The document discusses strategies used to translate English binomials into Arabic and examines the usefulness of English-Arabic dictionaries. It analyzed the translation of 25 lexical items and different translation strategies used.
Binomials are multi-word units like idioms and collocations that are learned as a whole and not as individual words. They are important to study because they are frequently used and easier to process than individual words.
The most common strategy used was guessing from context, followed by avoidance, literal translation, partial translation, and less frequently semantic approximation.
Babel 57: 2 (2011), 168184.
Fdration des Traducteurs (fit) Revue Babel
doi 10.1075/babel.57.2.03hus issn 05219744 e-issn 15699668 Strategies used in translating English binomials into Arabic RiyadF. Hussein and Richard Lingwood Middle East University for Graduate Studies, Jordan 1. Introduction It is the belief of the writers of this study that the education EFL students receive and the dictionaries they use to supplement their knowledge do not sufciently support the learning of multi-word units (MWUs), such as binomials. Jordanian students may complete their education handicapped by this omission, and with- out the support of adequate dictionaries and online tools to operate competent- ly. Tis study develops the ongoing debate on the place of multi-word units in the learning of English. Words have traditionally been viewed as primary units. Dictionaries help to reinforce this view by representing the lexicon as a series of head words or individ- ual lexical items. Moon (1997: 40) maintained that text studies and corpus stud- ies have revealed the signifcance and the intricacy of the links between words, for example, their strong clustering tendencies and the patterns which are associated with them. It seems there is a shif in the study of lexicon to emphasize the signif- cance of multi-word units, but not at the expense of single individual words. Te importance and prevalence of multi-word units lies in the fact that the most fre- quently spoken words are prone to forming everyday chunks (Isee, you know etc). Similar to individual words, multi-word units (MWUs) have psycholinguis- tic reality. Lewis (1993) suggests that the mind uses chunks of prefabricated lan- guage because these are easier to process and use than an equivalent number of individual words that have to be strung using syntactical rules. Multi-word units such as idioms, chunks, prefabricated forms and collocations are learned in toto and their total meaning is not the sum of its parts. To take, for instance, the idiom to kick the bucket (to die) one does not obtain the meaning of this idiom simply by analyzing the meaning of the individual words kick and bucket. Strategies used in translating English binomials into Arabic 169 1.1 Teoretical debate Moon (1997: 40) reminds us that although it is natural to focus on the word as the primary unit multi-word lexical items should not be neglected by the compilers of dictionaries and L2 teachers. She believed that collocation studies must involve corpus evidence as it is arguably pointless to study such things without using large amounts of real data. She argues that lexical form and meaning are inseparable. Most crucial to this study, Moon focused the debate about the structural pattern- ing of lexis around the opposite, complementary and co-existent open choice principle and the idiom principle as defned by Sinclair (1987 and 1991). She con- ceived the open-choice principle as a traditional slot-and-fller view where each time a unit, be it word, phrase or clause, is completed a large range of choice opens up limited only by syntagm and paradigm. Te idiom principle contextualizes choice in a given slot with the choices made in surrounding co-textual slots. Tis collocationalist view of language relates to complementary psycholinguistic the- ory which suggests language is processed and acquired as chunks and therefore words operate in a lexical system, not as independent and interchangeable items of the lexicon. Further, Moon questioned the absolute validity of traditional models of MWUs, as MWUs heterogeneity and mutability cause any model to provide only a partial and limited match. Tis reinforced her belief in the necessity of corpus evi- dence which is shared by the writers of this study. According to Moon (1997), there are three important criteria which help dis- tinguish holistic multi-word items from other kinds of strings: institutionalization, fxedness and compositionality. Institutionalization is the degree to which a mul- ti-word item is conventionalized in the language and whether it is viewed by lan- guage community as being a unit or word. Fixedness is the degree to which a mul- ti-word item is frozen or fxed as a sequence of words. For instance, on the other hand is a fxed form and is not an alternative to on another hand. Composition- ality is directly linked to the fact that multi-word units cannot be interpreted on a word-by-word basis. As indicated earlier, an idioms meaning is not obtained by looking at the meaning of individual words, but rather by creating a contextualiza- tion between the total idiom form and meaning. Titone and Connine (1999) ar- gued that idioms are