Hrisztalina Hrisztova-Gotthardt, Melita Aleksa Varga

(eds.)
Introduction to Paremiology: A Comprehensive Guide
to Proverb Studies
Hrisztalina Hrisztova-Gotthardt, Melita
Aleksa Varga (eds.)
Introduction to
Paremiology:
A Comprehensive Guide
to Proverb Studies

Managing Editor: Anna Borowska

Associate Editor: Darko Matovac
Language Editor: Aderemi Raji-Oyelade
Published by De Gruyter Open Ltd, Warsaw/Berlin
Part of Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Munich/Boston

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-

NoDerivs 3.0 license, which means that the text may be used for non-commercial
purposes, provided credit is given to the author. For details go to
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/.

© 2014 Hrisztalina Hrisztova-Gotthardt, Melita Aleksa Varga ( Eds.) and contributors

for chapters
ISBN: 978-3-11-041015-0
e-ISBN: 978-3-11-041016-7

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek

The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche
Nationalbibliogra e; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at
http://dnb.dnb.de.

Managing Editor: Anna Borowska

Associate Editor: Darko Matovac
Language Editor: Aderemi Raji-Oyelade
www.degruyteropen.com

Cover illustration: © Thinkstock/Vladimirs

Complimentary copy, not for sale.
To Professor Wolfgang Mieder, with eternal gratitude for support,
advice, inspiration and encouragement.
Acknowledgements
A er years of conducting various researches and investigating this
highly interesting eld of study, paremiology, we have bene tted
immensely from interactions with prominent scholars, friends and
colleagues. We are indebted to all of them for support, advice, and
help, because without any of these we would not have been inspired to
compile this volume. Therefore our gratitude goes in the rst place to
our contributors, who transferred their time, energy and knowledge
into these texts. Thank you for the hard work and willingness to enrich
the world of paremiology. We would like to especially thank Professor
Aderemi Raji-Oyelade, and express our deepest appreciation for his
support and for dedicating his precious time to proofread the
manuscript. We are very grateful for all the valuable remarks and
suggestions on content, language and style of the various chapters.

The Editors
Contents
List of contributing authors
Hrisztalina Hrisztova-Gotthardt, Melita Aleksa Varga
Introduction
References
Neal R. Norrick

1 Subject Area, Terminology, Proverb

De nitions, Proverb Features
1.1 The Subject Area of Paremiology
1.2 Terminology
1.2.1 The Proverb and Its Kin
1.2.2 Self-containedness
1.2.3 Traditionality
1.2.4 Didactic Content
1.2.5 Fixed Form
1.2.6 Poetic Features
1.3 Proverb De nitions
1.4 Proverb Features
1.4.1 Polysemy
1.4.2 Pun
1.4.3 Hyperbole
1.4.4 Irony
1.4.5 Tautology
1.4.6 Paradox
1.4.7 Connotation
1.4.8 Imagery
1.4.9 Syntactic Features
1.4.10 Discourse Features
1.5 Conclusion
References
Wolfgang Mieder

2 Origin of Proverbs
2.1 Introduction
2.2 The Creation of Proverbs
2.3 Four Major Sources for Common European
Proverbs
2.4 Origin of Some Modern Proverbs
2.5 New Theories on the Creation of Proverbs
2.6 Conclusion
References
Outi Lauhakangas

3 Categorization of Proverbs
3.1 Introduction
3.2 The Speci city of Proverbs
3.3 Whose Tradition Are Proverbs?
3.4 Practical and Ideological Needs to
Categorize Proverb Material
3.5 Di erences in the Accuracy of Proverb
Material
3.6 From Intuitive Orderliness to Systematic
Categorization
3.7 G. L. Permyakov’s Logico-semiotic
Classi cation of Proverbs and Proverbial
Phrases
3.8 The Matti Kuusi International Type
System of Proverbs
3.9 Comparison Between Permyakov’s
Logico-semiotic Categorization and
Kuusi’s Type System
3.9.1 Permyakov’s is not worth in Kuusi’s
System
3.9.2 Permyakov’s absence of in Kuusi’s
System
3.10 Automatic Data Processing and New
Possibilities to Construct Proverb
Databases
3.11 Summary
References
Peter Grzybek

4 Semiotic and Semantic Aspects of the

 Proverb
4.1 Semiotics and the Proverb
4.2 Semiotics and Its Dimensions
4.2.1 Pragmatics
4.2.2 Syntactics
4.2.3 Semantics
4.3 Metalanguage
4.4 “Indirectness” and “Non-literalness”
4.5 Holistic vs. Componential Analysis,
Analytical vs. Synthetic Clichés
4.6 Sign Concepts: System-based vs.
Process-oriented Semiotics
4.7 Logics and Analogics
4.8 Analogy, Double Analogy, and the
Concept of Situativity
4.9 From Proverb Semantics to Semantic
Proverb Classi cation
4.10 Theoretical and Empirical Paremiology
and the Semiotics of Culture
References
Marcas Mac Coinnigh

5 Structural Aspects of Proverbs

5.1 Structure and Style
5.2 Sentences and Phrases
5.2.1 Sentence Type
5.2.2 Sentence Function
5.3 Syntax and Structure
5.3.1 Proverbial Formulae
5.3.2 The Wellerism
5.3.3 Anti-proverbs
5.4 Structural Markers
5.4.1 Syntactic Parallelism
5.5 Emphatic Word Order
5.5.1 Cle ing
5.5.2 Le -dislocation
5.5.3 Topicalisation
5.5.4 Sub-Clausal Fronting
5.6 Parataxis
5.6.1 Relationship Between Juxtaposed
Phrases / Clauses
5.7 Concluding Remarks
References
Vida Jesenšek

6 Pragmatic and Stylistic Aspects of Proverbs

6.1 Introduction and Theoretical Framework
6.2 Stylistic of Proverbs
6.2.1 Proverbs and Rhetorical Devices
6.2.2 Proverbs and Stylistic Registers
6.2.3 Proverbs and Stylistic Colouring
6.2.4 Proverbs and the Feature of Expressivity
6.3 Pragmatic Aspects of Proverbs
6.3.1 Argumentative Functions of Proverbs
6.3.2 Proverbs as Items of Speech Acts in Non-
argumentative Contexts
6.3.3 Proverbs in Text-constituting and Text-
structuring Functions
6.4 Conclusion and Outlook
References
Anna Lewandowska, Gerd Antos

7 Cognitive Apects of Proverbs

7.1 Introduction
7.2 Lako and Johnson’s Conceptual
Metaphor Theory
7.3 Metaphorical Concepts
7.4 Epistemological Essentials
7.5 Proverb Concepts (PCs)
7.6 Structural Elements of Proverb Concepts
7.6.1 Linguistically Concise Form
7.6.2 Syntactic-semantic Structure
7.6.3 Holism
7.6.4 Structural Simplicity
7.6.5 Cultural Frame
7.6.6 Ability to Project
7.6.7 Ability to Implicate
7.7 The Relation of MCs to PCs
 References
Peter Ďurčo

8 Empirical Research and Paremiological

Minimum
8.1 What a Paremiological Minimum Ought to
Be?
8.2 Why Do We Need a Paremiological
Minimum or Optimum?
8.3 How to Get a Paremiological Optimum?
An Empirical Approach
8.4 The Concept of a Paremiological
Optimum. A Complex Approach
8.5 An Example: Paremiological Optimum of
Slovak Language
8.5.1 Method
8.5.2 Questionnaire
8.5.3 Empirical Survey Findings
8.5.4 Corpus Analysis Findings
8.6 Paremiological Optimum of Slovak
Language – correlation of the
knowledge/familiarity and the corpus
frequency
8.7 Conclusions
References
Kathrin Steyer
9 Proverbs from a Corpus Linguistic Point of
View
9.1 Introduction
9.2 Why Corpora?
9.3 Corpus Linguistic Approaches to
Proverb Study
9.3.1 Corpus-based Questions About
Proverbs
9.3.1.1 Proverb – Yes or No?
9.3.1.2 Fixedness and Variance
9.3.1.3 Proverb Frequency
9.3.1.4 Meaning and Usage
9.3.2 Proverbs – Corpus Driven
9.4 Summary and Outlook
References
Appendix 1
Tamás Kispál

10 Paremiography: Proverb Collections

10.1 De nition of Proverbs, Proverb
Collections and Proverb Dictionaries
10.1.1 De nition of Proverbs
10.1.2 De nition of Proverb Collections and
Proverb Dictionaries
10.2 Usage of Printed Proverb Collections
10.2.1 Which One to Use?
10.2.2 How to Find a Proverb in a Proverb
Collection?
10.2.3 What Kind of Information is Contained
Under a Proverb Entry?
10.2.3.1 Information on Standard Proverb
Forms and Variants
10.2.3.2 Information on Meaning of Proverbs
10.2.3.3 Information on Usage of Proverbs
10.2.3.4 Proverb Exercises
10.3 Usage of Electronic Proverb
Collections
10.3.1 How to Find a Proverb in an Electronic
Proverb Collection?
10.3.2 What Kind of Information Contains a
Proverb Entry?
10.3.2.1 Information on Standard Proverb
Forms and Variants
10.3.2.2 Information on the Meaning of
Proverbs
10.3.2.3 Information on Usage of Proverbs
10.3.2.4 Exercises on Proverbs
10.4 Conclusion
References
Roumyana Petrova

11 Contrastive Study of Proverbs

11.1 Introduction
11.2 Comparative and Contrastive Approach
11.3 The Beginnings: Contrastive
Paremiography
11.4 Contrastive Paremiology: What Is It All
About?
11.5 New Approaches to Contrastive
Paremiology: Tertium Comparationis
11.6 Contrastive Paremiology and the Ethnic
Aspect of Proverbs
11.7 Modern Contrastive Paremiology: A
Short Overview
11.8 New Approaches to Contrastive
Paremiology
11.8.1 The Semantic Approach
11.8.2 The Linguocultural Approach
11.8.3 The Cognitive Approach
11.8.4 The Culturematic Method
11.9 Concluding Remarks
References
Charles Clay Doyle

12 Proverbs in Literature
12.1 Introduction
12.2 Proverbs in Poetry
12.3 Proverbs in Prose Fiction
12.4 Proverbs in Plays
12.5 Proverbs in Other Kinds of Literature
12.6 Conclusion
References
Anna Konstantinova

13 Proverbs in Mass Media

13.1 Introduction
13.2 Proverbs in the Media Discourse: General
Remarks
13.3 Traditional Proverbs in Mass Media
13.4 Modi cation of Proverbs in Mass Media
13.5 The Role of Proverbs on the Structural
Level of Media Texts
13.6 The Role of Proverbs on the Semantic
Level of Media Texts
References
Sabine Fiedler

14 Proverbs and Foreign Language Teaching

14.1 Introduction
14.2 Proverbs in Foreign Language
Learning and Teaching
14.2.1 On the Signi cance of Including
Proverbs into Foreign Language
 Teaching
14.2.2 The Motivational Potential of Proverbs
14.2.3 Proverbs as a Basis for Language
Learning and Teaching
14.2.4 Proverbs and Figurative Language
14.2.5 Proverbs as a Mirror of Culture
14.2.6 Proverbs and Fluency
14.3 Towards a Proverb Optimum
14.3.1 Selection Criteria
14.3.2 A Questionnaire Study
14.3.2.1 The Knowledge of Proverbs Among
Advanced Learners of English
14.3.2.2 Mother Tongue Influences
14.3.2.3 The Role of Context
14.3.3 Some Implications for the Learning
and Teaching of Proverbs
14.3.3.1 Teaching Proverbs in an Appropriate
Context
14.3.3.2 Sources of Reference
14.3.3.3 Receptive and Productive Knowledge
14.3.3.4 The Contrastive Perspective
14.4 Final Remarks
References
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Anna T. Litovkina
15 Anti-proverbs
15.1 Introduction
15.2 Terminology
15.3 Occurrence of Anti-proverbs
15.4 Proverbs Most Popular for Variation
15.5 Anti-proverbs with International
Distribution
15.6 Types of Proverb Alterations
15.7 Themes Treated in Proverb
Transformations
15.8 Background of Research
15.9 Summary
15.10 Implications for Further Research
References
Glossary of Key Terms Appearing in the Book
List of Tables
List of Figures
Index
List of contributing authors
Hrisztalina Hrisztova-Gotthardt
University of Pécs, Hungary
Introduction

Melita Aleksa Varga

Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Croatia
Introduction

Neal R. Norrick
Saarland University, Germany
Chapter 1

Wolfgang Mieder
University of Vermont, U.S.A.
Chapter 2

Outi Lauhakangas
Helsinki, Finland
Chapter 3

Peter Grzybek
University of Graz, Austria
Chapter 4

Marcas Mac Coinnigh

Queen’s University Belfast, Northern Ireland
Chapter 5
Vida Jesenšek
University of Maribor, Slovenia
Chapter 6

Anna Lewandowska
Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Germany
Chapter 7

Gerd Antos
Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Germany
Chapter 7

Dana Gläßer
Chapter 7

Peter Ďurčo
University of St. Cyril and Methodius in Trnava, Slovakia
Chapter 8

Kathrin Steyer
Institute for the German Language, Mannheim, Germany
Chapter 9

Tamás Kispál
University of Szeged, Hungary
Chapter 10

Roumyana Petrova
Angel Kanchev University of Rousse, Bulgaria
Chapter 11
Charles Clay Doyle
University of Georgia, U.S.A.
Chapter 12

Anna Konstantinova
Kuban State University of Technology, Russia
Chapter 13

Sabine Fiedler
University of Leipzig, Germany
Chapter 14

Anna T. Litovkina
János Selye University, Komárno, Slovakia
Chapter 15
Hrisztalina Hrisztova-Gotthardt, Melita Aleksa Varga
Introduction
Proverbs summarize everyday experiences and common observations
in a concise and gurative way. They have been created and used for
thousands of years and passed as expressions of wisdom and truth
from generation to generation. It is thus not surprising that scholars
became interested in this language phenomenon and started to
examine it from various points of view. For instance, paremiographers
are devoted to collecting and classifying the proverbs, and
paremiologists address questions concerning the de nition, form,
structure, style, content, function, meaning and value of proverbs (see
Mieder, 2004: xii). However, the main results of the paremiographic
activities and the paremiological research are listed in the annual
bibliographies in Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb
Scholarship, edited by Wolfgang Mieder. Yet, even though proverbs
have been collected and studied for centuries, there is a major
question that arises every now and then, namely do proverbs play a
signi cant role in the modern age, or are proverbs on their way to
extinction in highly developed cultures? Current paremiological
research results show, however, that proverbs are still alive and
illustrate the complex communicative functions the sayings possess:
electronically stored and processed large, structured sets of
contemporary texts (corpora) testify to the relatively high frequency of
occurrence of proverbs, and we are witnessing the xedness and
productivity of proverbs in modern languages (Steyer, 2012: 7). It is
based on these ndings that we believe that proverbs still deserve
much attention, some of which is being transferred through the
present volume.
Similarly to the four main works in this area (Trench’s On the
Lessons in Proverbs (1853), Taylor’s The Proverb (1931), Röhrich &
Mieder’s Sprichwort (1977) and Mieder’s Proverbs. A Handbook (2004),
the present volume discusses the nature and the study of proverbs in
detail. It provides a comprehensive overview of the main areas of
paremiological research, not only summarizing the current research
stand, but also highlighting suggestions for further study. The basic
notions among others include de ning proverbs, main proverb
features, origin, collecting and categorization of proverbs. Special
emphasis is placed on the relation between theory and practice and on
important application areas which currently need more elaboration:
the role of proverbs in foreign language teaching and computer and
corpus linguistic aspects of paremiology.
Unlike the previous works mentioned above, each single chapter of
this book is composed by a di erent author – a leading scholar-
specialist for this particular area of proverbial study. Since all the
een chapters intend to give basic knowledge, an insight into the
main issues of paremiology, some overlapping of the information
presented in them turned to be unavoidable. Nevertheless, the
di erent chapters do not build upon each other and can be read
separately, not necessarily in the order given. The paremiological
glossary in the end of the volume and the multilingual approach are
important key features that make this handbook unique and
important. The exempli cation is done by using proverb examples
from various languages. All examples are translated into English,
which is given in square brackets a er the original entry. For the
convenience of our readers, if a proverb has an English equivalent, it is
noted with the abbreviation ee in the square brackets. The word-for-
word translations of proverbs into English have been marked with ww.
The original proverb from which an anti-proverb has been derived is
preceded by a < sign. An index of key terms from the book will
hopefully prove to be helpful while searching for valuable information.
The rst chapter of the volume entitled “Subject Area, Terminology,
Proverb De nitions, Proverb Features”, outlines the subject area of the
proverb study, taking into account the folkloristic and linguistic
aspects. The author of the chapter, Neal R. Norrick points out that
proverbs have been studied from a range of perspectives for various
reasons, and the diverse research traditions have produced a range of
di ering terminologies, which require description and comparison. For
this reason, the author introduces and compares the standard terms
used by linguists and folklorists while trying to de ne the proverb.
Furthermore, Norrick gives a short overview of the various attempts to
describe the essence and the character of this linguistic phenomenon.
He considers the possibility of a feature-based de nition and
investigates the main proverb features in their own right.
In his chapter entitled “Origin of Proverbs”, Wolfgang Mieder
discusses the multifaceted aspects of emergence of proverb. He agrees
with Archer Taylor and Bartlett Jere Whiting that proverbs are not
created by the folk but rather by an individual. Quoting the
anthropologist Raymond Firth, the author describes the process of
creation of a proverbial text, its way from “the concrete formulation of
an individual in response to particular set of circumstances” to “the
acceptance by the people at large as being appropriate to a more
general situation”. Mieder introduces the four major sources for
common European proverbs, namely the Greek and the Roman
Antiquity, the Bible, the Medieval Latin and the loan translations. In
addition, he refers to the fact that some modern sayings are created by
the mass media; lines of popular songs and lms, advertising slogans
etc. can very quickly turn into proverbs. The author closes his paper
summarizing several new theories on the creation of proverbs.
Outi Lauhakangas’ “Categorization of Proverbs” shows di erent
ways of classifying the unilingual and multilingual proverb material.
The author explains the history, background, aims and motives of
these e orts, presents and compares two serious attempts to systemize
the international proverb lore – G. L. Permyakov’s Logico-semiotic
Classi cation of Proverbs and Proverbial Phrases and The Matti Kuusi
International Type System of Proverbs. Furthermore, she o ers a critical
point of view to a number of popular and systematic proverb
collections, cultural comparisons and multilingual databanks.
Ultimately, Lauhakangas provides a summary of the di erent needs in
constructing categorizations of proverb corpora and also reviews the
possible bias in applying conventional classi cation methods to
proverbs.
In the chapter “Semiotic and Semantic Aspects of the Proverb”,
Peter Grzybek addresses the issue of the meaning(s) of proverbs. He
shortly presents di erent approaches towards the semiotic study of
proverbs, as for instance classifying the traditional sayings according
to their speech act character, to their status as a complex super-signs
or categorizing them based on the assumption that proverbs are signs
and models of typical situations. The author argues that it seems
reasonable to take the three semiotic dimensions – the pragmatic, the
syntactic and the semantic dimension – as a starting point for an
analysis of the semiotics of the proverb. He also concludes that
studying proverbs from the perspective of cultural semiotics can give
deep insides into various cultural mechanisms.
Marcas Mac Coinnigh points out that proverbs are found in all
world languages and although they may vary in terms of their subject
matter and function, it is generally accepted that the majority of
sayings adhere to certain grammatical formations regardless of
language, and certain syntactic structures are the favoured
architecture for the creation of new proverbs. In his paper entitled
“Structural Aspects of Proverbs” Mac Coinnigh describes and analyzes
the most common proverbial formulae (e.g. X is Y; No X, no Y etc.) and
syntactic markers (e.g. syntactic parallelism, emphatic word order,
parataxis etc.) using examples from a range of European and non-
European languages. His main aim is to provide a linguistic overview
of the notion of proverbial style and structure in world languages.
Vida Jesenšek’s essay “Pragmatic and Stylistic Aspects of Proverbs”
discusses the topic from two di erent perspectives. The rst one is the
perspective of the so-called traditional and the second one of the
contemporary stylistics. Traditional stylistics regards proverbs as
stylistic devices, to which it assigns individual characteristic stylistic
attributes outside of textual use (e.g. their belonging to a particular
stylistic register), whereas modern stylistic theories understand style
as a functional-pragmatic factor and focus on observing proverbs in
complex textual-situational contexts. By using examples from German
language, namely proverbs in context, Jesenšek illustrates the
argumentative potential of proverbs, their contribution to performing
various speech acts and the role in organizing and structuring the text.
Based on the assumption that proverbs are linguistically and
culturally coined frames, Anna Lewandowska and Gerd Antos refer to
the traditional sayings as verbal stereotypes of knowledge which allow
their users to comment on, standardize and evaluate new situations
with the help of known social clichés. In the chapter “Cognitive
Aspects of Proverbs”, the authors pose the following questions: What
makes proverbs stereotyped? Which in uence does the linguistic form
of proverbs have on our ability to memorize and duplicate them?
Which role do proverbs play in social language transfer? Lewandowska
and Antos discuss the above questions from a cognitive point of view
and concentrate on Lako and Johnson’s Conceptual Metaphor Theory
as a frame to create a cognitivist understanding of proverbs.
The scope of the chapter “Empirical Research and Paremiological
Minimum ”, written by Peter Ďurčo, falls on the concept of the so-
called paremiological or proverbial minima in languages. He gives a
short overview of the various attempts to establish a set of proverbs
that all members of a particular speech community know or a set of
proverbs an average adult is expected to know. Despite the sceptical
opinion of some scholars, Ďurčo argues for the need and importance of
paremiological minima for various languages. In addition, he
discusses in detail the potential empirical approaches, naming not
only the advantages, but the disadvantages as well. In the closing
session of his paper the author presents the ndings of his own
research in this area.
The chapter “Proverbs from a Corpus Linguistic Point of View”
features some aspects which are particularly relevant for the empirical
study of proverbs in written language. The main focus lies on two
corpus linguistic approaches to the study of current proverb use: the
corpus based and the corpus driven approach. Kathrin Steyer outlines
the general principles on which the two methods work. All the
examples are based on the German Reference Corpus DeReKo, which is
located at the Institute for the German Language in Mannheim. The
questions, search strategies and examples presented in the paper,
according to the author, should be transferable to other corpora and
other languages.
The rst section of the chapter “Paremiography: Proverb
Collections” deals with theoretical issues such as the lack of a general
and unambiguous de nition of proverbs and proverb collections.
Tamás Kispál argues that the main questions concerning proverb
collections relate mostly to their usage. For this reason, he focuses in
his essay mainly on presenting the structure and the features of
printed and electronic proverb compilations. To illustrate his
theoretical framework, the author uses numerous examples from
diverse printed volumes and electronic collections. He puts special
emphasis on the importance of integrating exercises on proverbs,
especially into proverb dictionaries written for non-native speakers.
The next chapter, “Contrastive Study of Proverbs” intends to
outline a comprehensive picture of the major approaches that have
been suggested, developed and applied by proverb scholars who
pursue the relatively new eld of comparative (crosscultural) and
contrastive paremiology. In the scope of her chapter, Roumyana
Petrova explores brie y the essence of the approaches both in general
linguistics and in paremiology and paremiography. The author argues
that contrastive paremiology is actually the theoretical extension of
contrastive paremiography. Petrova o ers a short overview of the
current contrastive paremiology research and presents in greater detail
four sets of speci c approaches in contrastive proverb studies: the
semantic, the linguocultural, the cognitive and the culturematic
method.
The main thesis of Charles C. Doyle’s chapter, “Proverbs in
Literature ”, is that proverbs can be thought of as (minimal) folk
poems. For this reason, they have long be employed not only in oral
discourse, but also as an element within formal literature – to point
morals, develop characters, enliven a dialogue, or they can function in
a variety of other ways. The author illustrates the manifold range of
uses of the traditional sayings with numerous examples for proverbs in
poetry, prose ction, plays and other kinds of literature, e.g. in
philosophical writings, political speeches, etc. Doyle closes his chapter
by pointing to the various remaining opportunities for research and
close study of how and why authors have employed speci c proverbs.
Anna Konstantinova’s chapter “Proverbs in Mass Media” discusses
di erent aspects of proverb application in mass media texts. Opening
her paper with some general remarks on proverbs in the media
discourse, the author explores the cases of standard and creative use
of proverbs. Apart from that, Konstantinova looks at the way proverbs
help structure di erent media texts. In addition, she dwells on the role
of proverbs on the semantic level of the texts. The author shows how in
modern mass media the proverb proves to be a tool of choice for
conveying di erent attitudes and views. The primary resource data
used by Konstantinova include newspapers and magazines form UK
and USA, American TV series and popular English language songs.
 In her own essay, “Proverbs and Foreign Language Teaching”,
Sabine Fiedler sets out to provide answers to the following questions:
Why should proverbs play a part in foreign language teaching? Which
proverbs should be taught and learnt? How can the teaching of
proverbs be best accomplished? At the same time, the chapter o ers a
detailed overview of current issues in phraseodidactic research.
Furthermore, it draws on the results of a survey on the knowledge of
proverbs among advanced learners of English. Even though Fiedler
focuses speci cally on English and German examples, the ideas
presented in the chapter can easily be adapted to the teaching of other
languages.
“Anti-proverbs” is the title of the last chapter of the volume. In this
essay, Anna T. Litovkina describes the nature of the deliberate and
innovative proverb alterations, known among paremiologist as anti-
proverbs. The chapter gives a de nition of the anti-proverb, discusses
its occurrence, treats proverbs most popular for variation and proverbs
with international distribution, addresses the di erent mechanisms of
proverb variation and topics. The vast majority of the texts quoted in
this chapter are in English; but in some additional cases, anti-proverbs
from other languages are quoted as well. In the end, Litovkina reviews
the background of anti-proverb research providing valuable grounds to
further investigation of the phenomenon.
With the choice of the topics and scholars, we hope that the
present volume will be appealing to both experienced and budding
scholars, both undergraduate, graduate and doctoral students of
Linguistics, Folkloristic and Culture Studies, as well as to all other
professionals interested in the study of proverbs. It is our sincere hope
that the book will o er an extensive and intriguing overview of the
multifaceted study of proverbs.

References
Mieder, W. (2004). Proverbs. A Handbook. Westport, Connecticut/London:
Greenwood Press.
Röhrich, L. & Mieder, W. (1977). Spichwort. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzlersche
Verlangsbuchhandlung.
Steyer, K. (2012). Vorwort. In K. Steyer (Ed.), Sprichwörter multilingual. Theoretische,
empirische und angewandte Aspekte der modernen Parömiologie. Tübingen: Narr
Verlag.
Taylor, A. (1931). The Proverb. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
Trench, R. C. (1853). On the Lessons in Proverbs. London: John W. Parker and Son,
West Strand.
https://archive.org/stream/onlessonsinprov01trengoog#page/n8/mode/2up
(accessed December 27, 2013).
Neal R. Norrick
1 Subject Area, Terminology, Proverb
De nitions, Proverb Features

1.1 The Subject Area of Paremiology

The linguistic units called proverbs in a culture constitute a diverse,
organically developed and developing collection of certain recurrent
sayings from the discourses of a language community. Lexica and
anthologies can mislead us into thinking there are some xed,
homogenous groups of items called proverbs – as opposed to an adhoc
grouping of recurrent sayings. There is no a priori reason to expect the
proverbs of a community to constitute a coherent syntactic type or to
express a consistent set of propositions. We should not expect to
discover a single characteristic proverbiality or a single inclusive
de nition of the proverb, and we should not be surprised when
isolated proverbs contradict each other. Hence Taylor’s (1962) famous
remark that the de nition of the proverb is too di cult to reward the
e ort.
What we generally call proverbs are traditional, pithy, o en
formulaic and/or gurative, fairly stable and generally recognizable
units. Proverbs are characteristically used to form a complete
utterance, make a complete conversational contribution and/or to
perform a speech act in a speech event. This di erentiates them from
non-sentential items like proverbial phrases, idioms, binomials etc.
Proverbs make apodictic (expressed as undeniable truth) statements
like Money talks or they evoke a scenario applicable to a range of
analogous situations, as in Little strokes fell great oaks. In supplying
ready-made responses to recurrent types of situations, proverbs seem
to suggest particular evaluations or courses of action.
Proverbs can be collected and anthologized as little texts complete
in themselves; they can be described in their relations to other
proverbs, in their discourse contexts and within their cultural matrix.
For folklorists, proverbs exist as items of folklore alongside riddles,
proverbial phrases and jokes. They provide highly recognizable,
(relatively) xed textual building blocks with unique rhetorical
potential. Proverbs are valued as folk wisdom and bearers of
traditional lore. Their cultural salience renders proverbs interesting in
cross-cultural comparison as well, including questions of intercultural
transmission and translation. For linguists, proverbs unite features of
the lexeme, sentence, set phrase, collocation, text and quote. They
illustrate interesting patterns of prosody, parallelism, syntax, lexis and
imagery. Because of their imagery, proverbs provide evidence of
stereotypes and standard cultural metaphors. These properties further
make proverbs valuable in psycholinguistic testing. Proverb variation
by text and by speech community raises interesting issues as well.
Recent advances in corpus linguistics have established patterns of
proverb use as statistical facts rather than educated guesses. Corpus
investigations show that proverbs are rare and o en manipulated in
contexts where they appear, but they nevertheless remain recognizable
due to their cultural salience. For lexicographers, proverbs are items to
be collected, categorized and catalogued with information on their
origins and distribution along with appropriate links to other proverbs,
proverbial phrases, idioms and so on within and across linguistic
communities. Thus, proverbs have been studied from a range of
perspectives for various reasons, and the diverse research traditions
have produced a breadth of di ering terminologies, which require
description and comparison.

