metaphor “She is an ħaya (snake)” was considered unsuitable by a considerable number of participants

4.9. Jinn (جني ʤeni: Colloquial)

Because Arabs strongly believe in the presence of supernatural beings, insults referring to them typically relate to evildoers, as seen in the examples below: ʤen “genie,” ibn al ʤen “son of genie” or ʤen Afreet “genie of Afreed.” The fantastic tales from Arabian Nights and associated fables instantly come to mind when we talk about Arabian mythology. The people of Arabia were preoccupied with supernatural or mystical forces, like Arabian Nights’ genie. Images of djinns, demons, gods, and demigods were prevalent in their society. Al-lat, Al-Uzza, and Mannat were the three principal goddesses represented at the shrine at Kaaba, which was devoted to the god Hubal (El-Zein, 2009).

Supernatural beings called jinn, jann, djinni, or genies existed. The Persian word for “jinn” is plural. Its meaning is “out of sight.” Both Islamic and pre-Islamic Arabian mythologies contain references to jinn. They are mentioned in the Quran. Surat al-Jinn is the name of the 72nd Sura of the Quran. The English word “genie” is derived from the Latin “genius.” Every human being is given a caretaker force at birth. The French descendant of this word, génie, was borrowed into English. The French translators of The Book of One Thousand and One Nights chose génie as a variant of jinn since it shared resonance and connotations with the Arabic equivalent. Additionally, English took up this usage, and it has since spread widely (Hanely & Brown, 2014).

In Table 1, only 7 and 6 respondents found the metaphor “He is a jinni” fairly acceptable. 29 likes “He is like a jinni.” 36 accepted the detailed simile “He is as powerful as jinn” and 38 the animal-free paraphrase “He is powerful.”

A sociopragmatic approach to analyzing the use of similes and metaphors in translation considers the social and cultural context in which language is used. The use of animal and supernatural creature metaphors and similes in Yemeni Spoken Arabic reflects the cultural beliefs and attitudes towards these creatures in Arabic culture. In particular, the use of animal and supernatural creature metaphors and similes in Arabic culture reflects the values, attitudes, and beliefs associated with these creatures. The analysis shows that the use of animal metaphors and similes in Yemeni Spoken Arabic reflects both positive and negative connotations. The word “snake” is used as a metaphor for a person who is both intelligent and cunning, as well as for a person who engages in risky behaviors. The word “snake” is also used to describe a person with a noble attribute. However, when used to describe a woman, the word “snake” has a negative connotation due to the belief that women poison with their tongues. Similarly, the use of supernatural creature metaphors and similes in Yemeni Spoken Arabic reflects both positive and negative connotations. The word “jinni” is used to describe a person who is powerful, but the metaphor “He is a jinni” was not widely accepted by the participants. On the other hand, the simile “He is like a jinni” was more acceptable. This may reflect the belief that jinni are powerful beings, but also have negative connotations as evildoers in Arabian mythology.