easy to identify because they are learned as single non-com- positional chunks much in the same way as single words are learned. Moon (1997: 43) writes that there are many diferent forms of multi-word items, and the felds of lexicology and idiomatology have generated an unruly col- lection of names for them with confusing results. She defnes a multi-word unit as a vocabulary item which consists of a sequence of two or more words. According to Moon this sequence of words semantically and/or syntactically forms a mean- 170 RiyadF. Hussein and Richard Lingwood ingful and inseparable unit. Multi-word units, she argued, are the result of lexic- al and semantic processes of fossilization and word-formations, rather than the results of the operation of grammatical rules. Multi-word infectional forms of words, for example comparative forms of adjectives or passive forms of verbs, can be separated out and excluded from this category since they are formed grammat- ically(1997: 43). Hamdans exploration of EFL students problems with binomials is founded on a debate among Jordanian researchers about the judgment that poor perfor- mance on collocation is a common feature of Jordanian EFL learners, regardless of their profciency level and task type (2005: 137). Hamdan called for further re- search on idiomatic or opaque binominals. Bahumaid (2006) further developed the case for the importance of collocation in translation and analyses the intralingual and interlingual problems faced by the translator in avoiding unacceptable or improbable collocations, including consid- eration of register. He found that culture bound and register-specifc collocations presented particular difculty. He noted that only Western theory has been used: little attempt had been made to explore the theory developed by the early Arab philologists. Abu-Ssaydeh (2006: 349) intensifed the debate by calling attention to the level of competence of translation in the Arab World and expressed the need for development of new teaching strategies. He called for greater attention to MWUs in particular as the occurrence of multiword units is rare in the language of trans- lators, thus creating a need ... to become more profcient in MWUs in order to approximate native-like competence. Abu-Ssaydeh (2006: 355) hypothesized that the more advanced the learner was, the more frequently he/she would resort to MWUs in his/her discourse. Foreign learners who have acquired near-native com- petence in English would, therefore, tend to use signifcantly more MWUs in their discourse than students who are, say, in their fnal year. In the translation of binomials and productive use of collocations, students demonstrate their defciency and incompetence. Hussein (1998) showed that in at- tempting to produce collocations, Jordanian college students made use of a num- ber of strategies when required to produce unfamiliar collocation such as trans- fer and synonymy. Te study also revealed that negative transfer was the strategy most frequently used by students when they encounter unfamiliar collocations. 1.2 Te usefulness of dictionaries Most relevant to this study, Moon (1997: 49) deplored the lack of infuence of writings about idiomatology and combinatorics on the compilers of dictionaries. In spite of the advances in the feld dictionaries perpetuate a black and white Strategies used in translating English binomials into Arabic 171 distinction ... something is a phrase, phrasal verb, or compound, or it is not. Abu-Ssaydeh (2006) attributed the failure to translate MWUs correctly in part to MWUs paucity in bilingual dictionaries. He explored the failings of bilingual dic- tionaries and proposed a solution in the compilation of an Arabic-English diction- ary of English MWUs. Bahumaid (2006) found bilingual dictionaries defcient and that Arab trans- lators rarely use monolingual English dictionaries for help with collocations, thus neglecting a valuable resource. Fareh and Bin Moussa (2007) limited their discus- sion to the usefulness of EnglishArabic dictionaries in the translation of meta- phor. Te binomials in the instrument used in this study may also function as metaphors. For example, if the reader refers to the questionnaire in the appen- dix to this paper, it will be seen that bread and butter functions as a metaphor for the earnings necessary to provide basic subsistence: the binomial stands for other things or qualities beyond the literal meaning. Fareh and Bin Moussa (2007) found that the Atlas and Al-Mawrid dictionaries contain under half of the metaphors in their instrument. Furthermore, 36% of the task items are absent from both dic- tionaries and inconsistency in presentation of the metaphors makes it hard for us- ers to access the information. Tey called for more research to be undertaken on the efciency of bilingual dictionaries in serving language learners. Verstraten (1992: 32) argues that L2 learners must be acquainted with MWUs because the ability to use fxed phrases seems to be a fairly sound indication of the command one has of the second language. It is paramount, therefore, that we emphasize the teaching of words not only as single units but also as multi-word units. Wardell (1991: 36) states that one peculiarity of the English of second lan- guage learners is their failure to produce collocations in the proper order. For ex- ample, such linked forms as white and black, death or life and wiser but sad- der, which do no follow the prescribed pattern have a false ring to native speakers who learn these forms during the normal acquisition process. He argues that for- eign language learners must be trained to follow the prescribed patterns black and white, life and death, and sadder but wiser. Tey must also be trained to recognize, produce, and correctly translate these forms. 