1.2 Terminology
Proverbs have repeatedly been characterized as self-contained,
traditional units with didactic content and xed, poetic form, whereby
all these characterizations have been cast in varying terminologies
with various nuances and connotations. Folklorists have been
concerned with setting proverbs proper o from the proverbial
phrases, proverbial comparisons, superstitions, wellerisms, clichés
and idioms. At the same time, linguists have sought to de ne the
proverb with terms such as sentence, clause, idiom, and
conversational turn among others. In the following, the standard terms
will be investigated and compared before turning to the matter of
de nition as such.

1.2.1 The Proverb and Its Kin

The proverb is a traditional gurative saying which can form a
complete utterance on its own. Its ability to constitute a complete
utterance distinguishes the proverb proper from another traditional,
characteristically gurative form, the proverbial phrase, which cannot
stand on its own, for example to kick over the traces, which lacks a
subject. The linguistic term idiom is o en applied to proverbial phrases
with gurative meanings. A special sort of proverbial phrase is the
proverbial comparison (or proverbial simile) with as, like or than, for
example as brown as a berry, like a house a re and older than the hills.
The maxim and the cliché are like the proverb in forming a complete
utterance, but they lack its traditionality and imagery: Whereas the
maxim states a rule for conduct as in Never put o till tomorrow what
you can do today, the cliché expresses a trite observation as in When
you’re hot, you’re hot. The slogan is a non-traditional form created to
promote a product or idea as in Nike’s advertising slogan Just do it or
Obama’s campaign slogan Yes, we can. Non-traditional sayings in
general usage but perhaps associated with particular sources such as
Greek mythology for Pandora’s box or historical persons as for Martin
Luther King’s I have a dream are called winged words. There are also
aphorisms, literary forms like the proverb in its straightforward
memorable formulation as in Art is long, life short. Winged words and
aphorisms merge into the stock of allusions to well-known texts and
writers such as All the world’s a stage from Shakespeare’s As You Like
It. Apart from that a binominal is a linguistic term for formulaic
phrases consisting of two parallel words connected by and or
occasionally or, including proverbs such as Live and learn and Sink or
swim. The wellerism, which derives its name from the character Sam
Weller in Charles Dickens’ novel The Pickwick Papers, is another
traditional item which extends a proverb or a cliché, playfully
assigning it to a speaker as in It won’t be long now, as the monkey said
when he backed his tail into a fan. Superstitions are traditional beliefs
without any xed expression, e.g. that breaking a mirror brings seven
years of bad luck. Although, these de nitions and distinctions seem
rough-and-ready, they provide an initial working basis, the more
precise parameters of which such as self-containedness and
traditionality will be examined in the paragraphs to come.

1.2.2 Self-containedness
According to Seiler (1922), proverbs must be self-contained sayings (in
sich geschlossene Sprüche), by which he means that none of their
essential syntactic units may be replaced. Seiler introduces this
criterion to distinguish proverbs from proverbial phrases: it excludes
proverbial phrases like to face the music and smooth as silk, because
they lack syntactic units essential to render them complete clauses,
and these can be linked to them at will, as in you have to face the music
and hair smooth as silk.
Milner (1969a) and Barley (1972) come quite close to Seiler’s self-
containedness when they identify proverbs with statements.
Abrahams (1972) is perhaps more precise in requiring that a proverb be
a full statement, and Dundes (1975) proposes the even more precise
propositional statement. Now, Abraham and Dundes seem to mean
that the proverb must be co-extensive with a logical proposition, i.e.
one unit consisting of a subject and predicate. An initial objection to
this criterion is that it fails to correspond to natural conversational
conventions, which have little to do with formal logical conventions
(Abercrombie, 1965; Crystal & Davy, 1969). Second, all ve writers cited
apparently intend their criteria to apply to some deeper, semantic level
underlying the surface structure of proverbs, since proverb surface
structures routinely consist of pure predicates without arguments, as
in Forewarned, forearmed or Live and let live. But without a complete
semantic analysis and a theory of proverb deep structures, such
features provide no rm basis for de nition.
Moreover, even presupposing deep structure semantic analyses for
the proverbs in question, the logical proposition or statement can only
serve as a lower boundary on proverb structure, since proverbs
commonly contain more than a single proposition-like unit, as in e.g.
Marry in haste and repent at leisure. As characteristically
conversational units, proverbs are more appropriately described in
terms of the structure of conversation, say that of a complete
conversational turn syntactically independent of surrounding
discourse (Norrick, 1985).
Paremiologists have also had recourse to the syntactic notion of the
sentence. Taylor (1934) determines that proverbs must be complete (if
elliptical) sentences, and goes on to insist (Taylor et al., 1939) that they
be grammatical sentences. Such scholars as Abrahams (1968a), Holbek
(1970) and Röhrich and Mieder (1977) also accept (complete) sentence
status as a basic property of the proverb; see also Mieder’s (2004)
summary de nition as a “short sentence of wisdom.” Unfortunately
the syntactic notion of the sentence su ers from some of the same
problems as the statement or the proposition as a de nitional criterion
for the proverb: it ignores the fundamentally conversational nature of
the proverb; it is untestable due to its appeal to some
unoperationalized notion of deep structure; it is not coextensive with
the proverb, but provides only a lower boundary on its form at best.
And the notion of the sentence brings in problems of its own.
For one thing, many proverbs exhibit special recurrent proverbial
structures (formulas in the terminology of Neumann, 1966), which
diverge from the standard Subject-Predicate pattern, for instance Like
father, like son, and Better late than never among many others. Second,
there are proverbs like Them as has gits in violation of standard rules
for sentences and even foreign proverbs like Che sarà, sarà completely
outside English sentence structure. Again characterization in terms of
a possible conversational contribution makes better sense. The notion
of the sentence was brought in to re ect the criterion of self-
containedness necessary to distinguish proverbs from proverbial
phrases (Seiler, 1922; Taylor, 1962; Röhrich, 1973), and these latter
cannot alone constitute an independent contribution to conversation,
which would su ce to distinguish the two, again appealing to
conversational categories. Sayings whose referring expressions are
interpreted generally rather than particularly in context as in A rolling
stone gathers no moss can then classify as proverbs, as can imperatives
like Strike while the iron is hot, interpreted with reference to the hearer
in the conversational context.

1.2.3 Traditionality
Proverb scholars have repeatedly stressed the traditional nature of
proverbs as items of folklore, including their common use in recurring
verbal performances (see, e.g., Seiler, 1922; Firth, 1926; Taylor, 1950;
Mieder, 1996; among many others). Certainly, we must insist on
currency in some linguistic community. The traditional nature of
proverbs coordinates closely with their status as items of folklore. The
relation between traditionality and folklore comes out nicely in
Abrahams’ (1969: 106) de nition of folklore as “traditional items of
knowledge which arise in recurring performances.” Since folklore is
traditional and recurring, it is seen as authorless, sourceless and also
as non-literary, non-learned. Inasmuch as proverbs are linguistic units,
the recurring units must initially be oral/verbal, even if they are later
recorded in writing and canonized in lexica.
Firth (1926) cites the rustic nature of proverbs as items of folklore in
his de nition, but he also stresses their common use in recurring
verbal performances. Seiler’s (1922) term Volkläu gkeit (folkloricity)
encompasses both the folkloristic nature of proverbs and their
common use as well. More recent de nitions have preferred the term
traditional, perhaps including the notion items of folklore (e.g. Taylor,
1950; Röhrich, 1967; Holbek, 1970; Abrahams, 1968a; Milner, 1969a;
Dundes, 1975). In sociolinguistic terms, proverbs must be associated
with some language community. To the extent that they contain
dialectal, sociolectal features, proverbs can further be associated with
particular social groups or “communities of practice” (Eckert, 1989;
Eckert, 2000; Wenger, 1998). Then terms like Volkläu gkeit and
traditionality can be understood as implying long-term common usage
in certain communities of practice.
However, folklore and traditionality can also refer to the content of
proverbs, speci cally their rustic imagery relating to pre-industrial
society. Time is money goes back at least as far as the ancient Greek
Theophrastus (c. 372-287 BC) and is attested for English as early as 1659
(Taylor, 1950), so that it clearly counts as traditional in the sense of
being in common use over time, but it hides its age well. By contrast,
proverbs like Strike while the iron is hot and Don’t put the cart before the
horse trade on rustic images which give them a traditional ring,
whether they have been in common use over time or not. Clearly, we
must distinguish these two senses of folklore and traditionality in any
consideration of proverbs.

1.2.4 Didactic Content

Didactic content has also been consistently predicated of proverbs (e.g.
by Seiler, 1922; Firth, 1926; Abrahams, 1968). The didactic tendency
may take the direct form of a prescriptive rule, as in Look before you
leap, or the indirect form of a general observation, as in Soon gotten,
soon spent. Jolles (1930) objects to calling proverbs didactic in the rst
direct sense, allowing only the empirical interpretation of proverb
content as general observations, but he fails to distinguish, rst, the
neutral ideational meaning of a proverb, second, the reason for its use
in some context, and, third, the e ect of a proverb in context. Thus, we
can say some proverbs explicitly express a social injunction, others are
o en used with didactic force, and others may suggest a course of
action to a listener in context. Mieder’s (1996: 4) de nition of proverbs
as containing “wisdom, truths, morals, and traditional views” seems
to cover all these aspects. Still, whether speakers perceive The early
bird catches the worm as a summation of past experience or not, they
can deploy it as a warning and they listener can interpret it as advice
and follow it in any case. Requiring didactic tendency would eliminate
some items o en included in the category of proverbs, in particular
those bound to speci c situations like Long time no see as a greeting
formula or A little bird told me as a way to avoid divulging the source of
information. Sayings like these lacking any didactic potential are
perhaps better separated from proverbs proper and labeled clichés or
conversational gambits
Certainly many proverbs exhibit either direct didactic tendency as
items of advice, as in Put your best foot forward, or indirect didactic
tendency as potential advice summarizing past experience, as in First
come, rst served. Others can be used with didactic intentions under
appropriate conditions, for instance Little pitchers have big ears as
advice about the danger of exposing children to adult talk generally
rather than as a speci c warning that children are listening.

1.2.5 Fixed Form

Taylor (1950) explicitly mentions xed traditional form as characteristic
for the proverb, and in Taylor (1962) he calls “rigidity of form ... an
essential characteristic of proverbs.” Barley (1972) also invokes the
notion of xed form, though he includes “limited restructuring and
variation.” Dundes (1964) distinguishes xed-phrase genres of folklore
such as proverbs and songs from free-phrase genres like jokes and
riddles. Fixedness in the form of proverbs follows from the necessity
that they remain recognizable in context. Speakers cite proverbs as
units, assuming their listeners will recognize them as such and
interpret them appropriately. Nevertheless, recognizability does not
require complete immutability of proverb form. Listeners continue to
identify proverbs in spite of lexical and grammatical variation because
proverbs are “strongly coded” (Meleuc, 1972) and “overcoded” in Eco’s
(1972; 1976) terms: their structures are marked and they bear greater
social and psychological signi cance than do other set phrases. Seiler
(1922) stresses that xedness cannot preclude variability through time
and from one community to the next. This variability naturally leads to
multiple forms for a proverb in some cases, e.g. Where/when one door
shuts/is shut another opens/is opened and All that glitters/glisters is not
gold/All is not gold that glitters/glisters. In conversational contexts it
may be impossible to say whether a particular speaker has uttered a
pre-existent variant or a nonce restructuring of a given proverb.
Further, because proverbs are strongly coded and highly
recognizable, mention of one crucial phrase can serve to call forth the
whole proverb. Thus, the rst noun phrase from A rolling stone gathers
no moss yields the name of the rock group The Rolling Stones and the
music magazine The Rolling Stone, as well as the title for Bob Dylan’s
song Like a rolling stone and so on. In conversation simply saying
Remember the early bird alone would serve to warn a listener about
arriving late.
Finally, proverbs are o en introduced with frames like you should,
one should and always, as in You should strike while the iron is hot or
Always look before you leap (Taylor (1930) calls these proverb
formulas, but Kuusi’s (1966) term frame seems to be more popular).
Proverbs are also o en introduced or followed by proverbial a xes
(Norrick, 1981) like as the saying goes, as they say and it is said. Certain
adjectives like proverbial and everlovin’ can appear before any stressed
noun in a proverb without a ecting its recognizabilty, as witness: The
proverbial pen is mightier than the sword or Make hay while the
everlovin’ sun shines. In fact, these proverbial in xes (Norrick, 1981)
help listeners identify proverbs as such. Taken together, these items
hold out the possibility of varying and extending practically any
proverb; at the same time, their frequent occurrence with proverbs
tends to foreground proverbial utterances.
As Moon (1998) has shown on the basis of empirical corpus
investigations, proverbs are both comparatively rare and variable in
everyday discourse, but they remain recognizable to members of the
language community due to their high salience. Fixedness in proverbs
is relative, and proverbs are never completely frozen.

1.2.6 Poetic Features

Metaphoricity (or imagery) is also o en included among the required
features of a proverb. Thus, Barley (1972) distinguishes literal
traditional sayings from necessarily metaphorical proverbs, terming
the former maxims; Greimas (1970) draws a parallel distinction
between the gurative proverb and the literal dicton. At the same time,
other writers like Taylor (1950) and Hain (1963) consider imagery a
common attribute of proverbs rather than a de ning property as such.
Moreover, as Seiler (1922) and others have noted, metaphoricity is a
matter of degree rather than an absolute dichotomy, so that the
distinction between proverbs and literal sayings would have to be a
gradual one as well. Furthermore, many proverbs may vary by use
between literal and metaphoric interpretation. It never rains but it
pours can occur in the literal context of a real rain storm or with
metaphorical reference to a streak of bad luck. Strictly speaking,
metaphoricity is a matter of proverb use rather than an internal
semantic property of proverbs themselves.
Like metaphoricity, prosody is o en counted among the typical,
but not necessary, features of proverbs, e.g., by Seiler (1922), Hain
(1963) and Abrahams (1968). Besides rhyme as in Birds of a feather
ock together, alliteration as in Live and let live, and assonance as in
Strike while the iron is hot, Taylor (1962) identi es various metrical
patterns and parallelism characteristic of proverbs. Related to prosody
is the tendency for proverbs to display certain word-order patterns,
e.g., shorter elements rst, longer elements toward the end (Panini’s
Law), as in Here today, gone tomorrow; see Cooper and Ross (1975) and
Norrick (1985). Prosody and regular patterning make proverbs both
more memorable and more recognizable in context.
Both imagery and prosody help render a construction more
memorable and thereby increase its chances of becoming a standard
formula. This explains why so many proverbs do display ostentatious
prosody and remarkable imagery, but it does not entail that all
proverbs exhibit such poetic structures. Indeed, plenty of everyday
prosaic phrases have somehow managed to achieve proverbial status,
e.g. Time is money and Children should be seen and not heard among
many others.

1.3 Proverb De nitions

What we generally call proverbs are recurrent, pithy, o en formulaic
and/or gurative, fairly stable and generally recognizable units used to
form a complete utterance, make a complete conversational
contribution and/or to perform a speech act in a speech event. This
de nition di erentiates them from non-sentential items like proverbial
phrases, idioms, binomials etc. Proverbs make apodictic statements
like Money talks or they evoke a scenario applicable to a range of
analogous situations, as in Little strokes fell great oaks. In supplying
ready-made responses to recurrent types of situations, proverbs seem
to suggest particular evaluations or courses of action, resulting in their
o en noted didactic tendency. They are associated with various
discourses and recognized texts, speakers and writers, including
famous authors, all of which accrues to the signi cance they bear in
society. Still, there is no single proverbiality and no single inclusive
de nition of the proverb. Alternate de nitions will be examined and
contrasted, leading to a consideration of the features characteristic for
proverbs – or really for groups of proverbs. Despite Taylor’s (1962)
warning about the futility of de ning the proverb, paremiologists have
proposed various sorts of de nitions through the years.
With culturally determined items like proverbs, as with other areas
of language use, it is necessary to recognize the fuzziness of the
category and the scalar application of features. Wittgenstein (1953)
showed that cultural institutions like game could only be de ned as
families of related activities, rather than in a feature-by-feature
manner, and this holds for institutionalized sayings like proverbs as
well. Probably no single proverb unites all the characteristics we
imagine to be prototypical. Among those proverbs we might consider
prototypical, there are, rst, proverbs which sketch a scenario
generalizable to comment on a range of analogous situations like: The
early bird catches the worm; A rolling stone gathers no moss; A stitch in
time saves nine. Second, there are formulaic examples, which tend to
make a literal statement such as: Like father, like son; The more haste,
the less speed; Easy come, easy go; Better late than never. A few
common formulaic proverbs may evoke a scenario as well, e.g., Once
bitten, twice shy; When it rains, it pours; Fair weather a er foul. Third,
there are those proverbs which make a speci c statement about a
particular matter, usually in less strikingly gurative language like:
Money talks; Time ies; Beauty’s only skin deep.
The attempt to discover a de nition of proverbiality based on
speci c properties is probably just as fruitless as a de nition of the
proverb itself in such terms. The notion of proverbiality is itself even
more clearly a matter of prototypicality (compare Arora, 1984). Honeck
and Welge (1997) develop a scale of proverbiality based on
“characteristics shown by the prototypical best proverbs.” Their
de nition contains characteristics like nonliteral in relation to a topic,
use of poetic features, and nonhackneyed, but these features
themselves cry out for de nition. Moreover, according to such criteria,
there can be no clear line between proverbs, clichés, literary allusions
and popular sayings like: When you’re hot you’re hot; All the world’s a
stage; Fools rush in where wise men fear to go; It’s just like déjà vu all
over again. What counts for all such sayings is currency in community
discourse in relatively stable form. This fact presents a problem for any
e ort to de ne the proverb in purely structural terms. Two noteworthy
attempts in this direction are Milner (1969a; 1969b) and Dundes (1975).
Milner (1969a) argues that the most characteristic form of the
traditional saying “consists of a statement in four parts,” whereby each
part can be assigned a positive or negative value and the four parts
naturally group into two halves. Then, for each half, two plus or two
minus signs yield a plus, and the combination of a plus and a minus
yields a minus. Milner develops analyses like the following for
proverbs.
Unfortunately, even clearly quadripartite (four-part) proverbs resist
any obvious assignment of positive and negative values: for instance in
Monkey see, monkey do how would one decide to score monkeys or
doing as + or -? Moreover, many attested proverbs simply do not fall
into four discernible elements, most clearly short examples like Time
ies and Money talks; moreover, Milner’s appeal to some “hidden
structure which must be perceived by the unconscious level of our
minds” (Milner, 1969b) is clearly unconvincing. Dundes (1975) argues
that Milner’s assignment of values and con gurations ends up as a
system of classi cation rather than a de nition as such.
Dundes himself further develops the basic idea of a structural
de nition of the proverb. He says, rst, that only underlying formulas
provide the basis for de nition, and, second, that the basic unit of
classi cation is a descriptive element consisting of a topic and a
comment–an analysis parallel to that Georges and Dundes (1963) had
proposed for riddles. A proverb may consist of a single descriptive
element, e.g., Love is blind, though examples with multiple descriptive
elements are statistically more common. On this basis, Dundes
distinguishes equational proverbs like Time is money from
oppositional proverbs, which in turn may involve simple negation as
in All that glitters is not gold or more complex oppositions as in Better
buy than borrow and You can’t have your cake and eat it. Ultimately
Dundes analysis ends up as a classi cation system for proverbs as
well. Simply saying proverbs are analyzable into two halves and four
quarters or into descriptive elements consisting of topic-comment pairs
provides little basis for de ning proverbs without showing the various
ways proverbs instantiate these structures, so that any de nition must
include a system of classi cation.
Moreover, the topic-comment de nition Dundes proposes is
functional rather than structural at base. It ultimately derives from the
theme-rheme distinction within the Functional Sentence Perspective
(FSP) analysis of the Prague School of linguistics. And it is precisely
the functional–as opposed to structural–basis of this approach which
allows for parallel analyses of such structurally distinct proverbs as:
Opposites attract (Noun Verb);
Easy come, easy go (Adverb Verb);
Out of sight, out of mind (Preposition Noun);
No pain, no gain (Determiner Noun).
Each of these proverbs contains paired descriptive elements as shown,
each structurally distinct yet functionally identi able as theme-rheme
descriptive elements. This is the genius of FSP analysis; and this
functional approach underlies any comprehensive proverb analysis.
We require a functional de nition of the proverb in any case, since we
must continue to recognize, e.g., Live and learn as a binomial in
structural terms (Verb Conjunction Verb), even though it functions as a
proverb.
Barley (1974) argues that in de ning items of folklore we should
“forget the genres and concentrate on the features,” and he develops a
feature-matrix de nition for the proverb and related items. In
abbreviated form:

Norrick (1985) makes a further attempt in this direction, arguing for

prioritization of certain features and using di erent sets of features for
ethnographic and supercultural proverb de nition; see also Harnish
(1993). Consideration of a feature-based de nition of proverbs
naturally leads into the following investigation of proverb features in
their own right.

1.4 Proverb Features

Semantic features of individual proverbs are interesting in themselves
and they may suggest an approach to proverbiality. Furthermore,
standard semantic features of proverbs can serve as a model of basic
types of meaning relations which should be familiar to all members of
a culture. The assumption that standard proverb meanings will be
accessible to normal adult members of the language community
provides the foundation for the use of proverbs in tests of
understanding by psycholinguists and psychologists.

1.4.1 Polysemy
The polysemy of the proverb A rolling stone gathers no moss with its
two standard interpretations a person on the move remains young and a
person on the move remains poor has o en been noted. Historically the
separate interpretations may have originated as dialect variants.
Although tests have shown that both readings for this proverb co-exist,
hearers interpret it interactionally to mean either that they should or
should not roll, depending on their beliefs (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett,
1973).

1.4.2 Pun
Proverbs occasionally contain puns. This makes them potentially
polysemic as well, in as much as either meaning may predominate in
any particular discourse context. For instance, we interpret No news is
good news to mean either news is never positive or the absence of new
information leaves hope that nothing bad has happened; similarly, we
interpret the phrase get up with the eas in the proverb Lie down with
the dogs and get up with the eas to mean either arise when the eas do
or arise infested with.

1.4.3 Hyperbole
Any proverb containing absolute modi ers and adverbs like no, never,
all and always is likely to involve overstatement, as in A watched pot
never boils and The grass is always greener on the other side (of the
fence). We understand the rst to mean that a watched pot seems to
take longer to boil and the second to mean that distant grass tends to
seem greener. See Norrick (2004a; 2004b) on overstatement and
Extreme Case Formulation in proverbs.

1.4.4 Irony
A few proverbs are ironic, e.g., All geese are swans, though irony is
much commoner in proverbial phrases such as A ne kettle of sh and
As clear as mud.

1.4.5 Tautology
Tautologous proverbs are considerably more common. The most
obvious examples are proverbs where the same noun phrase appears
on both sides of a copula verb, as in Enough is enough; Boys will be
boys; What will be, will be and It isn’t over till it’s over. Of course, such
proverbs are not meaningless expressions of equivalence. They exhibit
regular patterns of interpretation, and various attempts have been
undertaken to explain how listeners produce appropriate
interpretations, e.g., Wierzbicka (1987), Fraser (1988) etc.

1.4.6 Paradox
One might not expect to nd paradoxical proverbs at all, in as much as
proverbs record salient observations and rules of conduct. Yet proverbs
expressing preposterous claims like The pen is mightier than the sword
are fairly common in English, and level-mixing, vicious circle proverbs
like Never say never and Expect the unexpected are not particularly
rare. If proverbs employ paradox, it must somehow reinforce their
generalizing, didactic tendencies. Golopentia-Eretescu (1970; 1971)
recognizes several di erent patterns of interpretation, whereby non-
contradictory meanings are derived for some paradoxical proverbs, but
others like Nothing is permanent but change exhibit genuine logical
contradiction, mixing logical levels and leading to vicious circles. For
such proverbs no resolution works: The paradox asserts itself,
scintillates and intensi es: permanence passes, change abides, as
Norrick (1989) shows.

1.4.7 Connotation
Connotations contribute to the overall discourse meaning of proverbs
as well. They intensify the rhetorical force and the traditional
signi cance of proverbs. Folksy, rural, pre-industrial connotations are
typical of proverbs, e.g., Make hay while the sun shines and Don’t put
the cart before the horse. Many proverbs also exhibit Biblical and/or
religious connotations as well, e.g., The spirit is willing but the esh is
weak and The blind lead the blind.
Proverbs employ humour fairly frequently and jocular
connotations are evident in many proverbs (see section on set phrases
and humor), e.g., Monkey see, monkey do and If you can’t be good, be
careful used as a leave-taking formula.