5. Discussion

Study findings are discussed here. NESs use the metaphors and similes in Table 1 when translating Arabic animal and supernatural creature names into English. NESs preferred detailed similes, followed by single similes and metaphors. NESs translated animal and supernatural creature names with detailed similes like “He is as brave as a lion” and “She is as crafty as a snake.” NESs’ dog utilization was a high percentage. This finding can be explained by this animal’s unique trait, loyalty, which is common in Arabic and English. English use of the lion, symbolizing courage and strength in both languages, was also high. However, the data shows that the lowest percentage was lamb, as likening individuals to lambs for folly may be impolite in English, especially as this has a negative connotation in American history. Arab lambs’ innocence was strange to some participants. NESs positively employ the donkey, unlike in Arabic, where it symbolizes foolishness (Al Salem et al., 2022). The detailed simile technique was well-received by questionnaire respondents. Because this type of simile explicitly indicates the topic (likened), vehicle (likened to), simile element (as), and simile feature (like), it is acceptable (loyalty, cleverness, foolishness, etc.) (Buxton, 2004). The single simile (e.g., “He is like a cow” and “She is like a snake”) was the second most acceptable way for NESs to characterize people using animal and supernatural creatures’ names. As demonstrated in Table 1, the single simile percentages vary more than the detailed simile percentages. Using the single simile to refer to individuals as cows was entirely acceptable to 51% and fairly acceptable to 23.2 of respondents, similar to the detailed simile. This finding can be explained with the claim that not all NESs think cows are stubborn, as one of the responses was that “in America, people do not assume cows are all stubborn and stupid. According to one response, “in America, people do not assume cows are all stubborn and stupid.” Over 16.2% of respondents found the she-camel comparison unsatisfactory for describing individuals. As other participants say, “most native English speakers know nothing about the qualities of she-camels,” therefore utilizing the she-camel in a simile without discussing the similarities between she-camels and people feels odd. Some respondents noted that North Americans without Arabic experience may not understand the simile “He is like a jinni.” Some think calling people jinn is impolite. A few think the English “snake” indicates womanizing. This goes along with the findings of some studies (Al Salem et al., 2022; Kirvalidze, 2014; Steen et al., 2010)

The metaphors “He is a donkey” and “She is a cow” were completely acceptable to 16% and 9% of the respondents, respectively, and represented the highest percentages of respondents who found them to be completely acceptable regarding the single simile approach of translation. These animals can be found in English usages that are conceptually equivalent to their Arabic counterparts. However, in English, a donkey is a hard-working animal that humans ride and utilize for a variety of purposes, including drawing a plough and transporting goods. In British English, the term “donkey labor” is sometimes used to refer to laborious and monotonous work. Even though the expression “comparing someone to a cow” is common in English, some responders believe that doing so is impolite. However, many assert that this is typical in the English language. In this case, the choice deemed “pretty acceptable” received considerably lower percentages than those that related to the choice deemed “completely acceptable.” The feedback from the respondents reveals that because the grounds of likeness (a feature of the simile) are absent, the full simile is not obvious to them, and the message is not understandable. Some of those who participated in the survey also asked, “How is he similar to a lamb?” for instance, under the mistaken impression that the term “like” suggests a physical likeness. On the other hand, Arabic primarily refers to a shared behavior rather than a shared physical look. Respondents who are comfortable with this form of simile believe that it is more appropriate and courteous to employ a particle of simile (also known as a simile element) rather than to directly refer to people as animals for the purposes of style (with no simile element). This is consistent with the findings of some earlier studies, which indicate that the inability of texts containing metaphors to convey the meaning that was intended to the target readers when translating it from one language to another is due to the absence of the grounds of likeness, which is a characteristic of the simile, and the fact that the full simile is not immediately apparent (Al Issawi, 2021; Al Salem et al., 2022; Dobrzyńska, 1995; HM Helmy, 2018; Leezenberg, 2021).

6. Conclusion

In translation studies of the terminology used to address people by animals and supernatural beings, this study looks at cultural variations and usages specific to certain cultures. According to the study, it is challenging to translate these Arabic terms since they have culturally specific metaphorical meanings and no equivalents in English. Arabic accepts all metaphors and similes, whereas English only accepts detailed ones. To reconcile cultural gaps between Arabic and English, translating animal and supernatural creatures’ nouns’ figurative meaning takes some addition. Thus, a detailed simile with a particle and element satisfied the TL reader/hearer. The study also found that most animals are not utilized symbolically in English, making effective similes a poor translation strategy. The explicit simile particle made the single simile strategy acceptable. Future studies should examine other translation strategies to enable translators in the two languages to comprehend cultural differences.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Ali Mohammed Saleh Al-Hamzi

Ali Mohammed Saleh Al-Hamzi is a distinguished scholar with a wealth of experience in teaching and research. He has made significant contributions to the field of linguistics, particularly in the areas of translation, critical discourse analysis, sociolinguistics, pragmatics, and applied linguistics. His ongoing commitment to expanding his knowledge and exploring new avenues of inquiry makes him a valuable asset to the academic community.