1.3 Defnition of binomial Tis study draws upon Moons (1997) attempt at precise defnition of MWUs. She perceived an unruly terminology associated with MWUs and suggested some defnitions in common use, but warned there is no generally agreed set of terms, defnitions and categories in use. Drawing on Hamdans discussion, the choice of binomials for the instrument in this study may be defned as a fxed-sequence of two words from the same form-class connected by a co-coordinating conjunction. 172 RiyadF. Hussein and Richard Lingwood Tey are opaque or idiomatic, requiring knowledge of how the language is used in a wider context rather than dictionary defnitions of individual words. For ex- ample conjoined lexical pairs like to and fro or now and then can have usage be- yond their dictionary defnition. 2. Methodology 2.1 Research instrument To achieve the aim of the study, a 25-item translation test, partly based on Hamdan (2005), was designed. Each item included a binomial such as by and large, over and above, heart and soul, and now and then. Te translation test items were selected from a preliminary set of about 60 items which were compiled by the researchers from the language materials and courses ofered and textbooks prescribed in the English Department at the Middle East University for Graduate Studies and the BA program at Philadelphia Uni- versity. Te researchers estimated that a 25 item test would be sufcient to reveal students language capabilities and profciency in English. Te translation task in- volved translating binomials which are conjoined items such as the following: hit and run (verb+verb), over and above (prep+prep), again and again (adv+adv) and law and order (noun+noun). In the test, the binomials were not highlighted or blocked or isolated, to avoid detracting the subjects attention from the test focus, and to focus on the transla- tion of the given item. Te original test was given to a jury of three English and translation professors. Tey were asked to select 25 items, which they thought were most useful to students and translators. In addition, two native speakers of English were consulted as to the validity and appropriateness of the test items un- der investigation and they agreed as to the signifcance and appropriateness of the test (see appendix). 2.2 Subjects of the study Two diferent profciency groups were used for the purpose of this study. Te frst group comprised 30 MA students enrolled at the Middle East University for Grad- uate Studies in the frst semester 2008/2009. Teir age range was between 24 and 32. Tey had taken between 9 and 21 credit hours out of 33 hours by the time they took the translation test. Tey had also taken courses in syntax, general translation, literary translation, literary criticism and other English courses. Te second group comprised 50 sophomore and junior students, 38 females and 22 males, studying Strategies used in translating English binomials into Arabic 173 at Philadelphia Private University in the frst semester 2008/2009. In their English major program they took courses in grammar, writing, linguistics and translation. Teir age ranged from 19 to 22. All of the subjects were native speakers of Arabic and studied English as a foreign language. 2.3 Data collection Entire classes with proportionally greater female percentage were taken from Phil- adelphia Private University and the Middle East University for Graduate Studies. Prior to administering the test it was piloted on twelve students of English to de- termine the time respondents needed to complete the test and to make sure all the instructions were clear. Subjects were given one hour to complete the test and were urged to attempt translation of all the items even if they were not entirely fa- miliar with them. 2.4 Data Analysis Subsequent to test administration, the researchers reviewed the translation of all sentences and identifed the correct translations of binomials within those senten- ces among both groups. Te correct rendition of translations was recorded and their percentage was calculated. Te incorrect rendition of translation was identifed and the unsuccessful strategies used by students were identifed and categorized. Again the percentage of each strategy was calculated and ranked for both groups. With regard to the availability of binomials in EnglishArabic dictionaries, the researchers reviewed three standard dictionaries, Al-Mawrid (2005), Atlas (2005), and Oxford Wordpower (2004) to fnd out the extent of inclusion of these binomi- als; further, the binomial, ifs and buts for example, was frst searched for under the frst word ifs and when not found, it was sought under the conjoined word buts. 3. Objectives of the study Te major goal of this study is to fnd out advanced and intermediate subjects knowledge and ability to translate binomials from English into Arabic. More spe- cifcally, the study attempts to address the following questions: 1. What problems do Arab learners and translators of English encounter in trans- lating English binomial into Arabic? 