1.4.8 Imagery
Proverbs and proverbial phrases o en have striking images. This helps
keep them noticeable and memorable despite relative infrequency and
variation, as Norrick (2007) argues.
Cognitive linguists argue that the metaphors in set phrases
organize our perceptions, but the picture is far from clear (compare
Burger, 1996; Burger, 1998). Proverbs contain specialized images from
pre-industrial life, rather than basic-level metaphors or images
familiar to speakers today. Proverbs thrive on foregrounding, high
visibility and cultural salience, and consequently their images must be
striking and memorable, not quotidian. Proverb images o en fail
miserably as models for organizing our perceptions of recurrent
situations. In fact, they are frequently specialized, archaic and/or far-
fetched, e.g., Don’t buy a pig in a poke and The pot calls the kettle
black. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree is certainly confusing and
ambiguous by comparison with Like father, like son. The hasty bitch
brings forth blind whelps introduces a whole range of irrelevant
questions about dogs by contrast with the clear, concise, assonant and
rhyming Haste makes waste. Proverbs frequently mix metaphors,
combining images from separate source domains into complex,
sometimes incompatible collages. Thus, Every cloud has a silver lining
rst draws on the metaphoric domain of weather phenomena standing
for human experience and emotion, then switches to a scalar domain
where silver represents something precious and desirable. The lining is
mysterious, tting, as it does, neither with clouds nor with silver. We
try to imagine the cloud as a garment with a precious lining, but then
the bad weather aspect of the cloud disappears. The result is a jumble
of incongruous metaphors from unrelated domains, which cannot
really resolve itself at all. As another example, Hitch your wagon to a
star mixes the metaphoric domain of horses and wagons with
astronomical imagery. It is di cult to imagine just how one might
hitch a wagon to a star and what would result from the match. Again
the image can hardly serve as a model organizing our perceptions.
Di erent sorts of imagery may be distinguished in proverbs. Seiler
(1922) identi es both metaphor and personi cation in proverbs. Thus,
some proverbs call forth a scenario generalizable to a range of
analogous situations like A rolling stone gathers no moss, while others
make a speci c statement about a particular matter, o en employing
personi cation, as in Money talks. Proverbs may also be only partially
metaphoric, as in Every dog has its day, where only the noun dog need
be understood in a general gurative way as standing for any animate
entity or human being.
Seitel (1969) shows how fully metaphoric proverbs express a
scenario applicable to a range of parallel social contexts. He posits a
relation between the leopard and his spots in the proverb The leopard
cannot change his spots and the situation in which a speaker wishes to
argue that a thief can never reform. The proverb in e ect provides a
model by which we comment on an analogous social situation: the
leopard is to his spots as the thief is to his criminal tendency,
abbreviated by Seitel in the formula A:B::C:D.
Maranda (1971) sets up a model for the riddle which looks much
like Seitel’s model for proverbs. His standard formula A/B = C/D is
simply a notational variant of Seitel’s abbreviated formula. Maranda
recognizes a metonymic relation between each of the paired terms A/B
and C/D, and a metaphoric (analogical) relation between the two pairs.
For the Finnish riddle One pig, two snouts, A stands for the pig, B for
his snout, D stands for the two snouts, and C for the thing to be
guessed, namely the traditional Finnish fork plow. Georges and
Dundes (1963) show that the two sets of terms in Maranda’s riddle
formula are related just as the terms of the proverb are to its concrete
situation. The metonymic relation between the pig and his snout
parallels that between the leopard and his spots, while the relation
between the plow and its two snouts parallels that between the thief
and his criminal tendency.
Barley (1972) adapts and expands Maranda’s model for the proverb.
Since the relationship between the terms of a proverb, unlike those of
a riddle, can be understood even outside context, Barley distinguishes
the internal, logical relations between the terms of the proverb itself
from the external relations which the proverb contracts to its situation
of use. The analogy between the proverb image and the situation of
use is then not drawn directly, but by way of the generalized relation
expressed by the proverb. Barley calls this the maxim level, because
metaphorical proverbs can be paraphrased by literal maxims, in the
case of The leopard cannot change his spots we nd the maxim Once a
thief always a thief. Barley simply generalizes each term of a proverb,
essentially just disregarding the particular semantic features of words,
to generate its maxim level structural description. If leopard is
characterized as animate, animal, feline etc., one simply erases
features up to the level of animate. If the spots in the proverb are
characterized as natural, marking, blotch, contrastive color, then all the
features are erased up to the level of natural. This process yields a
generalized structural description like animate beings cannot change
their natural characteristics. See Grzybek (1994; 2000) for a good
critical treatment of this research on proverb interpretation and
context from a semiotic perspective.
Norrick (1985) reworks Barley’s traditional feature semantic
approach in terms of frame theory. Schema representations for words
like bird and worm will include the information that (some) birds hunt
for worms, because worms serve as food for them, thereby ensuring
that generalization of the concrete image in The early bird catches the
worm will lead to early agents reach goals rather than simply early
animate beings get animate beings. Norrick goes on to identify all kinds
of imagery in proverbs. He rst distinguishes the scenic species-genus
synecdoche of proverbs like The leopard cannot change his spots and
The early bird catches the worm from nominal (partwhole) synecdoche
in which a single noun in a proverb must be interpreted in parspro-toto
fashion, e.g., A false tongue will hardly speak the truth, where tongue
stands for the whole speaking person. Then he analyzes various sorts
of predicate extension metaphor, in which a selectional feature or
presupposition of the verb forces an anthropomorphic, animate or
concrete interpretation, e.g., Pride feels no pain, where pride is
personi ed, Familiarity breeds contempt, where familiarity is
interpreted as a living organism, and Fair words break no bones, where
words are treated as physical objects, respectively. Norrick further
recognizes, rst, object-attribute metaphor in proverbs like Necessity is
the mother of invention, where mother stands for its attribute of
nurturing, and, second, metonymy of the instrument-function variety,
e.g. in Fear gives wings, where wings stand for the ability to y.

1.4.9 Syntactic Features

Proverbs o en represent structures which would be ungrammatical by
normal standards. Like other idiomatic structures, proverbs represent
an anomaly in any generative linguistic paradigm (Chafe, 1968).
Proverbs o en contain archaic and dialect words and structures, e.g.
Them as has gits. They may even come from other languages entirely,
as in Che sarà sarà and C’est la vie. Proverbs are also o en constructed
around formulas which fail to conform to normal sentence grammar,
e.g., Like father, like son; The bigger they come, the harder they fall;
Once bitten, twice shy.
Since proverbs are typically conversational, it makes more sense to
think of them as potentially complete contributions to conversation in
order to sidestep the issue of grammaticality. Nevertheless, the
syntactic structures of proverbs are interesting in themselves, e.g.
those without verbs like: No rose without a thorn; Soon ripe, soon
rotten; Many men, many minds. As Nordahl (1999) argues, when
proverbs lack verbs, and when they are otherwise elliptical, hearers
must mobilize rhetorical principles to work out discourse inferences.
This holds as well for proverbs without nouns like: The more, the
merrier; Easy come, easy go; Slow and steady wins the race.
Along with truly formulaic structures, proverbs exhibit various
patterns of repetition. As demonstrated in Norrick (1989), repetition in
proverbs tends to focus attention on key terms and to emphasize
contrasts between the repeated elements. Sometimes the syntactic
frame of a proverb contains repetition as in Where there’s smoke there’s
re. Repetition across a copula results in tautological proverbs like
Enough is enough and Boys will be boys. We nd proverbs like An eye
for an eye, where each token of eye stands for a di erent referent, but
separate tokens may also seemingly refer to the same thing as in You
gotta do what you gotta do, resulting in apparent paradox. Playful
variation with repetition results in such memorable proverbs as One is
none and When the going gets tough, the tough get going. We return to
the interpretation of tautological and paradoxical proverbs below.
At the same time, as Bhuvaneswar (2003) has shown, proverbs
represent all the major types of syntactic structures (in English and
Telugu). Many of the best-known proverbs instantiate standard types
of sentences, e.g. Subject-Verb-Direct Object, as in A rolling stone
gathers no moss; or Subject-Verb-Indirect Object-Direct Object, as in
You can’t teach an old dog new tricks; Subject-Copula-Predicate
Nominal, as in Time is money and so on. To correctly access the role of
formulaicity in our perception of prototypicality of proverbs or in the
notion of proverbiality, however, we need statistical data. We must
consider not only the frequency of formulaic versus non-formulaic
proverbs in various corpora, but also the frequency of speci c
formulas and the number of formulaic examples among the most
frequently used proverbs.
Research on the length of proverbs in words has so far been
suggestive, but inconclusive (see Grzybek, 2000). Czermák (1998)
determines an average length of 4.7 words for proverbs in the Czech
National Corpus. More statistical data of various kinds will be
necessary to reach any rm conclusions.
The matter of so-called transformational defects, as described by
Fraser (1970), Newmeyer (1972), Dobrovolskij (1997; 1999) and others is
not particularly important for proverbs, insofar as they o en occur in
variant related forms and remain highly recognizable even when
truncated and manipulated. Currency and familiarity allow
recognition of proverbs even in varied and abbreviated form: hence the
use of recognizable chunks like early bird in contexts like the early bird
satellite and early bird air fares (numerous examples in the internet)
Proverbs provide convenient structures for manipulation to create
original statements, as in this example from CNN market analysis: The
early investor catches the bargain stocks. Note in particular the
tendency to literalization of the proverb image here. See Mieder (2007),
Mieder (1982) and Mieder/Litovkina (1999) on the modi cation of
proverbs into anti-proverbs in discourse.
Finally, as Moon (1998) argues, transformability has now become a
statistical corpus fact rather than an intuitive game. Corpus
investigations show that some set phrases, including proverbs, tend to
appear in certain variant forms while others do not. This discussion of
recognizability despite manipulation leads naturally into the following
section on proverbs in discourse.

1.4.10 Discourse Features

Moon (1998) presents statistics from computer counts showing that
proverbs are both comparatively rare and variable, but they are still
recognizable to members of the language community. Moon stresses
the correlations between frequency, form, type of idiomaticity and
discourse function. Very frequent items like at least and of course tend
to be functional and not fully lexical, frozen collocations rather than
metaphorical, while colourful, stylistically marked and metaphorical
expressions like proverbs are rare and o en manipulated in contexts
where they appear; see also Moon (2007).
Proverbs are statistically infrequent in corpora counts, because of
the kinds of corpora available and the way computer programs search,
but also due to the nature of proverb use itself, as Norrick (2007)
argues. First, proverbs are o en bound to contexts poorly represented
in corpora, e.g. oral storytelling, everyday face-to-face talk. Second,
proverbs occur in variants, as noted above, and these go unrecognized
in computer searches (numerous examples in the internet, e.g. early
bird airfares and like a rolling stone). Third, proverbs really are
infrequent compared to gambits, prefabs, binomials, collocations like:
(do you) know what?, by and large, ins and outs and in short.
Nevertheless, proverbs remain recognizable to native speakers,
due, rst, to their cultural salience and value as folk wisdom and
bearers of traditional lore. Second, proverbs occur in prominent
discourse positions like speech summaries and story closings with
evaluation functions. In argumentation, as Wirrer (1998) shows,
proverbs create a canonical specialization of topoi like the busy bee.
Third, proverbial utterances are o en foregrounded with special voice
shi s and intonation speech and marked with framing devices like we
always say and as the saying goes. As little recurrent texts in
themselves, proverbs represent highly marked, “strongly coded”
(Meleuc, 1972) structures, e.g. prosody (rhyme, alliteration, rhythm),
rhetorical strategies (hyperbole, paradox, personi cation, metaphor),
proverb formulas: like N like N and the A-er the A-er, special syntax and
lexis: Them as has gits and Look what the cat drug in.
Finally, because they are highly codi ed and easily recognizable,
proverbs o en serve as templates for creative manipulation, and hence
they appear in forms unrecognizable to a computer search. For
instance, in a conversation reported in Norrick (1993), a participant
comments on a recipe for tofu potato casserole by saying, that’s like the
bland leading the bland. The original form of the proverb allusion
appears in Matthew 15,14: If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into
the ditch, but perhaps more frequent is the form Like the blind leading
the blind. Either way, the full proverb provides a serviceable structure
for creation of a new utterance. Consider also I’d rather have some ten
million in the hand than one million in the bush in the passage from the
London Lund Corpus (Svartvik & Quirk, 1980) below, where A bird in
the hand is worth two in the bush presumably served as template.

B: ne.
I mean it’s not that I want to,
A: no, no no no, no, oh no.
but it seems absolutely xed now.
B: and I’d rather have,
some ten million in the hand,
than than the one million in the bush.
um but,
A yes, yes of course.
B I think this is highly unlikely.
and uh I I’m I’m personally assuming,
that uh a million in the bush,
is more likely to happen.
A yes, yes, literally.
B yeah.
A in the bush.
B {laughs} yes. I think I know.

The proverb provides not only the initial allusion in lines 6-7, but the
phrase a million in the bush in speaker B’s next turn (line 12) and the
phrase in the bush for speaker A (line 16). Note also the proverbial
framing device literally in line 14 here produced by speaker A in
response to the proverbial allusion. Neither this nor the previous
allusion would, of course, be picked up in a computer search, yet
allusions and variations like these are probably the most common
occurrences of proverbs in discourse.
As noted in section 2.5 on xed form, proverbs o en appear along
with other set phrases, e.g., you know, they say, an apple a day. There
are standard frames like one should, you should and always which
o en ll out imperative structures in proverbs, rendering, say, Keep
your nose to the grindstone as You should keep your nose to the
grindstone or Always keep your nose to the grindstone. Proverbs in
discourse are also frequently bracketed by various proverbial a xes
like they say; I always say; as the saying goes and so on. In addition,
framing devices like literally frequently occur in proverbial discourse
contexts, and speakers generally set proverbs o from the surrounding
discourse in various ways, as Hain (1951), Czermák (1998) and Moon
(1998) demonstrate. Clearly more research is needed in this area, not
just to determine how proverbs are varied with formulas like you
should and always, but also to see how framing devices like as the
saying goes and literally function in context.
Most of the foregoing discussion holds for proverbial phrases as
well, de ned as gurative but incomplete clauses (versus collocations,
idioms, clichés) or, again, via prototypes like as smooth as silk for
proverbial similes and to live high on the hog for verbal phrases.
Proverbial phrases, too, occur rarely and in variant forms, specially
marked and set o from their discourse contexts in various ways. Just
as the proverbial worm turns, we also nd people living high on the
proverbial hog.
The patterns of frequency, salience and recognizability all hang
together. Proverbs and proverbial phrases are not frequent, but highly
noticeable, because they are salient in context, frequently
foregrounded, easily remembered, and so they can be varied and serve
as templates but still remain recognizable. By contrast, frequent
phrases like of course and at all go unnoticed despite their frequency
and because of their nondescript form.

1.5 Conclusion
Proverbs have been studied from folkloristic, linguistic and
lexicographic perspectives with varying methods and goals, resulting
in diverse terminologies, sometimes overlapping, sometimes
complementary. Various attempts to de ne the proverb and
proverbiality have met with di ering degrees of success, but there is
fairly general agreement about the basic groups of proverbs and their
salient features.
References
Abercrombie, D. (1965). Conversation and spoken prose. In D. Abercrombie (Ed.),
Studies in phonetics and linguistics (pp. 1-9). London: Oxford University Press.
Abrahams, R. D. (1968a). Introductory remarks to a rhetorical theory of folklore.
Journal of American Folklore, 81, 143-158.
Abrahams, R. D. (1969). The complex relations of simple forms. Genre, 2, 104-128.
Abrahams, R. D. (1972). Proverbs and proverbial expressions. In R. M. Dorson (Ed.),
Folklore and folklife (pp.117-127). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Arora, S. L. (1984). The perception of proverbiality. Proverbium, 1, 1-38.
Barley, N. (1972). A structural approach to the proverb and maxim with special
reference to the Anglo-Saxon corpus. Proverbium, 20, 737-750.
Barley, N. (1974). ‘The proverb’ and related problems of genre-de nition. Proverbium,
23, 880-884.
Bhuvaneswar, C. (unpublished) (2003). The syntax of proverbs: A survey of the
syntactic structure of proverbs I: A case study of English in Quirk’s model.
Hyderabad.
Burger, H. (1996). Phraseologie und Metaphorik. In E. Weigand & F. Hundsnurscher
(Eds.), Lexical structures and language use. Beiträge zur Dialogforschung, 10 (pp.
167-178). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Burger, H. (1998). Idiom and metaphor: Their relation in theory and text. In P. Durco
(Ed.), Europhras ‘97 (pp. 30-36). Bratislava: Akadémia PZ.
Chafe, W. (1968). Idiomaticity as an anomaly in the Chomskyan paradigm.
Foundations of Language, 4, 109-127.
Cooper, W. E. & Ross, J. R. (1975). World order. In R. E. Grossman et al. (Eds.), Papers
from the parasession on natural phonology, April 17, 1975 (pp. 63-111). Chicago:
Chicago Linguistic Society.
Crystal, D. & Davy, D. (1969). Investigating English style. London: Longman.
Czermák, F. (1998). Usage of Proverbs: What the Czech National Corpus Shows. In P.
Durco (Ed.), Europhras ‘97 (pp. 37-45). Bratislava: Akadémia PZ.
Dobrovolskij, D. (1997). Idiome im mentalen Lexikon: Ziele und Methoden der kognitiv
basierten Phraseologieforschung. Trier: Wissenscha licher Verlag Trier.
Dobrovolskij, D. (1999). Haben transformationelle Defekte der Idiomstruktur
semantische Ursachen? In N. Fernandez Bravo, I. Behr & C. Rozier (Eds.),
Phraseme und typisierte Rede (pp. 25-37). Tübingen: Stau enburg Verlag.
Dundes, A. (1964). Texture, text, and context. Southern Folklore Quarterly, 28, 251-
265.
Dundes, A. (1975). On the structure of the proverb. Proverbium, 25, 961-973.
Ďurčo, P. (Ed.) (1997). Phraseology and paremiology. Europhras ‘97. Bratislava:
Akadémia PZ.
Eco, U. (1972). Introduction to a semiotics of iconic signs. Versus, 2, 1-15.
Eco, U. (1976). A theory of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Eckert, P. (1989). Jocks and burnouts: Social categories and identity in the high
school. New York: Teachers College Press.
Eckert, P. (2000). Linguistic variation as social practice. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Firth, R. (1926). Proverbs in native life, with special reference to those of the Maori.
Folklore, 37, 134-153.
Fraser, B. (1970). Idioms within a transformational grammar. Foundations of
Language, 6, 22-42.
Fraser, B. (1988). Motor oil is motor oil. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 215-220.
Georges, R. A. & Dundes, A. (1963). Toward a structural de nition of the riddle.
Journal of American Folklore, 76, 111-118.
Golopentia-Eretescu, S. (1970). In nite proverbs. Proverbium, 15, 38-39.
Golopentia-Eretescu, S. (1971). Paradoxical proverbs, paradoxical words. Proverbium,
17, 626-629.
Greimas, A.-J. (1970). Du sens. Essai sémiotique. Paris: Seuil.
Grzybek, P. (1994). Foundations of semiotic proverb study. In W. Mieder (Ed.), Wise
words. Essays on the proverb (pp. 31-70). New York: Garland.
Grzybek, P. (2000). Die Grammatik der sprichwörtlichen Weisheit von G. L.
Permjakov. Mit einer Analyse allgemein bekannter deutscher Sprichwörter.
Baltmannsweiler: Schneider-Verlag Hohengehren.
Grzybek, P. (2000). Zum Status der Untersuchung von Satzlängen in der
Sprichwortforschung. Methodologische Vor-Bemerkungen. In G. A. Lilic (Ed.),
Slovo vo vremeni i prostranstve. K 60-letiju professora V.M. Mokienko (pp. 430-
457). Sankt Peterburg: Folio Press.
Hain, M. (1951). Sprichwort und Volkssprache. Eine volkskundlich-soziologische
Dorfuntersuchung. Gießen: Wilhelm Schmitz.
Hain, M. (1963). Das Sprichwort. Deutschunterricht, 15, 36-50.
Harnish, R. (1993). Communicating with proverbs. Communication & Cognition, 16,
256-290.
Holbek, B. (1970). Proverb style. Proverbium, 15, 54-56.
Honeck, R. P. & Welge, J. (1997). Creation of proverbial wisdom in the laboratory.
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26, 605-629.
Jolles, A. (1930). Einfache Formen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, B. (1973). Toward a theory of proverb meaning. Proverbium,
22, 821-827.
Kuusi, M. (1966). Ein Vorschlag für die Terminologie der parömiologischen
Strukturanalyse. Proverbium, 5, 97-104.
Maranda, E. K. (1971). The logic of riddles. In P. Maranda & E. K. Maranda (Eds.),
Structural analyses of oral tradition (pp. 189-232). Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
Meleuc, S. (1972). Struktur der Maxime. In J. Ihwe (Ed.), Literaturwissenscha und
Linguistik. Bd. 2.3: Zur linguistischen Basis der Literaturwissenscha 2 (pp. 276-
321). Frankfurt/Main: Athenäum.
Mieder, W. (1982). Anti-Sprichwörter. Wiesbaden: Verlag für deutsche Sprache.
Mieder, W. (1996). Proverbs. In J. H. Brunvand (Ed.), American folklore: An
encyclopedia (pp. 597-601). New York: Norton.
Mieder, W. (2004). Proverbs: A handbook. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Mieder, W. (2007). Proverbs as cultural units or items of folklore. In H. Burger et al.
(Eds.), Phraseology: An international handbook of contemporary research, 28(1)
(pp. 394-414). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Mieder, W. & Litovkina, A. T. (1999). Twisted wisdom: Modern anti-proverbs.
Burlington: The University of Vermont.
Milner, G. B. (1969a). What is a proverb? New Society, 332, 199-202.
Milner, G. B. (1969b). Quadripartite structures. Proverbium, 14, 379-383.
Moon, R. (1998). Frequencies and forms of phrasal lexemes in English. In A. P. Cowie
(Ed.), Phraseology: Theory, analysis, and applications (pp. 79-100). Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
Moon, R. (2007). Corpus linguistic approaches with English corpora. In H. Burger et
al. (Eds.), Phraseology: An international handbook of contemporary research
28(2) (pp. 1045-1059). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Neumann, S. (1966). Zur Terminologie der paromiologischen Strukturanalyse.
Proverbium, 6, 130.
Newmeyer, F. J. (1972). The insertion of idioms. In P. M. Peranteau et al. (Eds.), Papers
from the eighth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society (pp. 294-
302). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Nordahl, H. (1999). Proverbes sans verbe: Petite étude syntaxico-rhétorique sur les
proverbes à ellipse verbale. In G. Boysen & J. Moestrup (Eds.), Études de
linguistique et de littérature dédiées à Morten Nøjgaard (pp. 343-349). Odense:
Odense University Press.
Norrick, N. R. (1981). Proverbial linguistics: Linguistic perspectives on proverbs. Trier:
Linguistics Agency.
Norrick, N. R. (1985). How proverbs mean. Berlin: Mouton.
Norrick, N. R. (1989). How paradox means. Poetics Today, 10, 551-562.
Norrick, N. R. (1993). Conversational joking. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Norrick, N. R. (2004a). Hyperbole, extreme case formulations. Journal of Pragmatics,
36, 1727-1739.
Norrick, N. R. (2004b). Hyperbole in proverbs and proverbial phrases. In C. Földes
(Ed.), Res humanae proverbiorum et sententiarum (pp. 219-227). Tübingen: Narr.
Norrick, N. R. (2007). Proverbs as set phrases. In H. Burger et al. (Eds.), Phraseology:
An international handbook of contemporary research, 28(1) (pp. 381-393). Berlin:
de Gruyter.
Röhrich, L. (1967). Gebärde, Metapher, Parodie. Düsseldorf: Schwann.
Röhrich, L. (1973). Lexikon der sprichwörtlichen Redensarten. Freiburg: Herder.
Röhrich, L. & Mieder, W. (1977). Sprichwort. Stuttgart: Metzler.
Seiler, F. (1922). Deutsche Sprichwörterkunde. Munich: Beck.
Seitel, P. (1969). Proverbs: A social use of metaphor. Genre, 2, 143-161.
Svartvik, J. & Quirk, R. (1980). A corpus of English conversation. Lund: CWK Gleerup.
Taylor, A. (1930). The proverbial formula ‘man soll’. Zeitschri für Volkskunde N.F., 2,
152-156.
Taylor, A. (1934). Problems in the study of proverbs. Journal of American Folklore, 47,
1-21.
Taylor, A. et al. (1939). The study of proverbs. Modern Language Forum, 24, 57-83.
Taylor, A. (1950). Proverb. In M. Leach (Ed.), Standard dictionary of folklore,
mythology and legend (pp. 902-905). New York: Funk & Wagnall.
Taylor, A. (1962). The proverb and index to ‘the proverb’. Hatboro, PA: Folklore
Associates.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wierzbicka, A. (1987). Boys will be boys: ‘Radical semantics’ vs. ‘radical pragmatics’.
Language, 63, 95-114.
Wirrer, J. (1998). Phraseologismen in Text und Kontext. Phrasemata I. Bielefeld:
Aisthesis Verlag.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophische Untersuchungen. Oxford: Blackwell.
Wolfgang Mieder
2 Origin of Proverbs

2.1 Introduction
In 1931 Archer Taylor, the twentieth-century doyen of international
paremiology, stated at the beginning of his seminal book The Proverb
that “the origins of the proverb have been little studied” (3). In the
same year his friend Bartlett Jere Whiting published his invaluable
article on The Origin of the Proverb, also arguing that much more
scholarly work is needed to understand the multifaceted aspects of
proverb origins. Both paremiologists present much information on this
intriguing subject matter, and they certainly agree that proverbs are
not created by the folk but rather by an individual. Someone at some
time and somewhere couches a general observation, behavior, or
experience into a short complete sentence that subsequently is picked
up by others who might well change the wording slightly resulting in a
number of variants until a standard formulation results. As early as
1823 the British statesman Lord John Russell said it best, when he
de ned a proverb as One man’s wit, and all men’s wisdom that in itself
has become proverbial as The wit of one and the wisdom of many
(Taylor, 1975: 68). In other words, every proverb begins with an
individual whose keen insight is accepted and carried forth as a piece
of proverbial wisdom by people of all walks of life. Of course, for most
proverbs the individual coiner is no longer known, and the numerous
cultural, ethnographic, folkloristic, historical, linguistic, and literary
studies of the origin, dissemination, function, and meaning of
individual proverbs only rarely succeed in identifying that very person
who uttered the proverbial wisdom for the rst time (see Quitard, 1860;
Röhrich, 1991-1992; Mieder, 1977 and 1984).
Thus a comprehensive study of the ancient proverb Big sh eat little
sh was able to trace the proverb back to an allusion in the didactic
poem Works and Days by the Greek writer Hesiod of the eighth century
B.C from which it developed by way of variants and translations until it
became established in more or less identical wording in most
European languages and beyond (Mieder, 1987). But the rst reference
in Greek does not really identify the originator of this rather obvious
insight based on a common observation in nature. Most likely the
proverb was already in oral communication and it will never be known
who uttered this concise piece of wisdom for the rst time. And yet, for
some proverbs it is precisely known who started it and at what time, to
wit William Shakespeare’s Brevity is the soul of wit (1601), Alexander
Pope’s Hope springs eternal in the human breast (1733) that is now
usually cited in its truncated form of Hope springs eternal, Theodore
Roosevelt’s Speak so ly and carry a big stick (1900), and Erich Segal’s
Love means never having to say you’re sorry (1970). Some proverbs
clearly started as sententious remarks with famous literary authors
such as Cicero, Geo rey Chaucer, William Shakespeare, Miguel de
Cervantes Saavedra, Friedrich Schiller, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Bertolt
Brecht, etc. It is known that their statements became literary
quotations, that they were repeated again and again, and that they
eventually circulate as proverbs, with their original author slowly but
surely being forgotten. This phenomenon is de nitely going on today.
Well-known individuals like Winston S. Churchill, John F. Kennedy,
Mikhail Gorbachev, Willy Brandt, Martin Luther King, and others have
formulated concise and memorable statements that have become
proverbial (Mieder, 2009). At times these proverbs are cited by also
naming their author (Taylor, 1931: 34-43), but as is the usual case with
proverbs, they circulate in oral and written communication as
anonymous folk wisdom. Today, with the power of the mass media,
some of these utterances can become proverbs in a very short time
sequence.
But it should also be noted that certain proverbs get attached to
names of famous people to add special authority to their wisdom,
without anybody having been able to nd these texts in their written
works. Thus, it has falsely been claimed that Martin Luther coined Wer
nicht liebt Wein, Weib und Gesang, der bleibt ein Narr sein Leben lang
[Who does not love wine, women and song will remain a fool his whole
life long] ( rst reference in 1775) which starting in 1857 also gained
currency in the Anglo-American world as Who does not love wine,
women, and song, remains a fool his whole life long while stubbornly
keeping Luther’s name attached to it (Mieder, 2004b). And speaking of
America, it should be noted that while such anonymous proverbs as
The cat in gloves catches no mice, There are no gains without pains, and
Creditors have better memories than debtors were in fact used by
Benjamin Franklin in his almanacs and his famed essay The Way to
Wealth (1758), he most certainly did not coin them. But to give this
proponent of Puritan ethics his due, the proverbs There will be sleeping
enough in the grave (1741), Time is money (1748), and Three removes is
as bad as a re (1758) are his very own inventions (Gallacher, 1949:
250-251).

2.2 The Creation of Proverbs

The older scholarship on proverbs followed the romantic notion that
the origin of proverbs lies somehow in the soul of the folk. Their birth
is veiled in mystery and obscurity (Trench, 1853: 42), and their
parentage is enveloped in mystery (Hulme, 1902: 18). In fact, it was
“loosely imagined that proverbs are a kind of mystic accretion of
wisdom; that they have crystallized out of the experience of the past
ages without the precise e ort of individuals, almost without the
intervention of human agency” (Firth, 1927: 262). As can be imagined,
it remains an especially vexing problem to ascertain the origin and age
of proverbs from oral societies, but proverbs from literary traditions
might in fact also have been in anonymous oral use prior to their rst
historically recorded reference (Schneider, 1981: 33-41). Confronted
with the collection of proverbs in oral use only among the Maori of
New Zealand, anthropologist Raymond Firth came to the same
conclusion regarding the origin of proverbs as scholars have reached
dealing with the proverbs of literate societies:
It seems fairly clear that at one time or another some one person must have
expressed the feeling of the community on that particular point in words which
appealed to other members of the group, and which were passed around and
adopted as a convenient mode of expression. [...] There are three processes which
usually go to the making of a proverb among primitive folk:
 (1) Concrete formulation by one individual in response to some set of
circumstances.
(2) Acceptance by the people at large as being appropriate to a more general
situation, and seeming by its peculiar form and twist of phrase to give t
expression to their thoughts and feelings.
(3) Possible modi cation of phraseology or meaning with the passing of time by
an unconscious process, with the e ect of keeping it consonant with public
sentiment. (Firth, 1927: 262-263)

The renowned American medieval literature scholar and paremiologist

Bartlett Jere Whiting agreed with Raymond Firth’s observation in his
seminal article on The Origin of the Proverb (1931), arguing that the
creation and acceptance of proverbs is very much the same as far as
orality and literacy are concerned:
Just as it is incomprehensible that a group should join in the manufacture of an
ordinary word, so it is incomprehensible that a group, working from whatever
impulse and under whatever circumstances, should join in the composition of a
proverb. Thus, at the outset, we are forced to admit that every proverb was the
work of an individual; and, at the same time, we must ask ourselves just what
kind of an individual it is which we mean. If we are to assume conscious literary
creation of a proverb, we assume that it was the work of an author who might
under his own name have issued it alone, or in a collection of proverbs, or
incorporated in some more extended literary work; or of an individual who
contrived to incorporate his name into the proverb itself. (Whiting, 1931: 49-50).

More or less at the same time that Whiting wrote his essay, his friend
Archer Taylor reached the same conclusion in his magisterial section
on The Origins of the Proverb in his invaluable classic study The
Proverb (1931): “It is not proper to make any distinction in the
treatment [of the invention] of ‘learned’ [literary] and ‘popular’ [oral]
proverbs. The same problems exist for all proverbs with the obvious
limitation that, in certain cases, historical studies are greatly restricted
by the accidents of preservation. We can ordinarily trace the ‘learned’
proverb down to a long line of literary tradition, for the classics or the
Bible through the Middle Ages to the present, while we may not be so
fortunate with every ‘popular’ proverb. [...] Obviously the distinction
between ‘learned’ and ‘popular’ is meaningless and is concerned
merely with the accidents of history [and the (im)possibility of having
recorded the origin of the proverbs” (Taylor, 1931: 4-5; see also Urbas,
1876: 511; Seiler, 1922: 19-20; Röhrich & Mieder, 1977: 26-27; Mieder,
1996: 236-237).
Following these masters on whose shoulders modern
paremiologists stand, one might well state the following, keeping in
mind that “you can only call a communicative form a proverb when it
is known and common – and this means that you unfortunately
missed its genesis [in most cases]” (Ayaβ, 2001, 239) and that there is a
“processus de proverbialisation” (Schapira, 2000: 85-86) involved for a
proverb-like statement to become an actual proverb:
Proverbs, like riddles, jokes, or fairy tales, do not fall out of the sky and neither
are they products of a mythical soul of the folk. Instead they are always coined by
an individual whether intentionally or unintentionally. If the statement contains
an element of truth or wisdom, and if it exhibits one or more proverbial markers
[parallelism, rhyme, alliteration, ellipsis, metaphor, etc.], it might ‘catch on’ and
be used rst in a small family circle, and subsequently in a village, a city, a
region, a country, a continent, and eventually the world. The global spread of
proverbs is not a pipe dream, since certain ancient proverbs have in fact spread to
many parts of the world. Today, with the incredible power of mass media, a newly
formulated proverb-like statement might become a bona de proverb relatively
quickly by way of the radio, television, and print media. As with verbal folklore in
general, the original statement might well be varied a bit as it gets picked up and
becomes ever more an anonymous proverb whose wording, structure, style, and
metaphor are such that it is memorable. (Mieder, 2004a: 9; Mieder, 2007a: 396-
397)

Keeping the matter of variants in mind as the original statement

develops into its standard proverbial form and that the proverb itself
can then be employed in various forms as a mere allusion, a partial
remnant, a question, an anti-proverb, etc., it is of theoretical use to
realize that “an individual proverb is something of an abstraction, a
form that exists as the basis for a range of possible variation” (Doyle,
2001: 73; see also Taylor, 1931: 22-27). Put another way, the conclusion
that can be reached from all of this is that “the texts of all proverbs are
self-su cient, in general dissociated from their sources and origins,
and continually being added to the canon” (Olinick, 1987: 464).
Indeed, new proverbs are constantly being added to the repertoire, but
it must not be forgotten that traditional proverbs can also disappear
when they no longer t the mores of the modern world, to wit such
anti-feministic proverbs like A woman’s tongue is like a lamb’s tail or A
woman is the weaker vessel. Little wonder that the woman’s liberation
movement led to the creation of the new proverb A woman without a
man is like a sh without a bicycle and its variant A woman needs a man
like a sh needs a bicycle in the early 1970’s not by the American
feminist Gloria Steinem but rather by the Australian educator Irina
Dunn (Doyle, Mieder, Shapiro, 2012: 279-280).
It must not be forgotten that proverbs continue to be created and
that there is obviously a future for proverbs in modernity (Combet,
1996), as Wolfgang Mieder’s book Proverbs Are Never Out of Season.
Popular Wisdom in the Modern Age (1993) has clearly shown. But
before turning to the peculiarities of modern proverb creations, it is
necessary to take a look at the four major periods of the creation of
proverbs that is necessary to take a look at the four major periods of
the creation of proverbs that belong to the common stock of European
proverbs (Mieder, 1999; Mieder, 2000b: 303–307; Mieder, 2006: 86-92).
Restricting the comments to just these nations, cultures, and
languages does not mean that similar developments did not occur in
Africa, Asia, the Middle East, etc. (see Goitein, 1952; Yankah, 1989;
Nwachukwu-Agbada, 1990; Paczolay, 1993).

2.3 Four Major Sources for Common European

Proverbs
Even though for most proverbs their creators will never be known, it is
quite feasible to estimate the time of their origin. Detailed diachronic
and comparative work can succeed in tracing a proverb back to a time
when it most likely was created. The realia expressed in such proverbs
will certainly provide clues for an approximate date of origin (Dundes,
2000b). Thus, the Danish paremiologist Bendt Alster has provided
herculean labor in deciphering the cuneiform tablets of ancient Sumer,
showing that parallel proverbs to those of the ancient wisdom
literature and those of classical antiquity having become common
European proverbs must have been in oral communication before 2500
B.C. (Alster, 2005). These cuneiform tablets even include remnants of
very early fables and folk narratives that have subsequently been
reduced to proverbs, but again without revealing who might have been
the individual person who rst shortened such texts to mere proverbs
and at what precise time. Some of the highly metaphorical proverbs go
back to Aesop’s animal fables as well as fairy tales and folk tales. In
fact, some of these ancient and later medieval narratives have been
forgotten and live on only as proverbs or proverbial expressions, to wit
Sour grapes, To be a dog in the manger, Don’t kill the goose that lays the
golden egg, Much cry and little wool, The sun will bring it to light, etc.
(Taylor, 1931: 27-32; Röhrich, 1960; Huxley, 1981; Carnes, 1988; Mieder,
2007b: 1108-1109).
Of course, it has long been noticed that some of the proverbs
known in identical wording in most European languages can at least
be traced back to Greek and Roman sources, always with the caveat
that they might in fact be considerably older than their earliest written
record found thus far. The still valuable comparative study The
Antiquity of Proverbs (1922) by the British scholar Dwight Edwards
Marvin includes y small essays on such “international” European
proverbs, stating at the outset that “it is a mistake to assume that the
earliest known record of a saying indicates its origin. Many with which
we are familiar were, so far as we know, rst used by the Romans, but
the Latin language was the medium of innumerable Greek phrases that
predate their Roman use and they may have been the utterances of
unknown philosophers, the fragments of lost historic records, the
attributed responses to ancient oracles or the accepted lessons of
forgotten myths and fables” (Marvin, 1922: 3; see Taylor, 1931: 61-65). It
should be noted, however, that Bishop Richard Chenevix Trench in his
early paremiological survey On the Lessons in Proverbs (1853) had
already seven decades earlier stated that “nations are continually
borrowing proverbs from one another” (Trench, 1853: 32). More
signi cantly, the German paremiologist Friedrich Seiler, to this day
known for his comprehensive Deutsche Sprichwörterkunde (1922) that
was of much use to Archer Taylor for his celebrated overview The
Proverb that appeared a few years later in the United States, referred to
such borrowed proverbs as Lehnsprichwörter (loan proverbs) and
presented the scholarly community with his four-volume compilation
and analysis Das deutsche Lehnsprichwort (1921-1924), showing that
there are many proverbs current in the German language that were
loaned or borrowed from classical, Biblical, and medieval Latin
proverbs. Proverbs from such languages as primarily French, Italian,
Danish, Swedish, Czech, Polish, etc. were also borrowed later, as the
German speaking people came in touch with their neighbors. This type
of borrowing was a common European phenomenon (see Taylor, 1931:
43-52; Barta, 1989; Hrisztova-Gotthardt, 2009), and it has been
documented in two monumental comparative proverb collections,
namely Emanuel Strauss’ three-volume Dictionary of European
Proverbs (1994) and Gyula Paczolay’s European Proverbs in 55
Languages with Equivalents in Arabic, Persian, Sanskrit, Chinese and
Japanese (1997). Of course, it must not be forgotten that Erasmus of
Rotterdam played a major role in disseminating the proverbs from
classical antiquity by way of his unsurpassed Adagia (1500 .) with its
thousands of references from Greek and Roman sources. As is well
established, his compilation was used by the humanists of the
sixteenth century, the proverbs were employed for instructional
purposes, and they found their way into the literary works and
vernacular collections by way of translation. In fact, Gyula Paczolay
considers this annotated collection as a “secondary source” for
classical proverb dissemination (Paczolay, 1998: 606). All of this
borrowing was so widespread that what might appear to be a proverb
of de nite Russian, Spanish, or Hungarian origin upon closer scrutiny
proves itself to be much older and having found its way into those
languages through loan translation. Bishop Trench has described
these surprises in a charming fashion over one hundred y years ago:
There is indeed nothing in the study of proverbs, in the attribution of them to
their right owners, in the arrangement and citation of them, which creates a
greater perplexity than the circumstances of nding the same proverb in so many
di erent quarters, current among so many di erent nations. In quoting it as one,
it o en seems as if we were doing wrong to many, while yet it is almost, or o ener
still altogether, impossible to determine to what nation it rst belonged, so that
others drew it at second hand from that one; − even granting that any form in
which we now possess it is really its oldest of all. More than once this fact has
occasioned a serious disappointment to the zealous collector of the proverbs of
his native country. Proud of the rich treasures which in this kind it possessed, he
has very reluctantly discovered on a fuller investigation of the whole subject, how
many of these which he counted native, the peculiar heirloom and glory of his
own land, must at once and without hesitation be resigned to others, who can be
 shown beyond all doubt to have been in earlier possession of them. (Trench, 1853:
31)

Every paremiographer putting together a national or regional proverb

collection is faced with this troubling phenomenon. For example, the
Dictionary of American Proverbs (Mieder, Kingsbury, & Harder, 1992)
includes many proverbs that originated in North America, but it also
lists British proverbs and many other proverbs that have been loan
translated during the past centuries. The title of this large
compendium should more appropriately have been A Dictionary of
Proverbs Current or Found in America, and the little book of Vermont
Proverbs (Mieder, 1986) should have been called more precisely
Proverbs Used and Registered in Vermont. That is not to say that an
attempt was not made to record as many indigenous proverbs from the
United States or from the small state of Vermont as possible. But as the
proverb says, Don’t judge a book by its cover [or title], and it must
simply be realized that the important matter is whether a proverb, no
mater what its origin or date, is in fact known and used in a particular
language. Naturally this also indicates the danger of trying to
determine something like a national character or worldview by a set of
proverbs, especially if that set includes proverbs that are of general
European or even global prominence.
And there is yet one more matter that needs to be mentioned here.
All these loan processes assume a single origin of every proverb, i.e.,
monogenesis. And yet, separate origins of such minimalistic texts as
proverbs can occur, a er all, as Alan Dundes has pointed out: “If one
is engaged in citing cognates of a particular proverb, one should be
careful to distinguish actual cognates, that is, versions and variants of
the proverb in question, assumed to be historically/genetically related
to that proverb, from mere structural parallels which may well have
arisen independently, that is, through polygenesis” (Dundes, 2000a:
298). The issue of monogenesis versus polygenesis has been discussed
in folklore circles since the Brothers Grimm, and it remains a
perplexing scholarly problem to this day (Chesnutt, 2002). A er all,
why should such short proverbs as Love is blind or Walls have ears not
have been coined more than once in disparate areas of the world? They
express common ideas or phenomena, o en in a metaphorical way,
that might well have resulted in more than one origin. Such proverbs,
few as they might be, could be called universal proverbs in opposition
to proverbs of but one origin appearing in many parts of the world due
to normal loan processes that are enhanced by modern aspects of
globalization (Paczolay, 2005: 74). Nevertheless, polygenesis is hard to
prove, but it has, for example, been shown by painstaking historical
analysis based on many contextualized references that the late
medieval French proverb Laissez faire à Georges (1498) referring to the
cardinal and statesman Georges d’Amboise and the modern American
proverb Let George do it (1902, but probably somewhat older) with its
reference to African-American railroad porters have no genetic
connection (Mieder, 2014).
But to return to the classical muttons, here are a few proverbs of
Greek or Latin origin, keeping in mind that each one of them deserves
a detailed analysis as to its earliest recorded reference in Greek or
Latin: Where there is smoke, there is re, Barking dogs do not bite, One
swallow does not make a summer, Don’t look a gi horse in the mouth,
So many heads, so many minds, A rolling stone gathers no moss, A small
spark makes a great re, A true friend is known in need, Like father, like
son, Blood is thicker than water, Make haste slowly, In wine there is
truth, etc. Yes, these proverbs go back to classical antiquity, but that is
only one side of the coin, for it can certainly be argued that loan
translated proverbs have what perhaps can be called several secondary
origins in the various target languages. In other words, take the
classical proverb One hand washes the other with its earliest reference
in ancient Greek. When it appears in Latin as Manus manun lavat it has
a secondary origin and the history of this Latin proverb could be
studied from its earliest reference on. When it is loan translated into
German as Eine Hand wäscht die andere it has its secondary origin in
that language that deserves to be studied in all its citations and
meanings. The same is true for the Russian loan translation Рука руку
моет, the French Une main lave l’autre, etc. The paremiological
scholarship has not yet used the term secondary origin, but it is a term
that ts the situation of a translated proverb taking on its own life in a
target language well. A er all, such proverbs do become part of the
national corpora, and this continues to take place today. For example,
the originally German proverb Der Apfel fällt nicht weit vom Stamm
[The apple does not fall far from the tree] with its earliest reference
from 1554 appears in English translation for the rst time in the
Notebooks covering the years between 1824 and 1836 of the American
transcendentalist Ralph Waldo Emerson as The apple does not fall far
from the stem and it has long become an American proverb among the
population of the United States (Mieder, 2000a).
The second major source for common European proverbs is the
ancient wisdom literature that found its way into the Bible and other
religious texts (Westermann, 1995). As one of the most widely
translated books the Bible had an incredible in uence on spreading
proverbs, some of them older than the Bible, to many cultures and
languages (Pfe er, 1975). These proverbs have become so well
integrated into various European languages that native speakers o en
are not at all aware of the fact any longer that they are citing Biblical
wisdom when using them. But be that as it may, the following proverbs
from the Bible have entered many languages (not just European) as
word-for-word loan translations: As you sow, so will you reap (Galatians
6:7-8), He who digs a pit for another, will fall into it himself (Proverbs
26:27), You see the mote in another’s eye but fail to see the beam in your
own (Matthew 7:3), He that will not work, shall not eat (2 Thessalonians
3:10), Do unto others as you would have them do unto you (Matthew
7:12), A prophet is not without honor save in his own country (Matthew
13:57), An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth (2 Moses 21:24), He who
sows the wind shall reap the whirlwind (Hosea 8:7), Man does not live by
bread alone (Deuteronomy 8:3, Matthew 4:4), etc. Of course, it
depended at least to a certain degree on the Bible translator whether
Biblical proverbs were able to establish themselves in the target
language. A revealing example is the Bible proverb Ex abundantia
cordis os loquitur (Matthew 12:34) that was awkwardly rendered into
English as Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh in the
King James Bible of 1616 and that consequently never really caught on
as a proverb in that language. On the other hand, in Germany Martin
Luther translated it quite folksy as Wes das Herz voll ist, des geht der
Mund über in 1522, and the proverb remains current to this day. But
there is also a counterexample: Luther rendered Mark 3:24 not at all
well as Und wenn ein Haus mit sich selbst uneins wird, kann es nicht
bestehen [If a house is at variance with itself it cannot endure]. It never
caught on as a proverb in the German language, whereas the English
rendition of A house divided against itself cannot stand is very current
in general speech especially in the United States, where Abraham
Lincoln’s use of it prior to the Civil War helped to popularize it. But as
luck would have it, the then mayor of Berlin Willy Brandt used the
proverb in English when he delivered a major address commemorating
Lincoln’s sesquicentennial birthday in 1959 at Spring eld, Illinois. He
then started using his own and much better translation Ein in sich
gespaltenes Haus hat keinen Bestand from time to time in Germany,
usually referring to Lincoln’s use of it but not to its Biblical origin.
When the wall came down in Germany in 1989, Brandt became very
engaged in the process of uni cation and relied heavily on this
translation to argue for a smooth transition to unity. With his
popularity and the media coverage the proverb has now caught on in
Germany as well, clearly a late development but a modern sign of the
fact that the spread of loan translated proverbs continues, even if an
old Bible proverb has to nd its way into the German culture and
language by way of America (Mieder, 2005: 112-117).
The rich treasure trove of medieval Latin proverbs makes up the
third major source for some of the most popular proverbs known
throughout Europe. They have been edited in Hans Walther’s and Paul
Gerhard Schmidt’s massive nine-volume Proverbia sententiaeque
latinitatis medii aevi. Lateinische Sprichwörter und Sentenzen des
Mittelalters (1963-1986). Add to this Samuel Singer’s und Ricarda
Liver’s thirteenvolume Thesaurus proverbiorum medii aevi. Lexikon der
Sprichwörter des romanischgermanischen Mitealters (1995-2002) that
registers thousands of Latin and vernacular proverbs from literary
sources of the entire Middle Ages, and one gets an idea of how
prevalent proverbs were at that time. As would be expected, not all of
these Latin as well as Romance and Germanic language proverbs
became known throughout Europe, but there are plenty who did reach
such an international status, as for example such popular favorites as
Never put o till tomorrow what can be done today, New brooms sweep
clean, Strike while the iron is hot, When the cat is away, the mice will
play, All that glitters is not gold, Empty vessels make much sound, A
horse has four legs and still it stumbles, A bird in the hand is worth two
in the bush, The pitcher goes so long to the well until at last it breaks, All
cats are gray in the dark, Clothes do not make the man, The devil is not
so black as he is painted, etc. It might be surprising to nd the proverb
All roads lead to Rome in this group of Latin proverbs from the Middle
Ages. However, it is placed here correctly, since Rome in this case is not
the imperial city but rather the city of the church. In other words, for
believers and clergy alike everything leads to the center of the papacy
in Rome.
Lest it be forgotten, it should be pointed out before turning to the
fourth and more modern source of wide-spread proverbs that there are
naturally also the thousands of home-grown proverbs dating from
medieval to modern times that are part of any national or regional
repertoire. For most of them the individual coiner is not known, but
they were phrased by someone as pieces of wisdom with certain
proverbial markers (metaphor, structure, rhyme, alliteration, ellipsis,
parallelism, etc.) that made it possible for them to be accepted and
repeated by others so that in due time they took on a proverbial nature.
By way of detailed historical and contextualized analysis their
approximate dates of origin can be ascertained, as for example for
such indigenous English proverbs as Early to be and early to rise makes
a man healthy, wealthy, and wise. A stitch in time saves nine, Birds of a
feather ock together, Nothing ventured, nothing gained, Practice makes
perfect, etc. Everyone of these folk proverbs deserves a detailed study
regarding its origin, dissemination, meaning, and continued use, but
the originator and precise date will never be known.
This certainly is also true for the fascinating more recent fourth
group of proverbs that belongs to the stock of common European
proverbs. As is well known, Latin as the lingua franca of Europe has
long been pushed aside, but it has now been replaced by the Englishes
of the world, notably the Anglo-American variety. British and
American proverbs have been loan translated for quite some time, but
this trend has increased at an impressive rate since the end of the
Second World War that brought the United States as a major political,
economic, and cultural player in closer contact with Europe and the
world at large. The American way of life with its future oriented
worldview and emphasis on pragmatism, business, consumerism,
mobility, and popular culture (music, television, lm, mass media,
etc.) has in ltrated societies throughout the globe, and the English
language has become the communicative tool that ties the world
together. Individual English words have long been taken over by other
languages, either directly or as loan translations. This is also true for
proverbs that are accepted either in their original wording or as loan
translations. Benjamin Franklin’s Time is money has entered numerous
languages in the form of loan translations, but with the power of
English as the international lingua franca, the German version of Zeit
ist Geld is today also cited in its original English as Time is money in
Germany. In fact, the following Anglo-American proverbs have all been
loan translated into German (and also other languages), but especially
the shorter ones are also cited in English at times and not surprisingly
so considering the general knowledge of English in Europe and
elsewhere:
(1) English: Don’t swap horses in mid-stream.
German: Mitten im Strom soll man die Pferde nicht wechseln.
(2) English: It takes two to tango.
German: Zum Tango gehören zwei.
(3) English: Don’t put all of your eggs into one basket.
German: Man soll nicht alle Eier in einen Korb legen.
(4) English: An apple a day keeps the doctor away.
German: Ein Apfel pro Tag hält den Arzt fern.
(5) English: A picture is worth a thousand words.
German:Ein Bild sagt mehr als tausend Worte.
(6) English: The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.
German: Das Gras ist immer grüner auf der anderen Seite des Zaunes.
(7) English: A dog is man’s best friend.
German: Der Hund ist des Menschen bester Freund.
(8) English: No news is good news.
German: Keine Nachrichten sind gute Nachrichten., and
(9) English: Good fences make good neighbors.
German: Gute Zäune machen gute Nachbarn (Mieder, 2010a; Mieder,
2010b: 297-340).
Of special interest is what has happened with the early seventeenth-
century English proverb The early bird catches the worm that has
always been considered as the equivalent of the extremely popular
German proverb Morgenstunde hat Gold im Munde [The morning hour
has gold in its mouth] from the previous century. Once the English
proverb was loan translated into German as Der frühe Vogel fängt den
Wurm in the 1970s by way of American mass media, it caught on very
quickly, in fact so much so that it is now giving the old German proverb
a run for its money! (Mieder, 1997; Mieder, 2010b: 285-296). There is no
doubt that the international domination of the English language will
continue this process, spreading old and new proverbs in English or as
loan translations throughout the world. This is not to say that proverbs
from other languages are not translated as well, but these incidents are
relatively rare and usually limited to but neighboring cultures and
languages. An example would be Mikhail Gorbachev’s consequential
proverbial statement in October of 1989 at Berlin that was translated
into German as Wer zu spät kommt, den bestra das Leben [Who
arrives late is punished by life itself] that became a new proverb in
Germany almost over night by way of the ever-present mass media
(Mieder, 2010b: 363-382).

2.4 Origin of Some Modern Proverbs

But speaking of the mass media, lines of popular songs and lms,
book titles, advertising slogans, bumper stickers, T-shirt inscriptions,
headlines, etc. can very quickly turn into proverbs.1 For quite a few the
creators and the rst date of occurrence can be found, if one bothers to
research them. But o en such individuals are not in the public eye,
and for most people it is irrelevant who might have coined them. There
is no doubt that especially in modernity people delight in creating
proverb-like statements that could be called pseudo-proverbs. Yet,
over time, they might well reach a general currency and become bona
de proverbs (Mieder, 2012). Thus the advertising slogan What happens
in Las Vegas stays in Las Vegas (2002) to attract tourists has turned
proverb, and so have the slogans Say it with owers (1917) from the
Society of American Florists, Number two tries harder (1962) from the
Avis car-rental company, and You’ve come a long way, baby (1968) from
the Philip Morris cigarette company. Lines from songs by famous
lyricists and musicians have also become proverbs, to wit There’s no
business like show business (1946) by Irving Berlin, Life is just a cabaret
(1966) by Fred Ebb from the musical Cabaret, and All you need is love
(1967) by John Lennon of Beatles fame. Then there are those lines
turned proverbs from popular lms, like If you build it, they will come
(1989) from Field of Dreams that actually is based on W.P. Kinsella’s
story Shoeless Joe Jackson Comes to Iowa (1979) that was not popular
enough to create a proverb, Keep your friends close and your enemies
closer (1974) from the Godfather, and the o en heard Life is like a box of
chocolates (1994) from Forrest Gump.
Modern proverbs are also created consciously by individuals as so-
called laws of the trials and tribulations of life in a stressful world.
Quite o en the bits of wisdom intended for the greater public have the
name of the originator attached to them, and by now entire little books
have been published with such personal maxims or mottoes, as these
texts might better be called at rst. However, many of them have been
accepted by others and they can be found in oral and written
communication, either with a name attached to them or as anonymous
laws that have indeed become proverbs. Of special interest is the law If
anything can go wrong, it will which together with the variants Anything
that can go wrong, will go wrong and Anything that can possibly go
wrong usually does has de nitely developed into a well-known
proverb. Its rst reference appears in Nevil Maskelyne’s article The Art
in Magic (1908): “It is an experience common to all men to nd that, on
any special occasion, such as the production of a magical e ect for the
rst time in public, everything that can go wrong will go wrong.
Whether we must attribute this to the malignity of matter or to the total
depravity of inanimate things, whether the exciting cause is hurry,
worry, or what not, the fact remains”. Nothing is mentioned here about
a possible author of this basic truth, and it took until 1951 for this law
to appear in print with the designation Murphy’s Law. According to The
Dictionary of Modern Proverbs (2012), here is the story of how the name
Murphy was attached to it: “In popular legend, Murphy’s Law
originated in 1949 at Edwards Air Force Base in California, coined by
project manager George E. Nichols a er hearing Edward A. Murphy, Jr.,
complain about a wronglywired rocket-sled experiment. However,
there is no documentation of that connection until 1955” (Doyle,
Mieder, & Shapiro, 2012: 101-102). So it really isn’t known precisely who
coined this law turned proverb, but the name of Edward Murphy has
been attached to it and to other such laws as well, just as Benjamin
Franklin’s name became associated with numerous proverbs two
hundred years earlier. Among other well known proverb laws that have
entered folk speech are Healey’s Law When you are in a hole, stop
digging (1911), Parkinson’s Law Work expands to ll the available
(allotted) time (1955), and Hardin’s Law You can never do merely (just,
only) one thing (1963). And there are also those modern proverbs that
have been attributed to famous individuals, as for example It’s not over
(the game is) not over till it’s over (1921) to the baseball star Yogi Berra,
A week is a long time in politics (1961) to former British Prime Minister
Harold Wilson, Float like a butter y, sting like a bee (1964) to the
boxing champion Mohammed Ali (Cassius Clay), Trust but verify (1966)
to former President Ronald Reagan, and Old age is not for sissies (1969)
to the American actress Betty Davis.
Other proverbs are created, again for the most part anonymously,
by way of intentionally creating so-called counter-proverbs (changing
an existing positive proverb into a negative statement and vice versa)
or anti-proverbs (the intentional manipulation of a proverb that
changes the wording and meaning). At times the originators of such
playful reactions to proverbs are known, as for example aphoristic
writers, journalists, and other wordsmiths. The important matter is
that new proverbs get created on the basis of traditional proverbs.
Among examples of counter-proverbs are Flattery will get you
everywhere (1926) versus the older Flattery will get you nowhere, Bigger
is not always better (1928)) versus The bigger the better, and Size does
matter (1964) versus Size doesn’t matter. While counter-proverbs are
not particularly plentiful, the deliberate creation of anti-proverbs,
while nothing new in the proverb tradition, has become a wide-spread
phenomenon since the beginning of the twentieth century (Litovkina &
Lindahl, 2007). Of literally hundreds of them the following three might
serve as telling examples: No body is perfect (1958) versus the older
Nobody is perfect, Beauty is only skin (1963) versus Beauty is only skin
deep, and Expedience is the best teacher (1966) versus Experience is the
best teacher. While most anti-proverbs are one-day wonders that have
not entered general folk speech, there are those that express new
wisdom and have been accepted as innovatively expressed wisdom
based on traditional proverbial structures – a process that is nothing
new in the long history of creating new proverbs. Since much of this
humorous, ironical or satirical manipulation of common proverbs is
taking place in the vast arena of the mass media (newspapers,
magazines, radio, television, lm, and the Internet), anti-proverbs
with a claim of some truth or wisdom can reach thousands or even
millions of people who in turn might use them to such a degree that
they may well become new proverbs (Valdaeva, 2003; Mieder, 2008).
This leads to the fascinating question whether proverbs can be
consciously invented? Bartlett Jere Whiting in his otherwise valuable
article on The Origin of the Proverb answered with a de nite no, stating
that “There have been many who have issued sententious sayings of
their own labelled as proverbs, but in no case have such imitations
deceived for a moment even the most super cial student of the true
proverb. [Especially literary authors] have failed in their attempts to
imitate the proverb” (Whiting, 1931: 20). He might be right regarding
especially authors of aphorisms whose texts, frequently actually based
on traditional proverbs, have failed to become accepted proverbs
(primarily because those that might in fact be proverb-like had no
chance of becoming true proverbs because of the small number of
readers in most cases). However, it might be pointed out that the
novelist but also philologist J. R. R. Tolkien certainly invented proverbs
for his Hobbit (1937) and The Lord of the Rings (1956-1957) that serve as
sapiential leitmotifs and might well be current among the special folk
group of Tolkien enthusiasts (Trokhimenko, 2003). Field research
among that reader group would probably establish that the invented
proverbs Every worm has its weak spot and Never laugh at live dragons
from the widely read Hobbit have become proverbial among them! Be
that as it may, Whiting is wrong with his negative view regarding the
invention of proverbs. They all have been or continue to be invented by
someone sometime, even if at rst they are at best proverb-like or
pseudo-proverbs, as for example a sententious remark in a novel, a
verse from a song, or an advertising slogan. The issue is that such well-
turned phrases might become proverbs if they are accepted and
repeated beyond the individual who came up with it all. Surely
Whiting would have to agree that there must be a beginning, no matter
whether it is a by-chance start or a conscious creation.