2. What strategies do translators use in translating English binomials into Arabic? 3. To what extent are EnglishArabic dictionaries helpful to learners and transla- tors in translating English binomials? 174 RiyadF. Hussein and Richard Lingwood 4. Results and discussion 4.1 Results related to the frst question Te results showed both advanced and intermediate students were generally de- fcient in their translation of English binomials into Arabic. A glance at the per- centages of correct responses and the means of these percentages suggests that the translation of the binomials constitutes a problem, though to varying degrees, to Table 1. Percentage of correct responses for the advanced and intermediate groups on stimu- lus binomial translations No. Binomial Percentage Advanced Intermediate 1 again and again 80 46 2 hit and miss 75 52 3 heart and soul 65 46 4 for and against 60 48 5 over and above 60 56 6 cut and dried 55 50 7 back and forth 55 32 8 now and then 50 36 9 null and void 50 48 10 here and there 50 32 11 root and branch 50 38 12 bread and butter 48 40 13 ins and outs 48 44 14 part and parcel 45 44 15 heart and hand 44 40 16 give and take 42 38 17 odds and ends 42 38 18 pros and cons 40 26 19 kith and kin 40 36 20 ups and downs 38 40 21 to and fro 36 34 22 here and now 34 22 23 ifs and buts 34 24 24 nuts and bolts 32 18 25 law and order 30 22 Mean 48.12 39.84 Strategies used in translating English binomials into Arabic 175 both the advanced and intermediate groups. Only 48.12% of the advanced stu- dents and 39.84% of the intermediate students attempts at translating the binomi- als were successful (see Table 1). Te results showed that the percentage of correct responses for the advanced group ranged from 80% for the binomial again and again to 30% for the binomi- al law and order. It ranged from 56% for the binomial over and above to 20% for the binomial nuts and bolts for the intermediate group. Te most correctly trans- lated binomials for the advanced group were again and again 80%, hit and miss 75%, heart and soul 65%, for and against 60%, and over and above 60%. Te least correctly translated binomials were ifs and buts 34%, nuts and bolts 32%, and law and order 30%. Te most correctly translated binomials for the intermediate group were over and above 56%, hit and miss 52%, cut and dried 50%, null and void 48%, for and against 48%, and again and again 46%, whereas the least correctly trans- lated binomials were ifs and buts 24%, here and now 22%, law and order 22%, and nuts and bolts 18% (see Table 1). Two of the least correctly translated binomials, namely ifs and buts and law and order were common to both groups. Ifs and buts may sound unfamiliar to them and was found entirely lacking in all of the three dictionaries whereas law and or- der was lacking in only two of the three dictionaries. Te problem with translat- ing law and order, despite its easiness and straightforwardness is that students in most cases tended to translate the frst word of the binomial and totally ignored the other conjoined word. Te most correctly translated binomials were used as entries in at least two of the three dictionaries consulted, whereas two of the least correctly translated binomials were cited in only one of the three dictionaries and the remaining three binomials were not cited in any of the three dictionaries. It was surprising that the majority of respondents incorrectly translated the bi- nomials to and fro, ifs and buts, and law and order despite their frequency and sa- lience in English. Te binomial law and order can be easily translated into Arabic and produced correctly, even if students resorted to the strategy of literal transla- tion. As stated above, subjects in both groups did not do well on the test and their performance remains generally low which suggests that collocations and binomi- als are a major difculty for EFL learners and translators, regardless of profciency level and task type. Hamdan (2005: 1423) asserts: In light of the pervasive poor performance of Jordanian EFL learners on collocations, it may be argued that multi-word units in general and collocation in particular (bino- mials included) be given due attention and emphasis in ELT materials at both school and university levels. At school, this may take the form of carefully prepared instruc- tional materials coupled with relevant exercises and activities that aim at developing the L2 learners subconscious and conscious knowledge of the various types of multi- word units. At university level, one feels rather uncomfortable to discover that only 176 RiyadF. Hussein and Richard Lingwood two of the 20 English Departments in Jordan ofer just one course in lexicology and/ or lexicography at the BA level. To bridge such a gap is probably the frst systematic step in the long march to promote lexical knowledge in EFL learners. In the absence of independent vocabulary and lexicography courses, instructors may make a deliberate use of translation courses and skill courses to develop the EFL learners knowledge of word meanings and collocation. 