2.5 New Theories on the Creation of Proverbs

In any case, the revered Whiting might be quite surprised to nd what
especially Stephen Winick and Richard Honeck together with Je rey
Welge have to say about the conscious creation and invention of
proverbs. In his pioneering article on Intertextuality and Innovation in
a De nition of the Proverb Genre (2003), Winick argues that, “given the
right conditions, new items created on proverbial models [structures]
do indeed come to be widely quoted [as new proverbs]” (Winick, 2003:
572), to wit the older proverb Di erent salves for di erent sores with its
well-established proverbial structure Di erent Xs for di erent Ys and
the African-American proverb Di erent strokes for di erent folks
(Mieder, 1989: 317-332). But he then goes one step further, claiming that
such aspects as currency and traditionality should no longer be
included in what is to be considered as proverbiality. In other words,
an invented sentence that has some of the markers (alliteration,
rhyme, parallelism, etc.) is a proverb from the very outset of its
creation. Such “utterances, which are already proverbs, make their
meanings in a proverbial way, at the moment of their creation”
(Winick, 2003: 573). For Winick the proverbiality of an utterance is in
the text itself, and that very text is a proverb without any need of such
cultural or folkloristic aspects as dissemination, currency,
traditionality, etc.:
It is neither necessary nor desirable to consider canonicity the essential
component of proverbiality. All of the features that “sometimes” occur in
proverbs – phonetic, syntactic and semantic poetic features, ascription to an
 ancestor, etc. – are techniques of intertextual reference, drawing our minds to
previous proverbial utterances. Thus, on a more general level, all of these
“occasional” qualities of proverbs add up to one quality that is always there:
rhetorical force imparted through intertextual reference. This approach allows for
dynamic creativity within the proverb tradition. (Winick, 2003: 577).

It is true, of course, that such a proverb-like statement or even pseudo-

proverb might be interpreted by an individual listener or a reader as an
actual proverb, or as Winick states, “It is a matter of interpretation.
Once an item is interpreted as a proverb, it becomes one, at least in
that situation” (Winick, 2003: 588). He looks at these possibilities as a
new dynamic approach to proverb creation, concluding that his
“intertextual model allows for the existence of new utterances that
ring with the echoes of previous gnomic sayings, without stigmatizing
these by suggesting they are ‘not-quite proverbial’” (Winick, 2003:
592). All of this makes plenty of sense from a purely linguistic or
intertextual point of view. However, even if someone were to create
such a proverb-like sentence and claim that it is a proverb – as Steve
Winick suggests – it would still have to prove itself to be worthy of that
designation by going beyond its mere creation by an individual to a
state of group acceptance. Changing the proverb The proof of the
pudding is in the eating for a moment, one might well respond to
Winick’s laudable attempt to give possible new proverbs a chance with
The proof of the proverb is in the repeating. But to stress once again,
there is nothing wrong with intertextually looking for possible new
proverbs – how else are they to be found? But for such a text to be
called a proverb in the normal sense of that word, certainly more than
one contextual reference has to be found, and what is wrong with
saying the more the merrier as far as proverbiality is concerned?
Richard Honeck and his co-author Je rey Welge gave their equally
intriguing article the provocative title Creation of Proverbial Wisdom in
the Laboratory (1997), and as Winick, they argue against the cultural or
folkloristic view of proverb creation by paremiologists as Taylor,
Whiting, and many others. They frame their approach from a cognitive
point of view, arguing “that proverbs are best treated as abstract
theoretical mental entities, rather than as familiar, culturally
embedded forms” (Honeck & Welge, 1997: 207). In a certain way,
though independently conceived, this cognitive approach looks at
proverbs somewhat like Winick’s linguistic stance, for “according to
the cognitive view, proverbs can be familiar or unfamiliar, personal or
communal, used in social or nonsocial contexts, for social or nonsocial
purposes, and either conform or not conform to various proverb
formulae. The key question in the cognitive view is whether a
statement is functioning, or is likely to be capable of functioning, as
proverbs function. In this regard, the most basic functions of proverbs
are psychological, namely, they categorize events and motivate
thoughts and behavior” (Honeck & Welge, 1997: 208). But adding that
proverbs obviously also have such pragmatic functions as exhorting or
warning, Honeck and Welge see themselves forced to state a caveat
nevertheless: “To be clear, we do not question the emphasis on
traditionality and currency in the cultural [and folkloristic] view of
proverbs, but we do believe that it tends to omit due consideration of
the initial, more cognitive psychological processes in their initial
creation” (Honeck & Welge, 1997: 208). It is true, paremiologists for the
most part have not properly answered the psychological question why
people produce many proverbs in the rst place and why, for example
the Native Americans (Mieder, 1989: 99-110; Mieder, 2004a: 108-111),
have created hardly any. But here then is the major point of their
argument:
If the cognitive view of proverbs is adopted, the laboratory creation of
proverbiality becomes feasible. This is because this view does not make any of
the implicational complex of the cultural view – traditionality, social usage, etc. –
necessary factors in proverbial function. What is necessary is that a statement
serve the basic categorization and motivational functions that proverbs do.
Indeed, speculatively, there may be more personal than cultural-level proverbs,
and if the cultural de nition is accepted, all of the former would be excluded
from consideration. If the cognitive view’s premise is accepted, however, all that
stands in the way of initial proverb creation is the set of experimental
manipulations that could foster it. (Honeck & Welge, 1997: 208-209)

Having thus made the case for purely personal proverbs but failing to
stress that the cultural and folkloristic view of proverbs does include
the fact that every proverb starts as a piece of wisdom of an individual
person, the authors become almost poetic in their concluding
assessment: “It is important to acknowledge the early stage of proverb
creation, when proverbs-to-be are performing basic gurative
categorization, and perhaps largely personal functions. These
proverbial statements are baby proverbs that may not be recognized as
such but that have the potential to become full- edged communal
proverbs. There may therefore be a large pool of proverbs-inwaiting
whose fate is determined in the crucible of larger sociohistorical forces.
Both the cultural and cognitive views, as well as others, are needed to
fully understand the overall process” (Honeck & Welge, 1997: 225). But
notice the terms being used here for the initial and personal creation of
proverbs, i.e., proverbs-to be, baby proverbs, [not yet] full- edged
proverbs, and proverbs-in-waiting. What does all of this mean other
than that the creation of a proverb is a personal matter, but in order for
such a proverb-like statement to become a bona de proverb, one that
is to be added to the annals of proverb collections, it does need to go
beyond the original creator. This has always been the case, and in the
mind of the folk with its view of proverbiality and that of most
paremiologists a proverb remains an expression of a general truth that
has been accepted and repeated by a folk group no matter what its size
or background. Certainly no paremiographer could possibly wish to
register all those “personal proverbs” that should perhaps better be
called maxims or mottoes to distinguish them from what is commonly
understood a proverb to be in the popular view (Mieder, 1993: 18-40).

2.6 Conclusion
Finally then, yes, proverbs are created by individuals. Anybody can
create a sentence that includes a basic truth, that sounds like a
proverb, that has all the stylistic and linguistic features of a proverb,
and that appears to be full of wisdom. But there is a basic problem
with such an invention, and this problem exists with every proverb
that has ever been coined! Be the text ever so close to what we
understand a proverb to be, it still needs elements that will turn it into
a proverb. A proverb requires some currency among the folk. In other
words, it has to be accepted into general oral and written
communication and appear with at least some frequency and
distribution.
 If one looks back at the creation of proverbs over the centuries, it
must be remembered that it might have taken years, dozens of years,
or even centuries for a given proverb to get accepted and reach a
certain currency and traditionality. Today, in the modern age of the
computer and the internet, someone might make a spontaneous
proverb-like statement that will literally travel across a country or even
the globe in seconds. Truly modern proverbs cover such ground with
solid speed. But, of course, it remains to be seen whether they will stay
in circulation for some extended period of time. How long? That is a
tough question to answer. A er all, proverbs have always come,
stayed, and gone. A day, a week, a month, a year surely are too short,
but how about a decade? In any case, judging from the proverbs
included in The Dictionary of Modern Proverbs (2012), some of these
modern proverbs have been around for several decades and have
proven that they have staying power.
One thing is for certain, the age of proverb creation is not over!
People will always feel the need to encapsulate their observations and
experiences into easily remembered and repeated generalizations, and
those that are of general interest and well formulated will, with a bit of
luck, be accepted by other people. The proverb Proverbs are never out
of season is as true today as ever before, and the study of the origin of
modern proverbs is indeed as intriguing as trying to reconstruct the
possible start of an ancient proverb. And why is there still much to be
studied regarding the origin of individual proverbs? The answer is
quite simple. The minute the question is raised about the origin of a
proverb, a multilayered and intricate scholarly project is started that
o en results in lengthy monographs with a multitude of linguistic,
folkloristic, literary, cultural, and historical references. The modern
proverb Nothing is as simple as it looks (1905) certainly ts the question
about the origin of proverbs, but that should not prevent
paremiologists from searching for answers in their quest to uncover
the process of proverb creation and dissemination.
References
Alster, B. (2005). Wisdom of ancient Sumer. Bethesda, Maryland: CDL Press.
Ayaß, R. (2001). On the genesis and the destiny of proverbs. In H. Knoblauch & H.
Kottho (Eds.), Verbal art across cultures: The aesthetics and proto-aesthetics of
communication (pp. 237-254). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Barta, P. (1989). Étude comparée de quelques proverbes français et hongrois et de
leurs équivalents européens; leur origine. Annales Universitatis Scientiarum
Budapestinensis de Rolando Eötvös nominatae – Sectio Linguistica 20, 317-333.
Carnes, P. (Ed.). (1988). Proverbia in fabula. Essays on the relationship of the fable
and the proverb. Bern: Peter Lang.
Chesnutt, M. (2002). Polygenese. In R. W. Brednich (Ed. et al.), Enzyklopädie des
Märchens (X, cols. 1161-1164). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Combet, L. (1996). Los refranes: origen, función y futuro. Paremia 5, 11-22.
Doyle, C.C. (2001). Observations on the diachronic study of proverbs. Proverbium 18,
57-75.
Doyle, C. C., Mieder, W. & Shapiro, F. R. (Eds.). (2012). The dictionary of modern
proverbs. New Haven: Connecticut: Yale University Press.
Dundes, A. (2000a). Paremiological pet peeves. In I. Nagy & K. Verebélyi (Eds.),
Folklore in 2000. Voces amicorum Guilhelmo Voigt sexagenario (pp. 291-299).
Budapest: Universitas Scientarium de Rolando Eötvös nominata.
Dundes, A. (2000b). “Praise not the day before the night”. Guessing age and
provenance. In M. Vasenkari, P. Enges & A.-L. Siikala (Eds.), Telling, remembering,
interpreting, guessing. A Festschri for Prof. Annikki Kaivola-Bregenhøj (pp. 257-
260). Joensuu: Suomen Kansantietouden Tutkijain Seura.
Firth, R. (1927). Proverbs in native life, with special reference to those of the Maori.
Folklore (London) 38, 134-153 and 245-270.
Gallacher, S. A. (1949). Franklin’s Way to Wealth. A florilegium of proverbs and wise
sayings. Journal of English and Germanic Philology 48, 229-251.
Goitein, S. D. (1952). The origin and historical signi cance of the present-day Arabic
proverb. Islamic Culture 26 169-179.
Honeck, R. P. & Welge, J. (1997). Creation of proverbial wisdom in the laboratory.
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 26, 605-629. Also in W. Mieder (Ed.),
Cognition, comprehension, and communication. A decade of North American
proverb studies (1990-2000) (pp. 205-230). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag
Hohengehren, 2003.
Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H. (2009). “A proverb comes not from nothing”. On the origin of
Bulgarian proverbs. In R. J. B. Soares & O. Lauhakangas (Eds.), Proceedings of the
Second Interdisciplinary Colloquium on Proverbs, 9th to 16th November 2008, at
Tavira, Portugal (pp. 237-246). Tavira: Tipogra a Tavirense.
Hulme, F. E. (1902). Proverb lore. Being a historical study of the similarities,
contrasts, topics, meanings, and other facets of proverbs, truisms, and pithy
sayings. London: Elliot Stock. Rpt. Detroit, Michigan: Gale Research Company,
 1969; rpt. with an introduction by W. Mieder. Burlington, Vermont: The University
of Vermont, 2007.
Huxley, G. L. (1981). Stories explaining origins of Greek proverbs. Proceedings of the
Royal Irish Academy 81c, 331-343.
Litovkina, A. T. & Lindahl, C. (Eds.). (2007). Anti-proverbs in contemporary societies.
Acta Ethnographica Hungarica 52, 3-285. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
Marvin, D. E. (1922). The antiquity of proverbs. Fi y familiar proverbs and folk
sayings with annotations and lists of connected forms, found in all parts of the
world. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
Mieder, W. (1977). International bibliography of explanatory essays on individual
proverbs and proverbial expressions. Bern: Herbert Lang.
Mieder, W. (1984). Investigations of proverbs, proverbial expressions, quotations and
clichés. A bibliography of explanatory essays which appeared in “Notes and
Queries” (1849-1983). Bern: Peter Lang.
Mieder, W. (1986). “Talk less and say more”. Vermont Proverbs. Shelburne, Vermont:
The New England Press.
Mieder, W. (1987). “Big sh eat little sh”. History and interpretation of a proverb
about human nature. In W. Mieder, Tradition and innovation in folk literature (pp.
178-228 and 259-268). Hanover, New Hampshire: University Press of New
England.
Mieder, W. (1989): American proverbs. A study of texts and contexts. Bern: Peter
Lang.
Mieder, W. (1993). Proverbs are never out of season. Popular wisdom in the modern
age. New York: Oxford University Press. Rpt. New York: Peter Lang, 2012.
Mieder, W. (1996). Geschichte des Sprichwortes und der Redensart im Deutschen.
Proverbium 13, 235-252.
Mieder, W. (1997). “Morgenstunde hat Gold im Munde”. Studien und Belege zum
populärsten deutschsprachigen Sprichwort. Wien: Edition Praesens.
Mieder, W. (1999). Sprichwörter des Kontinents. In W. Köpke & B. Schmelz (Eds.), Das
gemeinsame Haus Europa. Handbuch zur europäischen Kulturgeschichte (pp.
956-965). München: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag.
Mieder, W. (2000a). “The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree”. History of a German
proverb in the Anglo-American world. In W. Mieder, Strategies of wisdom. Anglo-
American and German proverb studies (pp. 109-144). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider
Verlag Hohengehren.
Mieder, W. (2000b). The history and future of common proverbs in Europe. In I. Nagy
& K. Verebélyi (Eds.), Folklore in 2000. Voces amicorum Guilhelmo Voigt
sexagenario (pp. 300-314). Budapest: Universitas Scientarium de Rolando Eötvös
nominata.
Mieder, W. (2004a). Proverbs: A handbook. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press.
Rpt. New York: Peter Lang, 2012.
Mieder, W. (2004b). “Wein, Weib und Gesang”. Zum angeblichen Luther-Spruch in
Kunst, Musik, Literatur, Medien und Karikaturen. Wien: Edition Praesens.
Mieder, W. (2005). “A house divided against itself cannot stand”. From biblical
proverb to Abraham Lincoln and beyond. In W. Mieder, Proverbs are the best
 policy. Folk wisdom and American politics (pp. 90-117 and 264-271). Logan, Utah:
Utah State University Press.
Mieder, W. (2006). “Viele Wege führen nach Europa“. Sprichwörtliche Stereotypen
und interkultureller Ausgleich. In W. Mieder, “Andere Zeiten, andere Lehren”.
Sprichwörter zwischen Tradition und Innovation (pp. 65-94). Baltmannsweiler:
Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.
Mieder, W. (2007a). Proverbs as cultural units or items of folklore. In H. Burger, D.
Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn & N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseology. An international
handbook of contemporary research (I, pp. 394-414). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Mieder, W. (2007b). Sprichwort. In R. W. Brednich (Ed. et al.), Enzyklopädie des
Märchens (II, cols. 1099-1116). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Mieder, W. (2008). “Anti-proverbs and mass communication”. Interplay of Traditional
and Innovative Folklore. In W. Mieder, “Proverbs speak louder than words.” Folk
wisdom in art, culture, folklore, history, literature, and mass media (pp. 87-119).
New York: Peter Lang.
Mieder, W. (2009). International bibliography of paremiology and phraseology. 2
vols. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Mieder, W. (2010a). “Many roads lead to globalization”. The translation and
distribution of Anglo-American proverbs in Europe. In J. Korhonen, W. Mieder, E.
Piirainen & R. Piñel (Eds.), Phraseologie global – areal – regional (pp. 43-59).
Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Mieder, W. (2010b). “Spruchschlösser (ab)bauen”. Sprichwörter, Antisprichwörter
und Lehnsprichwörter in Literatur und Medien.Wien: Praesens Verlag.
Mieder, W. (2012). “Think outside the box”. Origin, nature, and meaning of modern
Anglo-American proverbs. Proverbium 29, 137-196.
Mieder, W. (2014). “Let George do it”. The disturbing origin and cultural history of an
American proverb. Proverbium 31, in print.
Mieder, W., Kingsbury, S. A. & Harder, K. B. (Eds.). (1992). A dictionary of American
proverbs. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nwachukwu-Agbada, J. O. J. (1990). Origin, meaning and value of Igbo historical
proverbs. Proverbium 7, 185-206.
Olinick, S. L. (1987). On proverbs. Creativity, communication, and community.
Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 23, 463-468.
Paczolay, G. (1993). European, Far-Eastern and some Asian proverbs. Proverbium 10,
265-279.
Paczolay, G. (1997). European proverbs in 55 languages with equivalents in Arabic,
Persian, Sanskrit, Chinese and Japanese. Veszprém: Veszpréni Nyomda.
Paczolay, G. (1998). European Proverbs. In W. Eismann (Ed.), EUROPHRAS 95.
Europäische Phraseologie im Vergleich: Gemeinsames Erbe und kulturelle Vielfalt
(pp. 605-618). Bochum: Norbert Brockmeyer.
Paczolay, G. (2005). Universal, regional, sub-regional, and local proverbs.”
Tautosakos Darbai / Folklore Studies (Vilnius) 30, 73-85.
Pfe er, J. A. (1975). Das biblische Zitat im Volksmund der Germanen und Romanen. In
B. Allemann & E. Koeppen (Eds.), Teilnahme und Spiegelung. Festschri für Horst
Rüdiger (pp. 99-111). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
É
Quitard, P.-M. (1860). Études historiques, littéraires et morales sur les proverbes
français et le langage proverbial contenant l’explication et l’origine d’un grand
nombre de proverbes remarquables oubliés dans tous les recueils. Paris:
Techener.
Röhrich, L. (1960). Sprichwörtliche Redensarten aus Volkserzählungen. In K. Bischo
& L. Röhrich (Eds.), Volk, Sprache, Dichtung. Festgabe für Kurt Wagner (pp. 247-
275). Gieβen: Wilhelm Schmitz. Also in W. Mieder (Ed.), Ergebnisse der
Sprichwörterforschung (pp. 121-141). Bern: Peter Lang, 1978.
Röhrich, L. (1991-1992). Das groβe Lexikon der sprichwörtlichen Redensarten. 3 vols.
Freiburg: Herder.
Röhrich, L. & Mieder, W. (1977). Sprichwort. Stuttgart: Metzler.
Schapira, C. (2000). Proverbe, proverbialisation et déproverbialisation. In J.-C.
Anscombre (Ed.), La parole proverbiale (pp. 81-97). Paris: Larousse.
Schneider, K. (1981). The English proverb. De nition − determination of age −
models. Poetica 15-16, 23-48.
Seiler, F. (1921-1924). Das deutsche Lehnsprichwort. 4 vols. Halle: Verlag der
Buchhandlung des Waisenhauses. Rpt. ed. by W. Mieder. Hildesheim: Georg
Olms, 2007.
Seiler, F. (1922). Deutsche Sprichwörterkunde. München: C.H. Beck. Rpt. München:
C.H. Beck, 1967.
Singer, S. & Liver, R. (Eds.). (1995-2002). Thesaurus proverbiorum medii aevi. Lexikon
der Sprichwörter des romanisch-germanischen Mittelalters. 13 vols. Berlin: de
Gruyter.
Strauss, E. (1994). Dictionary of European proverbs. 3 vols. London: Routledge.
Taylor, A. (1931). The Proverb. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Rpt. as The Proverb and an “Index to The Proverb”. Hatboro, Pennsylvania:
Folklore Associates, 1962. Copenhagen: Rosenkilde and Bagger, 1962; rpt. again
with an introduction, a bibliography and a photograph of Archer Taylor by W.
Mieder. Bern: Peter Lang, 1985.
Taylor, A. (1975). Selected writings on proverbs. Ed. with an introduction and a
bibliography by W. Mieder. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.
Trench, R. C. (1853). On the lessons in proverbs. Being the substance of lectures
delivered to young men’s societies at Portsmouth and elsewhere. New York:
Red eld. Also with the title Proverbs and their lessons. London: George
Routledge, 1905. Rpt. with an introduction by W. Mieder. Burlington, Vermont:
The University of Vermont, 2003.
Trokhimenko, O. V. (2003). “If you sit on the door-step long enough, you will think of
something”. The function of proverbs in J. R. R. Tolkien’s Hobbit. Proverbium 20,
367-377.
Urbas, W. (1876). Die Sprichwörter und ihre Entstehung. Neue Monatshe e für
Dichtkunst und Kritik 4, 501-513. Also in W. Mieder (Ed.), Deutsche
Sprichwörterforschung des 19. Jahrhunderts (pp. 81-108). Bern: Peter Lang, 1984.
Valdaeva, T. (2003). Anti-proverbs or new proverbs: The use of English anti-proverbs
and their stylistic analysis. Proverbium 20, 379-390.
Walther, H. & Schmidt, P. G. (Eds.). (1963-1986). Proverbia sententiaeque latinitatis
medii aevi. Lateinische Sprichwörter und Sentenzen des Mittelalters. 9 vols.
Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Westermann, C. (1995). Roots of wisdom. The oldest proverbs of Israel and other
peoples. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press.
Whiting, B. J. (1931). The origin of the proverb. Harvard Studies and Notes in
Philology and Literature, 13, 47-80. Also in B. J. Whiting, “When evensong and
morrowsong accord”. Three essays on the proverb. Eds. J. Harris & W. Mieder (pp.
17-50). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Department of English and American
Literature and Language, Harvard University, 1994.
Winick, S. D. (2003). Intertextuality and innovation in a de nition of the proverb
genre. In W. Mieder (Ed.), Cognition, comprehension, and communication: A
decade of North American proverb studies (1990-2000) (pp. 571-601).
Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.
Yankah, K. (1989). An indigenous theory of proverb authorship. In K. Yankah, The
proverb in the context of Akan rhetoric. A theory of proverb praxis (pp. 183-213).
Bern: Peter Lang.

1 For precise references for the examples used in this sections see Doyle, Mieder &
Shapiro 2012
Outi Lauhakangas
3 Categorization of Proverbs

3.1 Introduction
In this paper, we shall go through di erent ways of classifying proverb
material, both unilingual and multilingual. The history, background,
aims and motives of these e orts will broaden the perspective to two
serious attempts to systemize international proverb lore and open the
way for new attempts to categorize this special genre of folklore.
Secondly, a critical point of view to a huge number of popular and
systematic proverb collections, cultural comparisons and multilingual
data banks will be o ered. The idea is to develop the proverb literacy of
readers so that they are able to analyze, evaluate and create questions
concerning their own research material. Ultimately, we shall provide a
summary of the di erent needs in constructing categorizations of
proverb corpora and also review the possible bias in applying
conventional classi cation methods to proverbs. On the base of these
conclusions we shall try to make an outline of the best possible
universal database of proverbs that should take into account culture-
speci c challenges and discuss the practical conditions for it.
These three aims tell about the di culty of scienti c proverb
research but perhaps particularly these challenges and open questions
have been one reason for the constant enthusiasm for collecting and
interpreting proverbs through the centuries. Proverbs have become
separate items like esteemed quotations that seem to bear probed
wisdom and useful knowledge within them. This industrious,
prolonged, large-scale and o en purposeful collecting has resulted in
a huge number of collections of proverbs. Most of them are either
unilingual or contrastive between two languages but there have also
long been multilingual collections. Paremiologists like to construct
order in their material that seems to tell more about universal human
experience than any other source.
3.2 The Speci city of Proverbs
A er reading the introductory article of this book you certainly have a
good view of the speci city of proverbs and even proverbial
expressions compared to other statements and utterances. The long
history of this genre of speech, anonymity, traditional avor,
memorable form, gurative meanings in contexts, and o en
universality de ne proverbs. Those items, which I shall call proverb-
like expressions, develop this tradition and make use of memorable
forms of familiar proverbs. Daniel Andersson (2013: 28) shows from his
cognitive linguistic point of view that actually every proverb should be
interpreted in its whole meaning potential. If a proverb is in real use,
the base meaning of it is continuously in a blending process. It is used
in context-bound meaning creation. The impressive and interactive
features of proverbs tell about their tness to get over language
borders. Thus, any categorization of proverbs should be done keeping
in mind their importing and exporting history, their potential
exibility to immigrate or emigrate as folklore.
In order to identify proverbs of di erent languages and culture
areas, agreement about their features does not stay as evident as when
recognizing physical objects. An innovation like the ax was
transported from one area to another. We have evidence of its age from
archeological ndings. In Finland we know that kirves, our word for an
ax, has been adopted from Baltic languages. But the history of
adopting a proverb from a language to another may have di erent
stages and motivations. We do not even know if we can call it a proverb
from the very beginning. The age of a single proverb can sometimes be
assessed but the reconstruction of the process of some expression
becoming a proverb in a certain language community is always
dependent of many repetitive and coincidental in uences.

3.3 Whose Tradition Are Proverbs?

Is there a common view of the origin of proverbs around the world? Do
we think that our familiar proverbs are our endogenous and private
cultural heritage, some general wisdom owned by the folk? Or do we
believe in God’s truth behind the noblest proverbs used by our wise
men? Some researchers see proverbs as a part of the common man’s
contesting speech (Lombardi-Satriani, 1974: 103–104). This kind of
speech re ects people’s countereaction when being disadvantaged.
Statements of proverbs can function in a reversed way, if they are used
in situations where balance of power is unequal. A proverb is an
indirect way to question generalizations. Didactic use of proverbs and
their ironic use cannot both realize the same function. Along with the
question of di erent functions comes a question of traditionality of
proverbs. In which level of tradition do we refer when we de ne
proverbs as traditional expressions?
We cannot claim that proverbs belong only to oral tradition. The
impression one gets reading for instance Finnish proverb collections is
that they deal with agrarian living conditions of the 19th century.
Historically, part of their use has been like invoking authoritative
literal texts, although the users have been illiterate. This holds true for
most of the European proverb lore. British proverbs may remind us of
Shakespearean era. Chinese proverbs tell about Confucian tradition
and most of the Sub-Saharan proverbs re ect a tribal way of life. All
these conceptions live side by side in the world of proverb users.
Most of European proverb collectors were clergymen and public
servants. The great Dutch humanist Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466-1536)
was a Catholic priest, although he was a reformist striving for more
harmonious change in the church than Luther (1483-1546). The last
version of Erasmus’ Adagia included over 4000 Greek and Latin
proverbial expressions, many accompanied by richly annotated
commentaries. It has been the core of the written Western proverb lore
in addition to the Bible and German proverbs in Luther’s texts.
Proverbs known before Erasmus’ times, like One swallow doesn’t
make a summer or Don’t look a gi horse in the mouth, have become
known all over the world or have turned out to be common earlier than
we thought. It is di cult to say whose proverbs people of di erent
cultures use today, since proverbs or recognizable fragments of them
have become popular elements of popular and global communication,
lately in social media.
3.4 Practical and Ideological Needs to Categorize
Proverb Material
Organizing linguistic matter has been a practical question for
centuries. Lexicography has developed to a branch of science (see e.g.
F. Čermák’s (2011) work on the Czech National Corpus and R. Almind’s,
H. Bergenholtz’ and V. Vrang’s work on the Danish Idiom Dictionary),
and encyclopedists have organized human knowledge according to
themes of life and hierarchies of general values. For lexicons as well as
proverb collections there has been one universal system to organize
the chosen entries: alphabetical order seems a neutral way to present
things.
The aim to collect proverbs and to construct a national heritage of
them and other genres of folklore of a language community brings with
it a supposition of consistency between the proverbs of one’s own
community. The belief that proverbs as such, form a coherent
narration of their local users seems natural. Interesting examples of
national collections are those which have the aim to present proverbs
of one culture but which are compiled by an immigrant. For example
William Scarborough (1875) was an American Presbyterian missionary
in China in the 19th century. He compiled “a careful and enthusiastic
study” of Chinese proverbs in which he also presented English
translations. He certainly had good intentions doing this but we are
not able to evaluate his choices and interpretations without experts of
the Chinese culture. Scarborough writes in his preface:
In making this selection of proverbs, it was not thought fair to exclude altogether
the vulgar and immoral. A few of these are admitted – veiled under free
translations–as the representatives of a class, which, so far as my experience
goes, is not a very large one (Scarborough, 1875: ii-iii).

This collection of Chinese proverbs was made before the political

revolution of the 20th century but it has its bias arising from narrow
Christian attitudes. The author is glad but at the same time quite
confused to nd many proverbs closely resembling the sayings of the
Holy Bible. “Many of the Proverbs of Solomon have their counterparts
in the proverbs of China”, he writes (Scarborough, 1875:xiv). As a
missionary Scarborough had to reason that these pagans are “not as
good as their proverbs”, their virtue was not in deeds. We notice that
biblical Proverbs were his yardstick.
The need to preserve an endangered language or dialect is a strong
reason to elevate the value of proverbs in this language. Consequently,
constructors of national romantic identity and high moral have been
selective. Some proverbs have been excluded being too vulgar and
some sounding too literal. Thus, we cannot avoid intentional and
unintentional choices already made by our predecessors, if we are
going to use as our sources any ready collected proverb material.
Thematic collections have di erent classi cations according to the
author’s interests or ways to interpret the material to be published. A
good example of thematically arranged collections that have a clear
national aim is Vladimir Dalj’s (2003, original 1862) Russian collection,
which is still or again very popular. New editions are published at
regular intervals. In Dalj’s collection there is one headline punishment,
кара that is repeated seven times in di erent compositions. In any
scienti c categorization the ideal should be that you do not create
overlapping categories. Yet, proverb material is not so one-
dimensional that you could easily determine the one and only category
for every expression. Dalj was a profoundly well-read humanist who
knew the Russian tradition. Thus, he was inclined to transfer his
overall conception to the collection. He presents the theme of penalty
in connection with obedience and disobedience, compassion,
recognition, submission, attack and threats. Judiciary is repeated three
times in Dalj’s subheadings. It is connected to order, truth and
extortion. The theme of law and order seems central and closely
connected to questions of social position. There are not just titles like
king, wealth and poverty, or master and servant, but these are dealt in
connection with order. The central question is again willingness or
refusal to serve, control and humble oneself.
There is another theme that is underlined among Dalj’s
classi cation. He presents detailed forms of spirituality. In his book
Dalj has headlines like Mystery, Mystery and curiosity, and Faith and
mystery. He combines destiny, patience and hope and di erentiates
even a title called Fanaticism and hypocrisy. The collection begins with
God and faith that are connected with sin and faith.
Thinking about the proverb genre we can nd plenty of omens and
“superstitions and signs” (as Dalj himself calls them) brought to these
groups. Dalj’s classic is a good example of a national collection that
constructs a national character by categorizing proverbs. His way to
categorize demonstrates how signi cant cultural variety can be when
we are interpreting proverbs. Data banks of proverb texts are never
neutral.

3.5 Di erences in the Accuracy of Proverb Material

If we compare proverb texts of two di erent cultures the most general
versions of synonymous proverbs apply to points of reference. For
intralingual and especially for comparisons between two cognate
languages we need more accurate knowledge about similarity between
proverb notes. Although the structure and the wording is the same in
both proverb texts, the common use and interpretation may di er.
If you see one proverb text representing a certain attitude in one
language area, it is di cult to estimate how representative for this area
it really is. Behind a single proverb text there may be many varying
texts. E.g. in the inclusive collection of Estonian proverbs (Krikmann &
Sarv, 1980) a proverb Ega kuer siis kiljata, kui kondiga visata [The dog
will not yelp if you throw him with a bone] (nb 4020.) has 17 slightly
di erent variants. E.g. Vai koer siis valu tunneb, kui teda kondiga
visatakse [The dog will hardly feel pain when it is thrown with a bone.]
In the same entry you are encouraged to compare this proverb to two
synonymous proverbs about an ox and a cat. Those are synonymous
proverbs that might have same idea in other languages, too. But they
are not variants of this dog-proverb type.
What are the preconditions for starting to systemize a proverb
material? Actually, we should not start organizing purely from the
basis of proverb texts. Although we imagine we are making neutral
choices, our hypotheses are based primarily on the knowledge of our
own culture and society. We know the history, social circumstances,
culture and hierarchies of our own society from where we presume the
familiar proverbs in our own language have arisen. We have inevitably
preconceptions of the phenomena we plan to organize. This would not
be a very disturbing problem, if the material were unilingual and from
a single cultural area.
Thus, it is a somewhat di erent aim to construct a collection of
proverbs of two or more languages. The knowledge determined by our
own cultural categories in uences our interpretation of the
phenomena and certainly the subsequent proverb material we are
going to add to our classi cation. The basis for the work might still be
quite similar as in the previous unilingual case. Now you just search
for cohesive construction made of di erences and similarities.
Selectivity may be even stronger in this project of contrastive
languages than in constructing an image of one language community.
Still, even alphabetically arranged comparisons of proverbs are always
choices. It is di cult to notice any missing item while reading an
alphabetical list of titles. Let us take e.g. the collection Turkish proverbs
and their equivalents in een languages (Yurtbaşi, 1996). If you start
from Endurance, next titles are Enemy, Envy and Equality. A quick look
at an English dictionary raises terms like enjoy or entertainment, which
are missing. Perhaps there were no such proverbs in Turkish that
would have dealt with those subjects.
As soon as we begin contrastive work with two or more languages
this problem arises. For example, if we choose Master and servant to be
a group title, this covers most of the cultures we know but a more
detailed classi cation, subgroups for proverbs dealing with these
issues, will be determined by the most familiar material we have. A
practical question arises: How do we succeed to form common
subtitles for proverbs coming from completely di erent cultures? Do
we know we are dealing with the same phenomenon without exactly
knowing the variety of proverbs in another culture? This kind of
uncertainty follows us in any project of comparing proverbs used in
distant cultures.
Even if the connections between proverb texts from two cultures
can be clari ed, the degree of popularity and divergent use in those
cultures will o en obscure the comparison. A proverb has been
translated from a language to another, but is it the same proverb, if its
use and common interpretation are totally di erent in two cultures?
The receiving culture is always strati ed and o en polarized, and
perhaps in a community there has already pre-existed a synonymous
proverb.
With the term synonymy we refer to proverbs, which have the same
idea but not the same form. If proverbs have both the same idea and
they vary only by some words or grammatical structures, they are
proverb variants to each other. This is the case if we compare proverb
texts inside a language or between cognate languages.
An example of changes in proverb loans is a proverb emphasizing
the value of other people’s help, A friend in the way is better than a
penny in the purse (Tilley, 1950: 242, nb F687). This proverb has been
carried from Holland or England to Finland. In Finland this proverb
has somehow been translated and transformed to Parempi reppu
reessä kuin ystävä kylässä [Better to have a sack in your sleigh than a
friend in the village]. The text or its variants alone do not prove
anything about Finnish mentality compared to the European style. The
misuse of hospitality has perhaps been worse in Finland than in the
south. (Kuusi, 1954: 74.) This is just an example that even a reverse
variant of a proverb can develop and nd a sounding board in new
circumstances, if the topic is functional enough.
The above mentioned strictly analyzed Estonian national proverb
corpus has already been compared with proverb corpora of cognate
languages- Finnish, Karelian, Votic, Vepsian and Livonian. (Kuusi &
Krikmann & al, 1985). Searching for proverb equivalents between
cognate languages has quite clear rules. If you nd an equivalent, you
can be almost sure that those expressions have the same roots.
Comparing proverbs of cognate languages means primarily surveying
distribution and di erent variations of the same proverb type. In case
we had information of conventions of proverb use in di erent
countries, the interpretations might prove to be di erent. We could not
be so sure anymore that we deal with the same proverb, although it is
outwardly the same. Basically the same problem might arise between
proverb variants of di erent dialects within one language. For example
an Estonian proverb Käsi aitab kätt, jalg jalga [One hand helps the
other, a foot helps a foot] is slightly di erent in its few Finnish
variants: Käsi käden noutaa [One hand satis es the other hand]. This
proverb type is not known in the southern and western parts of
Finland. As a plain texts it can easily be mistaken for One hand washes
the other (Ibid. nb 6.), which is a universal type and well-known in
Finland, too. Only close study of contextual meanings or di erent
actual uses of texts de ne them to two di erent categories.
In their pilot study concerning a corpus of German proverbs Peter
Grzybek and Christoph Chlosta, both native speakers of German,
noticed that they could not always reach the meanings of proverbs
from di erent parts of the country (Chlosta & Grzybek, 2000). A er
this experiment Grzybek sees the challenge to set side by side proverb
materials that di er much in their degree of semiotic analysis (analysis
of meanings). If we make very detailed analyses of contexts and use of
proverbs in one language, a successful comparison requires the same
level in the other language. Focusing on one language is di erent from
having items from many languages. In order to proceed to systematic
categorization and not only symptomatic (based on coincidences)
work you are forced to go deeper into details than you would like2.

3.6 From Intuitive Orderliness to Systematic

Categorization
Scarborough, the collector of Chinese proverbs mentioned above,
describes a condition which seems to be internalized in the proverb
enthusiasts of the Western cultural area. In order to feel that he
understood the inherent orderliness of proverbs he had to become
familiar with a great number of proverb texts.
It may seem, at rst, as though there were no rules shaping them a er any models
whatever. But, just as to the eye of a skilful botanist, the promiscuous growths on
the sides of a shady stream fall into ranks and classes, so to one who examines
these proverbs with a little care, they will be seen to class themselves together,
until, out of what seemed a perfect chaos, several orders arise (Scarborough 1875,
ix).

In this way Scarborough nds for example parallelism in Chinese

proverbs. The stylistic features are not the only thing he becomes
interested in. Scarborough discusses a more important quality which
seems apparent in Chinese proverb texts: virtue or morality. This has
been a natural and logical order for scholars systemizing their vast
material. It is proportioned to your own, most familiar ways to perceive
human action and motives. Subjectivity can never be totally excluded,
but researchers have tried to diminish it by making classi cations that
would comprehend all possible cases.
We shall introduce and discuss about two concrete attempts to
construct a systematic categorization of international proverbs. The
rst suggestion for proverb classi cation is a part of Grigory L.
Permyakov’s General theory of cliché that he describes “folkloristic in
its main material and linguistic in its method” (Permyakov, 1979). The
other classi cation system is the Matti Kuusi international type system
of proverbs (Lauhakangas, 2001).

3.7 G. L. Permyakov’s Logico-semiotic Classi cation of

Proverbs and Proverbial Phrases
A er the English publication of his work Grigory Permyakov (1919–
1983) became wellknown among paremiologists but actually his work
is not very deeply understood. Maybe for that reason, his scienti c
approach to categorization of international proverbs is not much
applied or developed. His experiment of proverb classi cation is part
of his notes on the General Theory of Cliché. Permyakov’s logico-
semiotic theory of invariants in language functions especially in
folklore. The part concerning proverbial expressions is based on an
“investigation of several tens of thousands of proverbs and proverbial
phrases belonging to 72 peoples of the East, and the equal number of
Russian folk sayings” (Permyakov, 1979: 163).
Along his theoretic pursuit Permyakov also had a practical reason
to develop a classi cation as he prepared a collection of Selected
Oriental Proverbs (Permyakov, 1968). He used both translated
collections of proverbs and proverbial phrases and dictionaries of
Russian-Eastern languages. Permyakov’s theoretical considerations
are based on structural paremiology and semiotics.
 Permyakov seemed to be fond of proverbs and proverbial phases.
He wrote about folklore items, “artistic miniatures re ecting facts of
everyday life in a vividly expressive form”. From proverbial
expressions he got an idea to study clichés in general. He considered
them to represent a special type of logical (logico-semiotic)
constructions (Permyakov, 1979: 163). Permyakov’s commentator Y. V.
Rozhdestvensky (1979: 259) clari es that linguistics clichés are
conventionally de ned as ready-made and reproducible language
units. Linguists’ interest in clichés was focused merely on vocabulary
and inventory of units that can be used. These language items were
only described.
Instead, Permyakov’s hypothesis was that there are rules of
producing reproducible units. He approached them from the
standpoint of grammar, poetics and rhetoric. He was not very
interested in collecting and describing clichés (like lexicologists or
other paremiologists) but rather in the way they are created. He saw
the mutable character and social aspects in the development of
folklore as well. (Rozhdestvensky, 1979: 261, 267.) From the current
point of view he was ahead of his time in his ethnopsychological and
structural approaches to folklore phenomena.
Permyakov applied Vladimir Y. Propp’s (1958 [1928]) functional
analysis of fairytale texts. Rozhdestvensky (1979: 265) speci es
qualities of Permyakov’s analysis. Firstly, it is empirical and inductive
analysis of language texts (from cultural text sphere). His analysis is a
description of the rules of building clichéized texts and it considers
clichés originating as oral speech.
In his article On paremiological homonymy and synonymy
Permyakov (1979, 248) goes deeper to the questions of semiotic
categorization. He gives an example of a homonymic proverb of the
Nyang tribe (in Cameroun) If a nut above (on a tree) hasn’t grown (ripen
yet), it will fall down (on the ground). The rst meaning is that not every
evil is apparent at once, but sooner or later it will come out. The other
meaning for the same proverb is how a good deed takes time to be
accomplished. Permyakov emphasizes that the two di erent meanings
are revealed in contexts where this proverb is used. Thus, the
homonymy will be removed in social situations. For the categorization
of proverbs these examples are still important.
 The most characteristic feature in Permyakov’s analysis is his
concept of situation. He speci es the situations, real life contexts in
which folklore texts are created and used. A word resolves a situation
but it does not itself depend on the situation. The gurative meaning of
the clichéized text makes it possible to use folklore texts as rules for
identifying new and previously unknown situations. (Permyakov, 1979:
272)
Permyakov (1979, 180–195) demonstrates his categorization by
giving text specimens classi cations according to four logico-semiotic
arch-invariants each falling into three categories. All twelve categories
are divided into subcategories according to combinations of features.
Permyakov concentrates on proverbs of over twenty Eastern minority
cultures, peoples living under the Soviet regime from Abkhazian to
Uzbek. He has also taken proverb texts from other Oriental and Arabic
cultures and samples even from Sub Saharan tribes.
Permyakov (Permyakov, 1979: 30, 157) sees that features of proverbs
centre around a limited number of invariant opposition pairs of the
type one’s own – another’s, near – faraway, good–evil etc. Di erent
images in proverbs are just indicators of these general properties. He
notes that sometimes only one member of the pair is present in a
paremia (proverb or proverbial saying). However the other member is
implied. The problem in his approach is his attempt to make
di erences between proverb types according to their negative, positive
and mixed forms. This seems to result from Permyakov’s way to
interpret proverbs as answers to potential questions in social
situations. He sees that proverbs and proverbial phrases are signs of
situations or of a certain type of relationships between objects
(Permyakov, 1979: 20).

Table 3.1: G. L. Permyakov’s (1979: 180–195) logico-semiotic arch-invariants

represented by logicothematic groups and subgroups A–C. (The subclasses and
oriental proverb variants are not presented in this table.)
The table 3.1 shows only a short part of Permyakov’s whole-scale
system. In the previously mentioned experience Chlosta and Grzybek
(2000) tried to make a classi cation of German proverbs according to
Permjakov’s system. Proceeding item per item they found the
classi cation a painstaking task. The di culties are not only due to
the complexity of Permyakov’s system, but because it seems to be
more exact than our everyday usage of proverbs. This seems to be
related to the fact that we only have some feeling about what proverbs
mean. Actually we use many proverbs only in some vague manner
without bothering ourselves much about what they mean3.

3.8 The Matti Kuusi International Type System of

Proverbs
Academician Matti Kuusi (1914–1998) was the Professor of Finnish and
Comparative Folk Poetry Studies (today called folkloristics) at the
University of Helsinki from 1959 to 1977. One of his areas of expertise
was paremiology, research on proverbs. This particularly dri ing genre
of folklore led him to establish contacts with scholars around the
world. One of the most esteemed paremiologist ever, Professor Archie
Taylor (1890–1973) from California, the author of The Proverb (1931),
was behind Kuusi’s (1957) rst international classi cation experiment,
which was realized as a universal inquiry, when Kuusi published a
question about a common but peculiar natural phenomenon
explained in a proverbial phrase. What does the paraphrase If it rains
while the sun is shining mean or what is its second part?4
In Finnish archives he had found several variations of the phrase,
e.g. piru piiskaa akkaansa; …vanhoipiikoi naijaa; …huoran lasta
kastetaan […the devil is beating his woman; …old maids will get
married,; …a whore’s baby will be christened]. He decided to write the
world history of one paraphrase. Having a closer look at one single
phrase he could also see how relative a folklore genre is according to
its actual use in a certain culture. Universally and even inside a
cultural area one and the same expression varies. It can be a folk
belief, a particular way to explain this peculiar natural phenomenon, a
paraphrase, a weather proverb (The code A3a 25 in Kuusi’s
classi cation), a riddle or a folk tale.
 Kuusi got 3000 variants of the sunshine and raining paraphrase
from 97 di erent cultural areas. He undertook to organize the complex
material and got practice in comparing variations from di erent
cultures.
Kuusi’s (1970) essential experiment on international classi cation
sprang from his comparative analysis of African proverbs that he had
begun almost by chance a few years earlier. He noticed that
surprisingly many proverbs in Ndonga language, which was his point
of departure, had same ideas as Finnish proverbs. This was a clear
break with his Finnish predecessors using the historical geographic
method and believing only on the theory of evolution. Kuusi
emphasized that there must be a di erence to study literary texts from
oral tradition. The research material of folklore studies cannot be only
text collections but you must be aware of the functions, performance
practices and real users of this speech – if it is possible. Proverb
collections were the basis of Kuusi’s systematic index of international
proverb types. Starting from comparisons of Finnish proverb texts to
Nordic and European equivalents he broadened his search to all
possible language areas and comparisons between non-Finnish
proverbs. Kuusi was able to continue with his type-system of proverbs
during his retiring age, when his daughter Outi Lauhakangas started
transferring the proverb index of literature references into a relational
database in 1990. At the same time they developed Kuusi’s
classi cation of international proverb types. This database was made
for the purpose of folkloristic and linguistic research. The aim was and
is not to collect all possible proverb texts from every possible language
area to one big pool but to study structures of proverb texts and main
themes of proverbial thinking and give sources for further research.
The database and classi cation of proverbs presented here is
named The Matti Kuusi International Type System of proverbs
(Lauhakangas, 2001). The database consists of three core elements:
1. A special library of proverb collections in the folklore archives of the
Finnish Literature Society in Helsinki,
2. A database of international proverb types and literature references
on the internet,
3. A thematic and structural classi cation of international proverbs.
The concept of proverb type alternates between a concrete proverb title
and a cluster of proverbs having the same idea. The type system
gathers together similar proverb titles from di erent nations into an
international or even a global type having a common idea. You can
study the whole structure and proverb types on the internet address of
the database5. An introduction to the background and construction of
Kuusi’s classi cation and material is presented in Lauhakangas’ (2001)
report. Here are the main themes of Kuusi’s classi cation. You can
notice while going through the titles that most of the groups are
thematic.
A Practical knowledge of nature
B Faith and our basic attitude
C. Basic observations and socio-logic
D. The world and human life
E. Sense of proportion
F. Concepts of morality
G. Social life
H. Social interaction
J. Communication
K. Social position
L. Agreements and norms
M. Coping and learning
T. Time and sense of time
Anyway, some exceptions are indicated already on the main theme
level. One of them is the theme C. Basic observations and socio-logic.
The structural analysis Kuusi demonstrated for this section is
comparable to Permyakov’s logico-semiotic approach. The theme is
named a er Paul Goodwin’s and Joseph Wenzel’s (1981) term
sociologic, which refer to same kind of socially determined reasoning.
From the titles of the classes under this theme you can notice how
opposition pairs are applied (little in relation to big; appearance in
relation to internal values).
C1. Durability of X’s nature / durability of identity
C2. X yields /requires /belongs to X
C3. Nothingness/emptiness yields /loses nothing
C4. Little : big / a little : a lot
C5. Signals & their meaning /interpretation
C6. Appearance : internal values
Subgroups of the rst class C1. Durability of X’s nature / durability of
identity are shown below as an example of the content of these classes.
C1a X’s basic nature/character will be unchanged; characteristics will
not change
C1b X is always X, even if...
C1c there is no need to teach X things belonging to its character;
hopeless to teach things not belonging to X’s character
C1d X will preserve X’s habits and customs
The titles above describe well the kind of notation used in Kuusi’s
categories. One could consider these titles examples of the moulds of
proverbs. Some of them are quite near the most general proverb types
in the corresponding group. For example, in the subgroup C1d you will
nd a global proverb type C1d 19 An old ox makes a strait furrow.
Equivalent proverbs will be found through literature references. For
example a Japanese synonymous proverb An old horse doesn’t forget
his path. As a cross-reference we shall nd the subgroup G6f the
treatment of the elderly that interprets the proverb type in a thematic
context, where the comparison between the young and the old is in the
focus. For example the proverb type G6f 15 is Older and wiser.
In order to move the Kuusi’s database of proverbs to the internet for
international use, we had to study the generality of proverb types. The
language and cultural areas that form together the global brand are:
Africa (Sub-Saharan), Islamic, European, Orient (old Eastern cultural
area), Paci c. American cultures are not seen as being apart from
European in uence. If a proverb type is common to most of these
language areas, it is considered a global type. The meaning and use of
a speci c proverb can vary from culture to culture.
 Alongside the original index of Finnish proverb titles the titles of
the international proverb types had to be translated into English. This
was necessary, if original English equivalents were not available. This
meant that the sum of proverb titles decreased from 8287 Finnish
entries to 1808 English entries. Still the classi cation remained
identical to the original Finnish type system and the reduction did not
cause any empty subgroups. The tempting possibility to nd any
proverb you are interested in cannot yet be realized for those who
cannot use the Finnish part of the database.

3.9 Comparison Between Permyakov’s Logico-

semiotic Categorization and Kuusi’s Type System
In both suggestions of proverb classi cation the starting point has
been a real proverb corpus, collections and archives of proverb texts
with their explanations. Thus, both Permyakov and Kuusi have
constructed empirical and inductive classi cations. Both researchers
have come to the conclusion that there are universal structures for
proverbial creativity. They share the view that most of the proverbs
gather around a nite number of opposition pairs. This can be seen in
the titles of their classes.
Permyakov’s aim has been to test his general theory of clichés and
functionality of the logico-semiotic hypothesis concerning folklore
items, ranging from proverbs to folk-tales. The ready-made
categorization of proverbs has apparently led Permyakov choose
suitable samples for each subgroup, although this process is di cult
undertake again in order to scienti cally validate it. Kuusi (1972)
wanted to make an experiment of international classi cation of
proverb types already when constructing his pilot article about the
criteria of proverb systematization. He took numerous proverbs as a
testing ground. His aim in this stage was also to give critical remarks
on Permyakov’s system of classi cation. This does not erase the fact
that Kuusi had already simultaneously with Permyakov started to
develop an international classi cation of proverb types. Kuusi
abandoned later his plan to publish more far-reaching suggestions of
the classi cation, because he understood that the complexity of
proverb semiotics, practically the di culty of taking into account all
possible cross-references, would be impossible to present in a printed
form. Not until new possibilities in information technology had arisen
with tools for making networks of internal references, he wanted to
start his systematization work anew. (Lauhakangas, 2001: 16.)
As was shown in the previous chapter, Permyakov (1979: 249) gave
examples of his way to deal with synonymic proverbs. Kuusi de nes
the synonymity of proverbs in the same way. Especially categorizing
proverbs from di erent languages as belonging to the same type
presupposes that we consider them synonymous proverbs. Now it is
possible to compare Permyakov’s grouping to Kuusi’s combinations.
Permyakov’s two pairs of typical Russian synonymic proverbs are
presented here with Kuusi’s codes a er each proverb. Every code of
Kuusi’s classi cation consists of
1. a main theme letter from A to T,
2. a class number inside the main theme,
3. a small letter telling about a subgroup, and
4. the individual number of every proverb type.