4.2 Results related to the second question Te strategies used by advanced and intermediate students were: incomplete trans- lation, literal translation, semantic approximation contextualized guessing and avoidance. Adefnition of these strategies along with relevant examples follows. 4.2.1 Incomplete translation Tis strategy implies that only part of the translation of the binomial is successfully attempted. For instance, in the binomial, part and parcel only the word part was translated and the translation of the entire binomial as one unit was ignored. Te same is true of the binomials law and order and here and now because in both of them only the initial words law and here were translated as single and independ- ent entities and not as being parts of larger entities. Analysis of data suggested that this strategy was used in 16% and 13.16%of the total attempts of the advanced and intermediate groups respectively. 4.2.2 Literal translation Tis strategy means that each single word is translated literally, but it is unsuc- cessful because there is no reference to the meaning of the whole binomial. Each word was translated literally without referring to the total meaning of the bino- mial. For example in the binomial, ups and downs each word was translated sep- arately without reference to the overall meaning. Students therefore translated lit- erally the word ups and then the word downs. Te same is true of ifs and buts and root and branch. Te binomial kith and kin was translated literally in the sense that these words were believed to be proper nouns and were thus translated as such. Te same is true of ins and outs which was translated as entrance and exit, and bread and butter and heart and soul. Te data showed that this strategy accounts for 12.7% and 18% of the total response of the advanced and intermediate groups respectively. 4.2.3 Semantic approximation Where several choices of meaning are available, a too general or inappropriate meaning is selected, thus semantic approximation is said to be used. For example Strategies used in translating English binomials into Arabic 177 law and order was translated as rule of justice which is an approximation but not the exact meaning of the binomial. Null and void was translated as unaccepta- ble, and give and take was translated as opinion exchange or speaking with each other, and again and again was translated as every time, to and fro was translated as here and there and over and above was translated as more than, and law and order was translated as security and protection. Analysis of data showed that this strategy constituted 7.7% and 11.9% of the total attempts by respondents in both groups. 4.2.4. Contextualized guessing In this strategy an attempt is made to guess the meaning of an unknown binomial using the information from the text which precedes or follows the binomial. An- alysis of the data suggested that the contextualized guessing strategy ranked frst for the whole sample. It constituted 41.9% of the advanced students total attempts and was found to be the second most frequently used strategy, 21.4%, by inter- mediate students. Some examples of the use of contextualized guessing in trans- lating binomials follow. In many cases respondents translated binomials through contextual cues as in the following sentence Te door swung back and forth. Tis binomial was translated as opens and closes. Te binomial every now and then in the sentence, Every now and then we have to report to the fnancial ofcer, was translated as from now on and in other cases as either at present or later. In the sentence, She went through some serious ups and downs last year, the binomial ups and downs was translated as good and merry times. In the sen- tence, If the director is in a bad mood, he accepts no ifs and buts, the binomial was translated as problems, argument, or intervention. In the sentence, If you want to know the ins and outs of what happened, read the newsletter, ins and outs was translated as causes, input and output, local and international news, or instructions. In the sentence We should consider all the pros and cons before reaching a decision, the binomial pros and cons was translated as details, precau- tions, options or causes and results. In the sentence Having kith and kin living around you can make you happier, the binomial kith and kin was translated as pets, people, little children or neighbors. In the sentence Everything was sold on the frst day of the sale, except for a few odds and ends, the binomial odds and ends was translated as strange clothes or exceptions. 4.2.5. Avoidance In this strategy, no attempt is made to translate all or part of the binomial. It is to- tally ignored by respondents. Te subjects who adopted this strategy did not at- tempt to translate the target item. According to Hamdan (2005: 149) the whole set of reasons underlying the use of abandonment (which is equivalent to silence in 178 RiyadF. Hussein and Richard Lingwood oral discourse) as a passive interactive strategy by diferent profciency EFL learn- ers are not yet known. Conscious ignorance, time limitation and lack of conscious- ness are possible reasons. As stated earlier, this strategy accounted for 35.3% for the advanced group and 21% for the intermediate group. Table 2 shows that contextualized guessing and avoidance were the most commonly used strategies by both groups, but whereas contextualized guessing was ranked frst and avoidance second for the advanced group, the intermediate group reversed the order. Te strategy of incomplete translation was ranked third for both groups. Finally, the literal translation strategy and semantic approxima- tion strategy were ranked fourth and ffh according to their use for the advanced group, while the intermediate group reversed the order. 