3.9.1 Permyakov’s is not worth in Kuusi’s System

When Permyakov introduces a class consisting of a structure and also
of a meaning is not worth, Kuusi has put same proverbs to two di erent
subgroups J1p Tolerance of jokes and criticism and C3e from air, water
or useless materials one gets no valuable or durable things. The rst one
is a European and Islamic type and the second case is a global type
that has cross-references to groups M5c quality and ways of handling
materialsand M6c enterprise, perseverance and toughness is better than
short-sightedness, giving up easily, the easy way. Titles of subgroups are
quite concrete (and quite long!) descriptions of the idea of each group
of proverbs. The texts may come from di erent languages and they are
translated to English, of course originally to Kuusi’s own language,
Finnish.
The game is not worth the candles, J1p 13
The goatskin is not worth the making, C3e 18

3.9.2 Permyakov’s absence of in Kuusi’s System

In the absence of sh a cray sh is a sh
With no people around, even Foma is a nobleman
This second pair of Permyakov’s proverbs belongs to a same
subgroup called E1e the value of X increases through lack of Y in Kuusi’s
international type-system of proverbs. The rst proverb is equivalent to
an individual proverb type E1e 16. If you have a possibility to check the
database in the internet you can notice that this proverb type is
European, Islamic and oriental and it has cross-references to groups
G4a, D3e, and L2c. This means that its various proverbs can be
interpreted in di erent situations (and in di erent cultures) from
di erent angles and they could be positioned to those subgroups as
well.
The Foma-proverb above is not so clearly a part of any readymade
individual proverb type. I can just say that it suits to this same
subgroup. My hypothesis is that it is used likewise the other proverbs
in Kuusi’ subgroup E1e.
Let us look closer at Kuusi’s whole main theme E, which has a title
Sense of proportion. It has exceptionally only one group in the next
hierarchical level E1 Relativity of ranking / the essential unity of
di ering things.
E1a the incompleteness / uncertainty / relativity of everything
E1b the esteemed also have their faults and imperfection (which must
be endured)
E1c an intelligent person can make mistakes, an able man can fail
E1d minor, inferior, late etc. is better than nothing
E1e the value of X increases through lack of Y
E1f insigni cant and despised things share basic features in common
with the rest of us
E1g the same origins / values / basic rights shared by human beings
and nature
E1h apparently opposite beings have basic features in common
E1i ‘coincidentia oppositorum’; the fusion of opposites
E1j the wisdom of the ‘middle road’, avoidance of exaggerations and
extremes, compromise is best
E1k things look di erent when seen from di erent perspectives,
paradoxes concerning luck in misfortune
E1l internal contradictions among essential nature, action or situation
In order to get a better view to contents of these subgroups we can
open the already presented subgroup E1e. I shall go through the
English (translated) proverb types now available in the database. The
rst (nb 10) is a global proverb type We never know the worth of water
until the well runs dry. The next title (nb 14) presented with an English
translation is Copper is a poor man’s gold, pewter a pauper’s silver. In
addition to the Finnish proverb text Tina on köyhän kulta, vaski
vaivaisen hopia in the Finnish zone of the database this proverb type
includes for example a synonymous African proverb: The tooth of a pig
is a poor man’s ivory.
The next type (again translated into English) in this subgroup is the
one we already dealt with: When there is no sh in the river, shrimps are
valued (E1e 16). The title text is taken and translated from a Chinese
proverb. This proverb idea is almost global with the exception of the
Sub Saharan Africa.
Then there is an example text known both in Finland and Estonia:
One has to screw the aunt since there is no other bride (E1e 18). The
same idea is familiar also in the Western Europe. Both the next proverb
type A drowning man will catch at any straw (E1e 21) and the last one In
the kingdom of the blind the one-eyed man is a king (E1e 26) are global
proverb types.
Studying closer the proverb examples in the previous subgroup we
could ask what are the criteria for these proverb types to be separated
from each other. You could call the group title a generalised proverb
type and deal with all those proverbs as synonymous texts. But we
might as well ask, if there are any basis to join quite di erent proverbs
to a single type. A problematic area of any classi cation work is to
decide how to distinguish one proverb type from another without
losing information about the relationship between them.

3.10 Automatic Data Processing and New Possibilities

to Construct Proverb Databases
An obvious challenge for improvement of any categorization of
proverbs and databases is lack of contextual data. Nonetheless, the
classi cation signs serve as guidance for understanding the most
common situations where these proverbs are used. Hrisztalina
Hrisztova-Gotthardt (2010) has made an analysis of the development
from the printed dictionaries and proverb collections to modern
database systems applied to proverb research. Taking into account
multidimensionality and new possibilities to use networks we may
nd new ways to approach proverb material. Once proverbial
collections are digitized, advanced search capabilities can be applied
on them. These capabilities include morphology- and semantics-aware
search (e.g. by stem, by syntactic criteria, by semantic domain), search
across numerous and di erent information sources, and convenient
presentation and manipulation of search results. Third, information
technology o ers convenient means for organization and classi cation
of proverbs. Linking between various proverbial and non-proverbial
resources, associating of textual data with multimedia data (video,
audio, maps) and other widely used methods of organizing data allow
for creation of powerful dynamic, multidimensional indices of
proverbs. Such indices (also known as ontologies, using the
terminology of information systems) are going to substitute the
traditional proverb collections. (Kats & Lauhakangas, 2010: 114.)
A truly qualitative leap would be to connect to Kuusi’s original
database supplementary national proverbial databases proportioned
to Kuusi’s classi cation tool. Perhaps Permyakov’s ideas could also be
applied to this kind of combination. We should not also forget Aderemi
Raji-Oyelade’s (2004; 2008: 150) observation that there is a steady
increase in the number of non-conventional proverb types which also
deserve further interpretive classi cation. He sees that these new
proverbs especially popular in Africa assimilate ancient thoughts and
observances but explode the conventional meanings and deconstruct
the logic of traditional sayings.

3.11 Summary
Some lexicographers (Almind et al.) write about the neglected role of
the common, non-academic user who has little need for an in-depth
classi cation. Instead of overtheorizing they want to show, how an
online dictionary puts the simpli ed theory into use and focuses on
the user’s needs, thereby reducing the necessity for complicated
classi cations. It is always good to put theories into use and in the case
of theories about proverb categorization the criteria for evaluation
should always be real and not arti cially constructed. In order to test
any classi cation of proverbs one should employ as testing grounds
proverbs in their interactional contexts and texts from cultures as
di erent from each other as possible. The demand for user’s needs as
the main criterion for classi cation should not prevent basic research
on systemization of proverb corpora. In order to serve scienti c
paremiology and better comprehension of social psychological and
cultural aspects of proverb use the need for in-depth categorization is
clear. It must be based on deep familiarity of proverbs and proverb-like
expressions as a genre of folklore and on knowledge of its interactional
functions. This does not exclude developing user-friendly search
systems for databases of proverbs.
References
Almind, R., Bergenholtz, H. & Vrang, V. Theoretical and Computational Solutions for
Phraseological Lexicography. Aarhus. Linguistik online 27, 23/06, 159–181.
http://www.linguistik-online.de/27_06/almind_et_al.pdf (accessed September
9, 2013)
Andersson, D. (2013). “Understanding Figurative Proverbs: A Model Based on
Conceptual Blending.” Folklore 124: 1, 28–44.
Chlosta, C. & Grzybek, P. (2000). Versuch macht klug?! Logisch-semiotische
Klassi kation bekannter deutscher Sprichwörter. In P. Grzybek (Ed.) Die
Grammatik der sprichwörtlichen Weisheit von G. L. Permjakov. Mit einer Analyse
allgemein bekannter deutscher Sprichwörter (pp. 169-199). Baltmannsweiler:
Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.
Čermák, F. (2011). The Case of the Czech National Corpus: Its Design and History. In
S. Gozdz-Roszkowski (Ed.), Explorations across Languages and Corpora (pp. 29–
44). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Dalj, V. (2003 [1862]). [Пословицы русского народа] Proverbs of Russian people.
Moscow.
Goodwin, P. D. & and Wenzel, J. W. (1981). Proverbs and Practical reasoning. A study
in Socio-logic. In W. Mieder & A. Dundes (Eds), The Wisdom of many. Essays on
the Proverb (pp. 140-160). New York/London.
Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H. (2010). Vom gedruckten Sprichwörterbuch zur interaktiven
Sprichwortdatenbank. Überlegungen zum linguistischen und lexikographischen
Konzept Mehrsprachiger Sprichwortdatenbanken. Sprichwörterforschung. Bd. 27.
Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Kats, P. & Lauhakangas, O. (2010). Proverbial databases, variety and challenges. In
O. Lauhakangas & R. Soares (Eds), Acta Proceedings of ICP 09 (pp. 110-120).
Tavira: AIP-IAP.
Krikmann, A. & Sarv, I. (Eds). (1980-1988). Eesti Vanasõnad. Proverbia Estonica I-IV.
Tallinn: Eesti Raamat.
Kuusi, M. & Lauhakangas, O. The Matti Kuusi International Type System of Proverbs.
In http://lauhakan.home.cern.ch/lauhakan/cerp.html
Kuusi, M. (1954). Sananlaskut ja puheenparret. [Proverbs and proverbial phrases.]
Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
Kuusi, M. (1957). Regen bei Sonnenschein. Zur Weltgeschichte einer Redensart. [If it
rains while the sun is shining. World history of one phrase.] FF Communications
171. Helsinki: SKS.
Kuusi, M. (1970). Ovambo Proverbs with African parallels. FF Communications 208.
Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica.
Kuusi, M. (1972). Towards an International Type-System of Proverbs. FF
Communications 211. Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica.
Kuusi, M., Krikmann, A., Laukkanen, K., Sarv, I. & al. (1985). Proverbia
septentrionalia. 900 Balto-Finnic proverb types with Russian, Baltic, German and
 Scandinavian parallels. FF Communications 236. Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum
Fennica.
Lauhakangas, O. (2001). The Matti Kuusi International Type System of Proverbs. FF
Communications 275. Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica.
Lombardi-Satriani, L. (1974). Folklore as Culture of Contestation. In Journal of the
Folklore Institute XI: 1-2, 99–121.
Permyakov, G. L. (1979 [1970 in Russian]). From Proverb to Folk-Tale. Notes on the
General Theory of Cliché. Moscow: Nauka
Permyakov, G. L. (1968). [Избранные пословицы и поговорки народов Востока.]
Selected Oriental Proverbs. Moscow: Nauka.
Propp, V. J. (1958 [1928]). [Морфология сказки] Morphology of the folktale.
International journal of American linguistics 24, 4.
Raji-Oyelade, A. (2004). Posting the African Proverb: A Grammar of Yoruba,
Postproverbials, or Logophagia, Logorrhea and the Grammar of Yoruba
Postproverbials. Proverbium 21, 299–314.
Raji-Oyelade, A. (2008). Classifying the unclassi ed: the challenge of
postproverbiality in international proverb scholarship. In O. Lauhakangas & R.
Soares (Eds), Acta Proceedings of ICP (pp. 146-155). Tavira: AIP/IAP.
Rozhdestvensky, Y. V. (1979). What is ‘the general theory of cliché’. In G. L.
Permyakov: From Proverb to Folk-tale. Notes on the general theory of cliché (pp.
259–284). Moscow: Nauka.
Scarborough, W. (1875). A Collection of Chinese Proverbs. Shanghai: American
Presbyterian Mission press.
Taylor, A. (1931). The Proverb and an index to the proverb. Hatboro/Copenhagen.
Tilley, M. P. (1950). The Proverbs in England in the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries. Ann Arbor (MI): University of Michigan Press.
Yurtbaşi, M. (1996). On bes dilde atasözlerimiz. Turkish proverbs and their
equivalents in een languages. Istanbul.

2 A private discussion between Outi Lauhakangas and Peter Grzybek in November

2012.
3 A private discussion between Outi Lauhakangas and Peter Grzybek in November
2012.
4 Taylor also provoked Kuusi to start as the rst editor-in-chief of the journal
Proverbium. His pioneering and active paremiological period at the head of the
journal lasted from 1965 to 1974. A strong network of paremiologists formed when he
invited proverb scholars to contribute to the same forum. New contacts brought
proverb collections from every part of the world.
5 The Matti Kuusi International Type System of Proverbs.
In http://lauhakan.home.cern.ch/lauhakan/cerp.html
Peter Grzybek
4 Semiotic and Semantic Aspects of the
Proverb

4.1 Semiotics and the Proverb

The semiotic study of proverbs has long been a claim in the eld of
folkloristics. The earliest explicit claim in this direction goes back to
Russian folklorist and semiotician Pëtr G. Bogatyrev, a co-author of
Roman Jakobson, who, as early as in the 1930s, explicitly stated: “The
investigation of proverbs in their semiotic aspect is one of the most
grateful tasks for a folklorist” (Bogatyrëv, 1971: 366). In contextually
appreciating this statement, one should not forget that this was the
time when, despite many valuable studies from the 19th century and
earlier, proverb research became an increasingly important topic. Let it
su ce to mention Friedrich Seiler’s fundamental Deutsche
Sprichwörterkunde (1922), or André Jolles’ in uential Einfache Formen
(1930). Nevertheless, despite all achievements made at that time, the
outstanding folklorist and paremiologist Archer Taylor, started his
seminal book on The Proverb with the sharp and critical remark: “The
proverb and related forms have long been objects of general interest
and the occasion for many books, but they have attracted little serious
and thorough study” (Taylor, 1931: vii).
Bogatyrev’s postulation remained unheard until the 1960s and
1970s, when along with the rise of structuralist approaches – rst in
the eld of linguistics, then in anthropology – semiotics, with its
genuinely interdisciplinary orientation, became increasingly
important. In fact, various facets and aspects concerning the semiotics
of proverbs began to be studied at that time, which had – more o en
implicitly, rather than explicitly –, been the object of paremiological
study before, but now received attention from a di erent
methodological point of view. Nevertheless, comprehensive and
systematic semiotic analyses of the proverb still today represent some
kind of research desideratum.
One of the major reasons for this state of the art is the fact that both
the proverb, as the research object at stake, and semiotics, as the
discipline in focus, are no traditionally established phenomena in the
international scholarly world. Although the proverb belongs, in
principle, to the discipline of paremiology, the latter has never been
institutionally established in the academic world; rather, the proverb
has traditionally been served as a research object for disciplines such
as folkloristics, sociology, pedagogy, linguistics, and many others, all
of them looking at the proverb from di erent methodological
perspectives, asking di erent questions and, as a result, obtaining
di erent answers. Likewise semiotics, that branch of science which
studies signs, or systems, and the processes of sign generation
(semiosis) and usage, has rather been a methodological tool used by
individual sciences, interested in a methodological generalization of
their results.
In semiotic studies, it is commonplace, in line with Morris’
Foundations of the Theory of Signs (1938), to subdivide semiotics into
three semiotic dimensions (see below), the distinction of which has
subsequently become most widespread in the eld of linguistics; yet,
due attention must be paid to the fact that they refer to any kind of
sign processes, not only, and not speci cally, to linguistics which has,
as a discipline, been of particular relevance for proverbs, too, being
part of verbal folklore. Notwithstanding the fact all these aspects have
become most relevant in the eld or linguistics, the semiotic approach
and the semiotic understanding of the three dimensions outlined is
much for encompassing and comprehensive, and it covers linguistics
as the science of linguistic signs, too, but is of larger concern and
relevance.
Keeping this in mind, it is also of utmost importance to note that,
despite the three-dimensional and triadic study of semiotics, a number
of dyadic relations may be abstracted for study (Morris, 1938: 6):
a) the pragmatical dimension,
b) the syntactical dimension,
c) the semantical dimension.
The three disciplines studying these dimensions are accordingly
termed pragmatics, syntactics, and semantics: whereas, according to
Morris’ (1938) concept, pragmatics is concerned with the relation
between sign and sign users, syntactics is directed towards the formal
relations of signs to one another, and semantics concentrates on the
relations of signs to the objects to which the signs are applicable. In
this respect, it should be pointed out right away that already Morris
emphasized the close interrelation between these three dimensions
suggesting that they can only, for heuristic purposes, be distinguished
and studied with a separate focus, but not really isolated, neither with
the regard to sign usage, nor with the study thereof. Also, it should be
noted, that more o en than not, in the history of studies applying
these concepts, implicitly or explicitly, semantics has some kind of
dominated over pragmatics and syntactics, since it has always been
common to ask for the function of pragmatical or syntactical factors
and, by way of that, for the in uence these dimensions have on the
overall meaning (or even change of meaning). It seems, in this respect
students of semiotics generally, and paremiologists speci cally, do not
di er from ordinary sign users, whose cognitive activity is principally
characterized by what psychologists have termed the “e ort a er
meaning” (Bartlett, 1932: 44) and identi ed as an anthropological
constant (Hörmann, 1986).
Morris’ rather rough approach, which owes much to the semiotic of
Charles S. Peirce, has not remained unchallenged in the course of
time: both the concrete de nitions and the methodological approaches
to each of these dimensions and their interrelations have
fundamentally changed in the course of the 20th century. Nevertheless,
they have served as some kind of orientation point till today. It seems
therefore reasonable to take them as a starting point for an analysis of
the semiotics of the proverb, on the one hand, and of proverb studies,
on the other. With this perspective, it will easily be seen that the three
semiotic dimensions cover traditional folkloristic and paremiological
issues, which can thus be united under a common theoretical roof.

4.2 Semiotics and Its Dimensions

4.2.1 Pragmatics
Generally speaking, pragmatics focuses on “the relation of signs to
interpreters” (Morris, 1938: 6); more speci cally, it is “that portion of
semiotic which deals with the origin, uses, and e ects of signs within
the behavior in which they occur” (Morris, 1946: 219). It is thus
concerned with the use of a sign system in contexts. Having initially
been a predominantly philosophical issue, including speech act
theory, pragmatics has become increasingly important since the 1970s
in the eld of linguistics, last but not least as a reaction to rather
context-free structural or generativist approaches. In fact, it was
context which received more and more attention; it became
particularly relevant to study the ways in which context contributes to
meaning, i.e., how meaning depends not only on structural and
linguistic knowledge of a message’s producer and recipient, but (also)
on the context of an utterance, pre-existing knowledge about those
involved, the inferred intent(ion) of the message’s producer, etc. In this
respect, a number of di erent notions of context were distinguished,
such as: (a) the physical context, referring to the real-life situational
setting of a communication act, i.e. that situation in which the
communication takes place; (b) the epistemic context referring to the
background knowledge (or world knowledge) of a communication,
which may be necessary for understanding, but logically speaking can
of course be shared on partly by producer and recipient; (c) the
linguistic context, o en distinguishingly termed co-text instead,
referring to that information into which a message is imbedded, i.e.
which either preceded or succeeded the message in question, or which
accompanied it simultaneously (e.g., speci c prosodic elements,
nonverbal communicative elements, etc.), (d) the social context,
speci cally referring to the relationship between producer and
recipient, involving, among others, hierarchies or di erent degrees of
intimacy between them, and thus having an impact on the success
communication act. The recipient’s ability to understand another’s
intended meaning has been called pragmatic competence; but of
course producing and conveying a message includes, to a certain
degree, the anticipation of the communicative imbalance between
producer and recipient, and any producer’s strategy to avoid resulting
problems is part of pragmatic competence, too.
With regard to pragmatical issues, paremiology has been
concerned with the study of negotiating proverbs in natural
communication (oral or written), and social life, i.e., with the analysis
of speech act performances, focusing on the why and how of verbal
exchanges. This line of research, despite all di erences in detail, has
thus basically concentrated on the proverb in its context, less on the
proverb as a text: in fact, proverbs are studied with regard to
contextual and situational implications in the process of social
exchange, on the one hand, including all pragmatic restrictions which
may be e ective, and with regard to functional factors, on the other.
Paremiological research along this line has of course been much more
concrete, than simply stating that proverbs are indirect speech acts6;
rather, quite concrete social and cultural interactions have been
analyzed in detail. Studies in this direction have a long tradition.
Raymond W. Firth, for example, who was later to become an important
ethnologist and a leading representative of functional cultural
anthropology, referred to the importance of proverb context as early as
in 1926, when he wrote: “The essential thing about a proverb is its
meaning, – and by this is to be understood not merely a bald and
literal translation into the accustomed tongue, nor even a free version
of what the words are intended. To convey the meaning of a proverb is
made clear only when side by side with the translation is given a full
account of the accompanying social situation,– the reason for its use,
its e ect, and its signi cance in speech” (Firth, 1926: 134). And on the
threshold to modern, structural anthropology, Ojo Arewa and Alan
Dundes, in their 1966 essay Proverbs and the Ethnography of Speaking
Folklore7, explicitly postulated to complement the description of a
proverb’s textual characteristics by a detailed description of the
context in which it is used. Their main interest was not as much the
question of the function of the proverb in general, as the description of
a concrete proverb’s function in a speci c context: “Notice that such as
study of context is not the same as the more general study of functions
of folklore. One can say that proverbs sum up a situation, pass
judgment, recommend a course of action, or serve as secular past
precedents for present action; but to say this does not tell us what the
particular function of a particular proverb used by a particular
individual in a particular setting is” (Arewa & Dundes, 1966: 71).
Emphasis is laid here on the contextual boundary conditions of
individual (proverbial) speech acts and proverb usage. Nevertheless,
the ultimate object of this approach was twofold, of course: with
regard to individual proverbs, the interest was to gain better insight
into a proverb’s functioning and, by way of that, into the complex
matter of its semantic functioning; and with regard to the proverbial
genre, the interest was to obtain a clearer picture of the proverb’s
social and cultural functions in general. This dual interest has since
characterized pragmatic approaches to the proverb in the eld of
paremiology (see among others Briggs, 1985, Charteris Black, 1995,
Hasan-Rokem, 1982).
Summarizing the gist of this whole line of research, one can
generally say that, on the whole, the predominant interest has been, to
study the ways in which context contributes to, or changes, proverbial
meaning, i.e., to analyze the overwhelmingly complex question how a
proverb either obtains its meaning, or how it changes its meaning, or
its function, depending on (a change of) the situational, contextual, or
pragmatic boundary conditions of proverb usage.

4.2.2 Syntactics
As to the syntactical dimension, it cannot be overemphasized that
syntactics must not be identi ed with, or reduced to, the (study of)
grammatical concept of syntax in linguistics, i.e., the rules and
principles of sentence structures and processes by which sentences are
constructed. The linguistic study of syntax may, of course, be sub-
summarized under the broader concept of syntactics, but the latter, in
its semiotic understanding of the term, refers to (the study of) signs in
their relations to one another generally.
Before pointing out the relevance of syntactics for paremiology, it
seems necessary to emphasize that in this context, a number of further
distinctions should be made, which have not always been kept apart as
clearly as would have been desirable. Partly, this is due to Morris’ own
ambiguous statements, partly to later interpretations of his statements
by other scholars. A major problem consists in the wrong identi cation
of syntactics not only syntax, but also with syntagmatics, thus
excluding paradigmatic sign relations from the eld of syntactics. In
his Foundations of the Theory of Signs, Morris (1938: 14) de ned
syntactics rather speci cally as being concerned with “the
consideration of signs and sign combinations in so far as they are
subject to syntactical rules” (the latter being meant as formation and
transformation rules in terms of formal logics); but he also, in a more
general way, spoke of “the formal relation of signs to one another”
(Morris, 1938: 6). Later re ning these de nitions in his book Signs,
Language, and Behavior, Morris (1946: 219) saw syntactics not only
generally dealing “with combinations of signs”, but also as that
“branch of semiotic that studies the way in which signs of various
classes are combined to form compound signs” (Morris, 1946: 355).
Whereas the rst statement thus still refers to combinatorics and
seems to imply a syntagmatic perspective, the second refers to any
kind of relation between signs, possibly including paradigmatics, too,
and the third speci cally aims at the combination of signs from
di erent classes being interrelated in one way or another. In order to
cover all aspects of syntactics, it seems therefore reasonable to pay
attention to the methodologically important juxtapositions of
paradigmatics vs. syntagmatics and simultaneity vs. succession, which
stand in speci c relations to each other.
When, per de nition, syntactics includes (the study of)
syntagmatic relations of a given sign concerning its relation(s) to other
signs with which it is combined, this necessarily implies a speci c
succession or sequentiality, i.e., an extension in the temporal and/or
spatial dimension. Following the above de nitions, a syntactical
approach needs not be syntagmatic, however; rather, it may include
paradigmatic relations between signs as well (Posner, 1985), which
concern a sign’s relation(s) to signs within one and the same sign
system and, consequently, no temporal or spatial extension. As a
consequence, a paradigmatic focus implies simultaneity, in contrast to
a syntagmatic focus, implying succession. In sum, a syntactical
approach would thus not be restricted to syntagmatics, but include
paradigmatics, as well and, as a consequence, not necessarily imply
sequentiality. Moreover, syntactics would also include the (study of a)
simultaneous combination of heterogeneous signs, i.e., signs from
di erent sign systems being merged into a complex sign, or a sign
complex.8
These distinctions, as theoretical as they may appear to be at rst
sight, are highly relevant for paremiological analyses, too. In fact,
paremiological studies have always included syntactical studies,
without necessarily having been understood or termed as syntactical
in the sense outlined above. It goes without saying that no exhaustive
or systematic account can be given here, but it may be helpful to give
at least some examples:
a. Approaches to proverbs concerning the linguistic embedding of a
verbal utterance into the linguistic context, for example, would be a
typical case of a syntacticalsyntagmatic approach: concentrating on
the linguistic environment of a proverbial utterance would focus,
among others, on the study of the verbal text preceding or succeeding
a given proverb utterance, o en referred to as co-text instead (Catford,
1965: 30), in order to distinguish such verbal embeddings from
situational contexts. Such analyses would also attempt to identify
introductory (pre-proverb) formulae, i.e., some kind of preceding
verbal prompters, verbally introducing proverbs into a running
conversation and separating them from the ongoing text, as well as
extensions and elaborations, including stylistic extensions, strategies
of commenting, proverb dialogues competitions, etc. Studies of
proverb usage in a given situational context with particular regard to
non-verbal communicative elements accompanying it, would be an
instance of simultaneity-oriented syntactics, studying the combination
of heterogeneous signs into a compound sign complex. What is
relevant here is of course not the nonverbal channel as such, but the
simultaneous combination of (di erent) signs; this instance is
therefore di erent, of course, from studies of proverb usage in
particular societies, when proverbs are not orally expressed, by on
drums, through gestures, in dancing, etc., without verbal
accompaniment.
 b. A syntactical-paradigmatic approach, as compared to this, asks
for a de nition of which paradigm is under study, since paradigms are
not a priori given truths, but the a posteriori result of de nition. Such a
paradigm may be represented by all proverb variants and variations
belonging to one and the same proverb (with a given language or even
cross-linguistically), it may comprise all proverbs belonging to a
speci c structural type, e.g. all those including formulae like Where …
there, Like … like, etc., or it may even concentrate on all proverbs of a
given language, studying their interrelations, and it may as well study
all proverbs, within a given culture or not, in their mutual
interrelations, including what has been termed paremiological
homonyms, synonyms, antonyms, etc.
As has been pointed put above, syntactical approaches would of
course comprise linguistic syntax analyses, studying grammatical
speci cs of proverbs, as well. It should be noted, however, that in this
case the concept of proverb as the object of research is, from a semiotic
point of view, essentially di erent from its understanding in the
examples above. In all previous examples, a proverb has been
understood as a proverbial entity, i.e., as one sign studied in its
relation to other signs. It has been thus ignored, at least temporarily,
that a proverb itself is composed of more than one constituting sign,
since a proverb, by de nition, is composed of minimally two words,
and each individual word is a sign in its own right9, the proverb thus
turning out to be what has been termed a super-sign, i.e. a complex
sign, or a sign complex.
Accepting the assumption that a word obtains its meaning only in
co(n)text, it turns out that any change in this respect, as well as any
pragmatic di erence, will have impact on proverb meaning, showing
once more how closely interrelated pragmatical, syntactical and
semantical aspects are, and how uently these aspects merge into
each other, despite any heuristic focus.