4.3. Results related to the third question Te third question addresses the extent to which EnglishArabic dictionaries in- corporate English binomials and present Arabic equivalents for them. It was found that binomials along with their translations were highest in Al-Mawrid 72%, fol- lowed by Atlas Dictionary 60% and fnally Oxford Wordpower 52%. Only eight bi- nomials, or 32%, were found in all of the three dictionaries. Tese are give and take, back and forth, now and then, ups and downs, to and fro, ins and outs, hit and miss, and odds and ends (see Table 3). Five binomials, or 20%, were missing from all the dictionaries: for and against, ifs and buts, heart and hand, nuts and bolts and here and now. It was surprising that the following binomials were only included in two of the three dictionaries despite their importance: again and again, over and above, pros and cons, kith and kin, and fnally bread and butter. Tese fndings demonstrate the defciencies of these dictionaries. It is believed that dictionaries whether bilingual or monolin- gual are teaching aids and references for teachers and students; and if these dic- tionaries were inadequate, then this will inevitably reduce their beneft to learners and translators. Table 2. Percentage of erroneous strategy use by advanced and intermediate learners Type Rank Advanced Intermediate Contextualized guessing 1 41.9% 21.4% Avoidance 2 21.5% 35.5% Literal translation 3 12.7% 18% Incomplete Translation 4 16% 13.16% Semantic approximation 5 7.7% 11.9% Strategies used in translating English binomials into Arabic 179 Two points need to be emphasized. First, the dictionaries included the trans- lation of equivalents of binomials but to varying degrees. However, none of them was comprehensive enough to include all of the binomials. Second, the diction- aries are not consistent in the way binomial expressions are listed in their entries. Sometimes they were listed under the frst part of the conjoined binomial, and other times they were listed under the second word. Tis confrms Fareh and Bin Moussas (2007: 42) point that these dictionaries lack standards of classifcation because it is not always clear under which word an expression is going to be listed in the dictionary. Table 3. Availability of binomial expressions in EnglishArabic dictionaries: Al-Mawrid, Atlas and Oxford Wordpower No. Binomial Atlas AlMawrid Oxford Word Power 1 give and take + + + 2 here and there + 3 back and forth + + + 4 for and against 5 now and then + + + 6 ups and downs + + + 7 again and again + + 8 over and above + + 9 ifs and buts 10 to and fro + + + 11 ins and outs + + + 12 part and parcel + + 13 law and order + 14 heart and hand 15 heart and soul + + 16 nuts and bolts 17 null and void + + 18 pros and cons + + 19 hit and miss + + + 20 here and now 21 cut and dried + + 22 kith and kin + + 23 odds and ends + + + 24 root and branch + + 25 bread and butter + + 180 RiyadF. Hussein and Richard Lingwood 5. Conclusion Analysis of the data indicated that both the advanced and intermediate groups had considerable difculty translating the target binomials. Te fndings showed that the translation of binomials was a problem for both groups. At best their perfor- mance can be described as mediocre and at worst it can be described as appalling. Tis can be attributed to a number of factors. First, multi-word units are complex lexical units and the acquisition of the meaning of a single word is much easier than recalling that of a multi-word unit. For instance, it is much easier to recog- nize and produce the meaning of the word root than the binomial branch and root. Second, because the sense of the multi-word units is non-compositional, that is the meaning of the idiom or binomial cannot be deduced from the meanings of its constituent elements, they pose great difculty for translators and learners alike. Tird, shortage of vocabulary courses ofered in the English departments in Jor- dan. Fourth, the absence of specialized EnglishArabic collocational dictionaries, and dictionaries currently used do not adequately cover multi-word units such as collocations, phrasal verbs, binomials and idioms. Finally, lack of attention to mul- ti-word units on the part of teachers and students alike. Dictionaries lacking some of the target binomials are partly responsible for er- rors committed by students. Te unavailability of a binomial expression in a dic- tionary is very likely to motivate the respondent to use literal translation or an- other erroneous strategy. One way of tackling this problem may lie in enriching students reading ex- perience. Students and translators should read extensively English newspapers, international magazines, and modern novels on their own, and constantly look up meanings in bilingual or monolingual dictionaries. Extensive reading not only broadens their vocabulary range but also enhances the capability to collocate con- joined words in English. Secondly, courses may be developed to meet the need for understanding and use of multi-word units such as idioms, collocations, phrasal verbs and binomials. Tis area is neglected in the EFL courses of most schools in Jordan. Colleges and uni- versities in Jordan rarely ofer specialized courses in lexis to remedy this situation. In conclusion, a call is made for the compilation of specialized EnglishArab- ic dictionaries to address multi-word units such as collocations, idioms, binomials or at least upgrade or enrich the currently used ones. Strategies used in translating English binomials into Arabic 181 Bibliography Abu-Ssaydeh, Abdul F. (2006) Multi-word units: Can lexicography have a role in their acquisi- tion? Babel 52(4): 34970. Atlas Dictionary, EnglishArabic. (2005) Amman, Atlas Global Center for Studies and Research, 1695 pp. Baalabaki, Munir. (2005) Al-Mawrid: A modern EnglishArabic dictionary. Beirut, Dar el-ilm Lilmalayen, 1090 pp. Bahumaid, Showqi. (2006) Collocations in EnglishArabic translations. Babel 52(2): 13352. Fareh, Shehdeh and Bin Moussa, Maher. (2007) Practicality and Usefulness of EnglishArabic dictionaries in translating English metaphors. Babel 53(1): 3247. Hamdan, Jihad M. (2005) Interacting with binomials: Evidence from Jordanian EFL learners. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 40: 3556. Hussein, Riyad F. (1998) Collocations revisited Journal of King Saud University, Language and Translation 10: 3947. Lewis, M. (1993) Te Lexical approach. London. L Teaching Publications, 200 pp. Moon, Rosamund. (1997) Vocabulary connections: Multi-word items in English in Schmitt, Norbert and Michael McCarthy, Vocabulary description, acquisition and pedagogy. Cam- bridge: CUP, pp. 4063. Oxford Wordpower Dictionary for Arabic Speaking Learners of English (2005) Oxford University Press, 886 pp. Schmitt, Norbert and McCarthy, Michael (1997) Vocabulary description, acquisition and peda- gogy. Cambridge, CUP, 383 pp. Sinclair, J (1987) Collocation: a progress report. In R. Steele and T. Treadgold (eds.) Language topics: An international collection of papers by colleagues, students and admirers of Professor Michael Halliday to honor him on his retirement. Vol. II: 31931. Amsterdam: John Benja- mins. Sinclair, J (1991) Corpus, concordance and collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 198 pp. Titone, D. A. and Connie, C. M. (1999) On the compositional and noncompositional nature of idiomatic expressions. Journal of Pragmatics 31: 165574. Verstraten, Linda. (1992) Fixed phrased in monolingual learners dictionaries in Pierre Arnold and Henri Bejoint. Vocabulary and applied linguistics(eds), pp. 2840. Wardell, David. (1991) Collocations: Teaching word-pairs in EFL classes. Forum 29(2): 357. 182 RiyadF. Hussein and Richard Lingwood Appendix: Translation Test Following is a 25-item translation test. Please translate all of the following sentences into Arab- ic. Te researchers assure you that your score on the test will be strictly confdential and will be used solely for the purpose of academic research. Your cooperation is highly appreciated. How- ever, before you start translating these sentences, please answer the following questions: Age Sex male female Major Educational level BA MA University Afliation 1. Paul and Mary must give and take more ofen if they want a happy marriage. 2. Most of the drawings were boring, but there were some masterpieces here and there. 3. Te door swung back and forth. 4. You cant be for and against the war. 5. Every now and then we have to report to the fnancial ofcer. 6. She went through some serious ups and downs last year. 7. Te boss told her again and again not to shout in his presence. 8. Te waitress gets good tips over and above her wages. 9. If the director is in a bad mood, he accepts no ifs and buts. 10. Hagar was desperate and ran to and fro looking for water. 11. If you want to know the ins and outs of what happened, read the newsletter. 12. Marking term papers is part and parcel of a teachers job. 13. Te new government has chosen to make law and order its priority. 14. Te flm star gave herself, heart and hand, to the relief work. 15. When she sings, she puts her heart and soul into it. 16. Stop talking about the theory, lets talk about the nuts and bolts of implementing the project 17. Te lawyer says this contract is null and void. 18. We should consider all the pros and cons before reaching a decision 19. She works in rather a hit-and-miss way, Iam afraid no one can rely on her results 20. If you have stolen the money, you must admit it here and now, or Iwill call the police. 21. Its too late to negotiate with the manager now, the decision to close the factory is cut and dried. 22. Having kith and kin living around you can certainly make you happier. 23. Everything was sold on the frst day of the sale, except for a few odds and ends. 24. Te corruption in the institute was eradicated root and branch. 25. John earns his bread and butter as a teacher of English, but he loves to write poetry. Abstract Te present study investigates Jordanian students ability to translate English binomials into Arabic and explores the strategies used when translating them into Arabic. It also investigates the usefulness of EnglishArabic dictionaries. For this purpose, a 25-item translation test was Strategies used in translating English binomials into Arabic 183 developed and distributed to two groups; an advanced group including 30 MA students, and an intermediate group comprising 50 undergraduate students studying English at Jordanian uni- versities. Te study revealed that the subjects general performance on the translation test was unsat- isfactory. Te percentage of correct answers on all items for all subjects was approximately 44%. Tis means that more than half of the test items in the translation test were erroneously ren- dered. Te subjects used diferent strategies to translate English binomials into Arabic. Te most frequently used strategy was contextualized guessing, followed by avoidance, literal translation, incomplete translation and least used, semantic approximation. Finally, with regard to the incorporation of English binomials along with their equivalents in Arabic in the English Arabic dictionaries, it was found that they were the highest in Al-Mawrid Dictionary 72%, followed by Atlas Dictionary 60%, and fnally Oxford Wordpower 52%. Some binomials were included in one dictionary, others were included in only two dictionaries. Five binominals, or 20% of binomials under investigation, namely for and against, ifs and buts, heart and hand, here and now and nuts and bolts were missing in all of the dictionaries. Tis indicates the need to compile specialized EnglishArabic dictionaries to address multi-word units such as collocations, idioms, and binomials, or at least to upgrade or enrich the currently used ones. Keywords: Multi-word units, binominals, translation strategies EnglishArabic Rsum Cette tude examine la capacit des tudiants jordaniens traduire des binmes anglais en arabe et tudie les stratgies utilises pour les traduire en arabe. Elle examine galement lutilit des dictionnaires anglais - arabes. Pour ce faire, un test de traduction de 25 items lexicaux a t mis au point et distribu deux groupes: un groupe avanc comprenant 30 tudiants de matrise et un groupe intermdiaire compos de 50 tudiants en anglais des universits jordaniennes. Ltude a rvl que les prestations gnrales des participants au test de traduction taient in- satisfaisantes. Le pourcentage de rponses correctes pour lensemble des lments et des sujets tait denviron 44%. Ce qui signife que plus de la moiti des lments dans le test de traduction taient traduits de manire errone. Les participants ont utilis difrentes stratgies pour tra- duire les binmes anglais en arabe. La stratgie la plus frquente consistait deviner en fonction du contexte, suivie par lvitement, la traduction littrale, la traduction incomplte et, plus rare- ment, lapproximation smantique. Enfn, en ce qui concerne lincorporation de binmes anglais et de leurs quivalents arabes dans les dictionnaires anglais-arabe, nous avons constat quils sont les plus nombreux dans le dictionnaire Al-Mawrid (72%), puis dans le dictionnaire Atlas (60%) et enfn dans le Oxford Wordpower (52%). Certains binmes apparaissaient dans un seul dictionnaire, dautres dans deux dictionnaires seulement. Cinq binmes, soit 20% des binmes tudis, savoir for and against, ifs and buts, heart and hand, here and now et nuts and bolts, taient absents de tous les dictionnaires. Ce qui montre la ncessit de compiler des dictionnaires spcialiss anglais- arabes pour aborder des units lexicales multiples, comme les collocations, les idiomes et les bi- nmes, ou du moins pour amliorer et enrichir les dictionnaires utiliss actuellement. Mots-cls: units lexicales multiples, binmes, stratgies traductionnelles anglais-arabe 184 RiyadF. Hussein and Richard Lingwood About the authors Riyad F. Hussein is a professor of linguistics and chairman of the Department of English lan- guage and literature at the Middle East University for Graduate Studies, Amman, Jordan. He obtained his Ph.D. from the State University of New York at Bufalo in 1981. He has published extensively in national and international journals such as Language Problems and Language Planning, English for Specifc Purposes, IRAL, World Englishes, Language Sciences, META and Grazer Linguistische Studien. His research interests include bilingualism, code-switching, lan- guage maintenance and language shif, second language acquisition, TEFL, translation and lex- ical studies. Address: Dept. of English, Middle East University for Graduate Studies, P.P. Box 2665, Amman 11953, Jordan. Richard Lingwood is an assistant professor of English at Al Isra Private University, Amman, Jor- dan. He has taught Literature and Humanities, MA TEFL and English for Translators at univer- sities in the UK and MENA. He has a PhD in English Literature from the University of Wales and a doctorate in chiropractic. He is currently preparing a study of Jordanian literature in En- glish. Address: Dept. of English, PO Box 22, Amman 11622, Jordan. E-mail: richardlingwood@gmail.com Copyright of Babel is the property of John Benjamins Publishing Co. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.