4.2.3 Semantics
As compared to Morris (1938: 6) de nition of semantics as “the relation
of signs to the objects to which the signs are applicable”, he later
regarded it as dealing “with the signi cation of signs in all modes of
signifying” (Morris, 1946: 219): whereas in the rst case, we would thus
be concerned with some kind of reference semantics, the later
modi cation is more general in scope, rather focusing on the
conditions which must be ful lled for something to be denoted by a
sign, or for a sign to serve as denoting, or signifying, something,
respectively.
In the course of time, and mostly related to the elds of philosophy
of language, on the one hand, and linguistics, on the other, the
discipline of semantics has undergone important developments and
sustainable changes. In the eld of linguistics it has become common,
irrespective of methodological di erences, to distinguish di erent
branches, or foci, of semantics, depending again on the speci c focus
of research: whereas lexical semantics is concerned with the meanings
of words and morphemes, as well as the structure of a (mental) lexicon
as a whole, sentence semantics studies how (i.e., by what kind of rules)
the meaning of larger syntactic units, such as phrases, clauses, or
sentences, can be described and eventually derived from individual
words; text semantics concentrates on the combination of sentences,
i.e., the representations of real or hypothetical (presumed, ctive, etc.)
facts into coherent narrative, descriptive or argumentative structures;
and discourse semantics concentrates on the level of texts in
interaction (discussions, conversations, etc.) Quite obviously, these
di erent aspects interact in speci c ways.
What is important here is that all these aspects are essentially
relevant for semantic studies in the eld of paremiology, too. The
proverb being de ned as a folklore unit on the sentence level, sentence
semantics is of course speci cally concerned. Quite obviously, the
study if or how from the meanings of individual words, as the
constituents of a sentence, along with combinatorial semantic,
morphosyntactic and syntactic rules relate to the meaning of syntactic
entities (phrases, clauses, sentences), cannot be solved without
information from lexical semantics: independent of the fact if di erent
kinds of tropes and gures are included, or not, sentence meaning
might well not emerge from the meanings of its components (see
below). But it would be a too narrowing view to restrict paremiological
semantics to these two aspects – ultimately, the meaning of a proverb
is likely to transcend sentence boundaries. Depending on the
de nition of text, a proverbial sentence can be seen to be a full text in
its own right, eventually embedded into a situational context and
additional co-text. Likewise, the integration of a proverb into
discursive structures parallels the importance of co(n)textual
structures already pointed out above with reference to pragmatics and
syntactics.
It is obvious that neither a historically nor a conceptually oriented
survey of semantic approaches can be given here, be that with regard
to semantics in general or to the narrower eld of proverb semantics,
only. In any case, it seems worthwhile emphasizing again, with regard
to the three-partite division of semiosis outlined above, Morris’
emphasis of the unity of the three dimensions involved, and referring
to the fact that ultimately, that any semiotic process can only be
adequately studied paying due attention to the indispensable
interrelationship of all three dimensions. Not any one of them must be
isolated from any one of the others except, temporarily, for heuristic
purposes. Based on these general assumptions, it has become a
commonplace in semiotics, speci cally in process-oriented semiotics,
that signs do neither occur isolated from other signs, nor outside of a
speci c situational context; consequently, meaning is generally
considered to emerge as a result of operations which sign users ful ll
by way of texts (in a broad semiotic understanding of this term) in
particular communicative situations.
Generally speaking, it should be pointed out that the notion of
semantics has been ambiguously used in the past, and that we have
been concerned with di erent readings of the term semantics. Most
importantly, and irrespective of di erent methodological approaches
complicating the situation, two di erent levels of abstraction should
clearly be kept apart. When semantics was introduced as a scholarly
term in the linguistic discourse by Bréal in 1883, its task was supposed
to be the description of the meaning of words and of meaning change;
this led to a rather colloquial usage of the term, semantics o en being
understood as a synonym for meaning. Proverb semantics, thus
understood, would then be but the meaning of a proverb – indeed
such readings can be found, e.g., in Lundberg’ 1958 study on The
semantics of proverbs, concentrating on contradictory interpretations
(i.e., meanings) of proverbs within a given language.10
More adequately, however, and following the tradition outlined
above, semantics should not be understood in terms of meaning, but of
the study of meaning, or science of meaning. Semantics, in this
understanding, thus would not be the object of study, but the
discipline of studying the object; and since the object, in this case (i.e.,
the proverb), is a linguistic expression, this would ask for a description
and study of (the process of generating) meaning. From this
perspective, any attempt to explain or to interpret a proverb, i.e., to
describe its meaning, could thus be classi ed as being semantic, and
any description of proverb meaning would fall into the eld of proverb
semantics. It would be too easy, however, to leave this statement as it
is: on the one hand, it is quite evident that no (proverb) meaning can
ever be described without at least a minimum of meta-linguistic
competence, be that implicit or explicit; on the other hand, ambition
and scope of di erent meta-languages, or their degrees of abstraction,
may be quite di erent, up to the level of speci c theories of proverb
meaning and meaning generation. Meta-language thus turns out to be
a crucial factor in context of proverb semantics, and it seems
reasonable to recall some elementary cornerstones about the status
and function of meta-language.

4.3 Metalanguage
Generally speaking, meta-language is language about language. As
compared to this, the language which is spoken about is called an
object language; in case some meta-language itself is made the object
of study, i.e. functionally turning out to be the object, we speak about
meta-meta-language. Any meta-language includes two main
components (Baranov, 2007: 78): (i) the initial alphabet of elements or
units (vocabulary of metalanguage) and (ii) the allowed rules for the
generation of well-formed metalanguage formulae (expressions) from
initial elements.
 It goes without saying that not only is meta-language itself
concerned by all three dimensions of semiosis (i.e., by pragmatic,
syntactic and semantic aspects) but also may it concern all aspects of a
given object language, not only the semantic dimension focused here,
in terms of a semantic meta-language. As Baranov (2007: 78) correctly
points out, with regard to phraseology, expressions of a semantic
meta-language must convey the essential features of the meanings of
the object language expressions.
In this respect, two positions may be distinguished, with regard to
the completeness of description (Baranov, 2007: 81): for the rst, the
goal is a (maximally) complete analysis and exhaustive description of
meaning, including all necessary and su cient conditions for its
correct use; according to the second, a semantic metalanguage can
describe only a part of the content of a language expression.
From a model theory perspective, a meta-linguistic expression can
be regarded to be a model of an object expression; quite obviously, a
meta-linguistics model can in practice cover but selected properties
considered to be relevant in a given research context. As a
consequence, the view on the object, as well as its description, will
change depending on the meta-language chosen. Di erent meta-
linguistic approaches and any theory of proverb meaning will
therefore arrive at di erent semantic descriptions, and with each
di erence in describing a proverb’s meaning the latter will seemingly
change, to a certain degree.
There are, at least, two more factors to which due attention must be
paid with regard to the in uence of meta-language. First, one should
not forget that the more general (broader, abstract) a given meta-
language is, the more phenomena it will be able to cover, but on costs
of the degree of speci city of description. And second one should be
well aware of the fact that meaning is, a er all, the outcome of a
dynamic process – but any description of meaning is bound to arrive at
a static result. Alone from this fact it follows that any attempt at
describing a concrete meaning will always face serious di culties, if it
will not even be principally doomed to failure.
Estonian folklorist Arvo Krikmann has adequately drawn the
necessary conclusions from these general and theoretical problems.
On their background the proverb as a genre seems to be speci cally
characterized by a number of factors responsible for what he has
termed its semantic inde niteness: in addition to modal, functional,
pragmatic, situational, and other factors, Krikmann (1971) particularly
emphasized the importance of the chosen meta-language. According to
him, it is simply impossible to de ne a proverb’s meaning exactly, and
he concludes: “[…] the meaning of a proverb [...] is, for a researcher or
a user, a mere semantic potential. The nal and maximally de nite
meanings of a certain text manifest themselves only in concrete
actualizations of this text” (Krikmann, 1974: 5).
Ultimately, attempting to solve the problem, we are therefore faced
with a methodological dilemma, since analyzing a proverb text we are
concerned with two antagonistic tendencies. On the one hand, we are
faced with the absolute sum of all possible meanings which represent a
proverb’s semantic potential. On the other hand, we have to do with
the sum of all real (actual) meanings, as manifested in all its previous
realizations, and since we do not know all these actual realizations, we
usually have no chance to explicate the proverb’s semantic potential in
such a way that it corresponds to its actual meanings. This de cit is
responsible for a number of possible error sources in any attempt to
describe a proverb’s meaning (Krikmann, 1974: 5):
i. a semantic description is attributed to the text, which is too broad (or too
general) – as a result, the description includes a number of unreal meanings, in
addition to all real meanings;
ii. the description is too narrow – consequently, part of all real meanings remain
out of the consideration;
iii. errors (1) and (2) occur simultaneously – in this case, the description
introduces some unreal meanings and excludes, or neglects, a part of real ones;
iv. the interpretation fails entirely and the formulation of the semantic potential
does not include any real meaning.

Despite this seemingly hopeless situation there have always been (and
will always be) attempts to describe proverb meanings,
notwithstanding all theoretical problems pointed out – a er all, there
are simply concrete practical needs to do so, maybe even less for
paremiology than for paremiography, striving for some kind of
semantic arrangement of proverbs. In this respect, paremiologists and
paremiographers, have always had to deal not only with the
interaction of semantics with pragmatics and syntactics – it is yet
another problem, which is essentially responsible for the proverb’s
semantic inde niteness, namely, factors concerning its indirectness,
gurativeness, non-literalness, etc.
The assumption of indirectness has always, in one way or another,
played an important role in the history of proverb scholarship,
primarily with regard to semantic issues, including however
pragmatic, linguistic, poetic and other approaches.

4.4 “Indirectness” and “Non-literalness”

From a pragmatic point of view, it might eventually be appropriate to
classify a proverb as an indirect speech act. This concept goes back to
ideas from the philosophy of language, mainly Searle’s (1975)
discussion of Indirect Speech Acts, based on his earlier Speech Act
Theory (Searle, 1969), and referring back to Austin’s (1962) well-known
treatment How to do things with words. In this framework, we are
concerned with a direct speech act, when a speaker utters a sentence
and means exactly and literally what s/he says (Searle, 1975: 59). But a
speaker may also utter a sentence, mean what s/he says, but
additionally mean something more, or something di erent instead. In
these cases, we are concerned with indirect speech acts, when “the
speaker communicates to the hearer more than he actually says by way
of relying on their mutually shared background information, both
linguistic and nonlinguistic, together with the general powers of
rationality and inference on the part of the hearer” (Searle, 1975: 60).
On this basis, there have been a number studies on the speech act
character of the proverb. And there have not only been attempts to
characterize the proverb, due to its citational character, as a doubly
indirect speech act (Norrick 1982), there have been e orts to de ne
speci c paremic speech acts – Nahberger (2000: 121), Nahberger
(2004). Such attempts may be reasonable from a philosophical or
maybe even pragmatic point of view. If, however, such classi cations
are helpful for semantic purposes (be that in a paremiological context
or not), is an entirely di erent matter. Ultimately, the status of indirect
speech acts has increasingly been principally called into question in
the last years, not only due to the fact that the majority of speech acts
in every day conversation have turned out to be indirect (Crystal, 1987:
121); profound skepticism has also come up for theoretical reasons,
stating, e.g., that “there are no indirect speech acts” (Bertolet, 1994:
335), claiming “that indirect speech acts, if they do occur, can be
explained within the framework of conversational implicature”
(Green, 2009), or declaring “that the notion can be discarded with no
signi cant methodological loss” (Chankova, 2009).
The question of gurativeness in proverbs has preoccupied
generations of paremiologists, and monographic surveys of the
proverb use to devote separate chapters to this question – Seiler, (1922:
149), Röhrich & Mieder, 1977: 90), and many others. More o en than
not, juxtapositions of the following kind have traditionally been put
forward:

metaphorical proverb vs. proverbial apothegm (Taylor 1931)

proverbe vs. dicton (Greimas (1970)
proverb proper vs. maxim (Barley 1972)
proverb proper vs. folk aphorism (Permjakov (1979)

Although at rst sight such distinctions, irrespective of di erences in

terminology, seem to refer to similar concepts, they may have been
based on di erent assumptions: On the one hand, the di erence may
either have been assumed to be (a) categorical or (b) gradual (allowing
for possible degrees and transitions between both); on the other hand,
the juxtaposition may have been motivated either on the basis of
speci c (c) textual characteristics, or the di erence have been seen in
(d) pragmatic respects (i.e., in the act of proverb usage, strictly asking
for a distinction of literal or non-literal usage of a proverb, rather than
of literal and non-literal proverbs).
One might argue, or course, in favor of the notion that these
di erent assumptions are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and that
we are rather concerned with di erent perspectives: from a text-
oriented approach (c) one might, for example, treat a proverb, be it
categorically (a) or (b) gradually (more or less) literal or non-literal, as
a homonymic and polyfunctional text (c). One might also classify a
proverb as literal or non-literal, from an a posteriori perspective,
without claiming that such a categorization is possible a priori, too, on
the basis of information given in the text itself – a er all, any word can
be used metaphorically, and even the classical sentence Colorless
green ideas sleep furiously, seemingly semantically anomalous at rst
sight, has repeatedly shown to be fully reasonable, if interpreted
metaphorically.
Be that as it may, the problem of literal and non-literal meanings is
too complex to be answered straight-forward. In any case, it seems
reasonable see a parallel here to what (Burger, 2007: 91) has suggested
for phrasemes, namely, to speak of literal reading, rather than of literal
meaning. While this wording emphasizes the recipient’s active role and
makes it clear that the distinction outlined may be a cognitive, rather
than an exclusively text-based phenomenon. Moreover, it has
generally been assumed that distinctions which can be made from
text-oriented studies are relevant for, or paralleled by cognitive
processes, as well, among others, Norrick (1985: 27) claims that a
speaker “means what he says on the literal level, but he means
something more in context”, particularly if one takes into account that
the “literal meaning (or rather one literal meaning of several potential
ones, as the components can be polysemic at the literal level) can be
activated […], but does not have to be of any importance in the actual
use of language” (Norrick, 1985: 91).
Related issues have been the study of speci c psycholinguistic
studies of proverb comprehension, where a crucial question has been
if understanding a proverb’s literal meaning is an obligatory pre-
condition for the decoding of its gurative meaning. Since Grzybek’s
(1984c) early summarizing discussion of results available at that time,
much progress has been made in this eld (e.g., Gibbs et al., 1996,
Honeck, 1997). Various models have been propagated, starting from
two-step literal rst models, over multiple meanings models, up to
conventional meaning models, to name but a few, all of them
concentrating on the question, how paremic meaning is achieved, if
and how (elements of) literal meaning may come into play or not.
Unfortunately, in many relevant studies, many possibly interfering
factors have never been systematically controlled, starting from a clear
phrase-paremiological distinction between idioms, proverbial sayings
and proverbs, including the di erentiation of di erent kinds of
proverbs as well as of di erent kinds of tropical process involved – be
that on the lexical or the sentence level (see below) – up to di erences
depending on (individual) familiarity with the given proverb.
The above-mentioned point of di erent kinds of gurativeness
concerns two aspects: on the one hand, this concerns individual tropes
(such as metaphors, metonymies, synecdoches, etc.) as lexical
components possibly present in proverbs,11 on the other hand, this
relates to the proverb text as a whole, i.e., its overall paremic
(transferred, indirect, non-literal, non- gurative, etc.) meaning.
Although Seiler (1922: 152), in his Deutsche Sprichwörterkunde, drew on
this di erence as early as in 1922, both aspects which must be clearly
distinguished have o en have not been kept apart – both problems are
principally di erent, yet closely related, depending again on the
approach chosen.

4.5 Holistic vs. Componential Analysis, Analytical vs.

Synthetic Clichés
In a more modern approach, Krikmann suggested to distinguish two
di erent methodological approaches to explain proverb meaning:
(1) The rst approach, which might be termed componential, regards
the proverb text as internally heterogeneous. It tries to tell apart
content elements (c-elements) from formal elements (f-elements).
Formal elements are, among others, any kind of relational words or
quanti ers, syntactic formulae, such as every, all, if ... then, better ...
than, etc. All other words belong to the c-elements; these can be
further subdivided into semantically (c1) literal and (c2) transferred
(non-literal, gurative, tropical, etc.) elements, based on the
assumption that there is, in principle, a literal reading of words, and a
non-literal ( gurative) one. The exact distinction between c-elements
and f-elements may vary, of course, as well as the classi cation of
speci c kind of trope involved, depending on various factors; but all
approaches along these lines share the assumption that gurativeness
(non-directness, gurativeness, poeticalness, etc.) is not assigned to
the proverb text as a whole, but is restricted to its individual elements
(or even to the c2-elements, alone).

(2) The second approach, which might be termed holistic, considers the
proverb text as an internally homogeneous entity. All its elements are
considered to belong to a speci c secondary language, a proverb
representing a secondary modeling system, i.e., a semiotic
superstructure built upon (the basis, or principle of) natural language
as a primary modeling system. From this perspective, approaches along
the componential approach appear to be restricted to the analysis of
the proverb as a linguistic entity, studying it in the framework of
sentence semantics (see above). In contrast, according to the holistic
approach, a proverb is seen not only as a linguistic super-sign but as
an even more complex superstructure, a paremic super-sign, in
analogy to any poetic work of art. In this framework, the eventual
occurrence of tropes on the lexical level may result in di erent
subcategories of proverbs, but the overall classi cation of a proverb as
being completely poetical would not be touched by this detail, the
semantic description of a proverb thus asking for a speci c meta-
language beyond sentence semantics.
From a di erent perspective, we are thus faced again with the
proverb’s semiotic status as a sign complex, or a complex super-sign.
Comparing these two approaches just outlined, there are some
similarities between the two, since in both cases, lexical tropes may
but need not be contained; furthermore, both do not exclude, or even
claim that there is some information beyond the information given on
a merely linguistic level. Yet, both approaches di er in important
respects:
a) the status and role of lexical tropes, particularly concerning their
relation to the syntactic and proverbial whole, is treated di erently;
b) the need to develop a speci c meta-language for the description
of what is assumed to be some kind of additional information, is seen
di erently, and clearly relevant in the second approach only.
Whereas the rst approach thus focuses on a componential analysis,
eventually being negligent of the need to develop of a speci c meta-
language for the semantic description of the proverbial whole, in
addition to its the second approach, with its particular emphasis on
the additional (secondary) meaning, is faced with the need to o er a
solution as to the interplay between lexical and proverbial levels,
particularly with regard to gurative processes involved. Again, we
have a parallel to the narrower eld of phraseology, and one cannot
but agree with H. Burger (2007: 92), for whom “one of the main
semantic problems in phraseology is describing and explaining if and
how the two meanings or levels of meaning are connected”.
According to the componential approach, a proverb text thus is
regarded to be not principally di erent from any other verbal text,
except for the indirectness of the speech act of its utterance (see
above), and for the eventual inclusion of lexical tropes. Under this
condition, a proverb is submitted to semantic analyses in a linguistic
framework. For approaches along these lines, literal meanings (or
readings) of the proverb and/or its components are a pre-condition of
analysis.
In this respect, the concept of semantic autonomy has been used in
the eld of phraseology, in order to study “how much and in what way
the components of the phraseme contribute semantically to its overall
meaning” (Burger, 2007: 96). Along these lines, idioms without
semantically autonomous components have been termed non-
compositional, those with semantically autonomous components have
been termed compositional; as a consequence, such idioms have been
termed non-motivated or opaque, on the one hand, and motivated or
transparent, on the other, both types also allowing for combinations
leading to partly idiomatic (motivated, transparent) idioms (Burger,
2007:96).12 The classi cation of a phraseme to be (more or less)
motivated thus depends on a decision how the individual components
contribute to the overall phraseological meaning. It seems that with
regard to this point, things are considerably di erent in paremiology:
although here, too, we may ask how the individual components
contribute to the whole, and if, or how, these components can be
motivated, these questions are not relevant for a classi cation of the
proverb meaning as a whole, which is always motivated, even if
possibly in di erent manners (see below).
 Componential analyses in paremiology, however, tend to see the
overall proverb meaning, which may frankly be admitted to exist,
either as an emerging result of the (the analysis of) individual
components, or it tends to be completely ignored and regarded as
being out of scope. Quite typically, Norrick (1985: 9), for example,
suggests that a semantic analysis of a proverb must begin with a literal
reading13, before its customary meaning or standard proverb
interpretation (in his terms) can be achieved. The literal meaning, in
this context, is not the original proverb text, but a literal paraphrase of
its surface form.14 In Norrick’s understanding, this intermediate step
may be necessary for proverbs which contain, for example, archaic or
peculiarly proverbial syntactic constructions or lexical items;
according to Norrick (1985: 81) such proverbs (i.e., only such proverbs)
are “not amenable to regular compositional semantic interpretation” –
from what we learn that all other proverbs obvious are considered to
be amenable. Whereas compositional analysis thus is regarded to be
not only possible, but also necessary, in order to arrive at a proverb’s
literal meaning, there is, according to Norrick (1985: 82), no need to
semantically analyze proverbs in order to provide them with what he
terms standard proverb interpretations: since proverbs are not freely
generated, “no analysis of their internal semantic structure is
necessary to provide readings for them” (Norrick, 1985: 82). Both
statements taken together, it becomes obvious that the semantic
(compositional) analysis is con ned to literal readings, and that the
semantic analysis of proverb meaning as such ultimately is not even
touched upon in his approach, except for everyday re-phrasings of
proverbs’ customary meanings.15 Based on the literal reading, Norrick
(1985: 81), assumes proverbs to be either literal or gurative,
depending on the relation between the literal meanings determined for
them and their standard proverb interpretations16; more speci cally, he
claims that if the literal reading coincides with the customary meaning,
a proverb is literal, else gurative (Norrick, 1985: 1). Irrespective of the
fact that the whole approach is highly problematic, from a theoretical
point of view17, it turns out that proverbs which contain some kind of
trope on the lexical level are classi ed as gurative, all others as literal.
 At closer sight, the crucial question raised above, as to possible
interrelations between lexical tropes and the paremic meaning of the
proverb as a whole, thus turns out to remain unanswered, in this
approach. And although it is conceded that “information beyond that
present in a simple semantic decomposition of lexical items may play a
crucial role in interpretation” (Norrick, 1985: 114), the same holds to as
to the question how to semantically describe a proverb’s customary
meaning, as an inventorized unit, admittedly being considered as
“belonging to a particular language“ (Norrick, 1985: 1).
Whereas thus, in the framework of componential approaches, there
even may be no need to develop a speci c meta-language for paremic
meaning, it is just this speci c paremic content which renders the
proverb a secondary modeling system, for the second approach. Here,
a proverb is treated not only as a linguistic, but also, additionally and
indispensably, as a paremic entity. In other words: from this
perspective, a proverb is analyzed both as a text in ordinary language,
as the primary modeling system, and as a speci c paremic entity,
belonging to a speci c paremic plane of language, assumed to
represent a second level of meaning.
This approach theoretically owes very much to literary and cultural
semiotics. In this theoretical framework, linguistic analyses are of
course not excluded – but (additionally) considering the proverb to be
a speci c paremic text, all text elements are considered to ful ll
semantic functions, and they must be strictly distinguished both from
all elements of the primary language and from those of a given meta-
language used for their semantic description (in both cases we would
otherwise be concerned with homonymous elements). We will come
back to details of the concept of secondary modelling systems, further
below, and we will discuss what this concept has in common with
approaches distinguishing between two kinds (or levels) of
signi cation, a primary (denotative) and a secondary (connotative)
one. There is more than one scholar who has advanced this view, but
with regard to the question raised above, Permjakov’s approach
deserves some in-depth treatment here.
Permjakov’s approach18 is based on the fundamental distinction
between analytical vs. synthetic clichés, relating not only to proverbs,
but to all categories of linguistic stereotypes. The main di erence
between these two types of clichés is seen to consist in the way how
the constituent signs are fused to a complex supersign (a term not
used by Permjakov himself):
– analytical clichés can have only a direct overall meaning: even if an individual
constituting element is used in a non-direct (i.e., transferred, or gurative)
understanding, these stereotypes tend to remain mono-semantic, i.e. they have
one concrete meaning and do not ask for some extended interpretation;
– synthetic clichés , as compared to this, are assumed to have an extended
(transferred, gurative) overall meaning, in addition to the direct, which cannot
(or not completely) be derived from the meanings of the individual components;
synthetic clichés are considered to refer not only, as a linguistic supersign, to a
speci cally denoted segment of reality, but, as a paremic cliché, to all similar
situations of which they are a model.

The crucial di erence between analytical and synthetic clichés thus is

the kind of overall motivation, which goes along with their mono- vs.
polythematicity, on the one hand, and their quality of being a
secondary modelling system or not. To give but one example as to the
concept of polythematicity: prognostic sayings19 such as When
swallows y high, the weather will be dry or Low ies the swallow, rain
to follow would have to be considered as analytical clichés, being
restricted to the observation of swallows’ behavior and predictions
derived from it, and allowing for no (or at least not asking for any)
semantically extended interpretation; in contrast, the thematically
similar proverb One swallow does not make a summer, as a synthetic
cliché, also (or even only) works when referring to situations which
have nothing to do with swallows (or other kinds of birds), seasons of
the year, etc.20, but rather, in a more general sense, to situations in
which the ( rst) appearance of a speci c phenomenon should not be
(mis)interpreted as an obligatory index of the appearance of
circumstances usually accompanying it.21
Thus attributing the proverbial genre to the category of synthetic
clichés, it is important to emphasize that this concerns literal (L-
proverbs) and gurative (F-proverbs) proverbs alike. In this respect, it
is of utmost importance to emphasize that a proverbial text as a whole
is always motivated, i.e., neither in L-proverbs nor in F-proverbs
motivation can be absent; this is a clear di erence in comparison to
the situation in phraseology, where a phraseme may be fully
motivated, partly motivated, or non-motivated, depending on the
component’s status, their function for the phraseological whole and
the possibility to derive the latter from the individual components
(Burger, 2007: 96).
Yet, both types of proverbs di er according to their motivational
character: F-proverbs are (or can be) motivated guratively, F-proverbs
directly. The fact that not only F-proverbs, but L-proverbs as well are
synthetic, so that the overall meaning of both can be understood to be
extended (or transferred), may at rst glance be as surprising, as well
as the fact that not only F-proverbs, but also L-proverbs can contain
individual (lexical) tropes – yet, these assumptions are fully in line
with what has been termed a holistic approach above.
Under these conditions, the gurative character of proverbs
appears in a di erent light, as compared to many traditional
conceptions: now the question is foreground, which options and
which restrictions there are as to the occurrence of tropes in L-proverbs
and in F-proverbs. In the framework outlined, this question may be
asked separately (a) on the basis of text properties, and (b) with regard
to properties of the lexical components. Both perspectives are not
completely independent of other because, according to Permjakov
(1979: 113-115), for each of the two paremic types there are clear
interdependencies between the properties of the components and
global text properties.
In addition to further distinctive properties enumerated by
Permjakov (1979: 10-112), the one which is most relevant for the
treatment of gurativeness in proverbs and the distinction between L-
proverbs and F-proverbs is the dichotomy between directly motivated
and guratively motivated components, the latter further being sub-
divided into metaphorically motivated, on the one hand, and
otherwise motivated components (i.e. metonymies, synecdoches,
hyperboles, etc.), on the other. From this results an essential di erence
between the overall meaning of L-proverbs and F-proverbs:
1. the overall meaning of F-proverbs is always metaphorical, and no
direct interpretation is possible here;
2. for L-proverbs, a direct interpretation is possible, notwithstanding
the possible presence of gurative components.
This general distinction goes along with a number of di erences as to
constituting components:
1. both L-proverbs and F-proverbs may contain direct components:
a) in L-proverbs all components can be direct
b) in F-proverbs it is excluded that all components are direct
2. both in L-proverbs and in F-proverbs all components can be
gurative (that means, neither L-proverbs nor F-proverbs must
obligatorily contain a direct component)
3. both L-proverbs and F-proverbs may contain a metaphorical
component:
a) if an L-proverb contains a metaphorical component, then it must
also contain either another direct or a gurative (but in this non-
metaphorical) component
b) in F-proverbs at least one of the components must be
metaphorical
c) F-proverbs may contain, in addition to a metaphorical
component, direct components; if, however, an F-proverb contains,
in addition to a metaphorical component, further gurative
components, these can only be metaphorical ones.
Table 4.1 summarizes the most important properties of L-proverbs and
F-proverbs22 (Permjakov, 1979: 122).

Table 4.1: Text and component properties of proverbs

Against this background, proverbs such as The apple does not fall far
from the tree or Too many cooks spoil the broth may of course quite
easily be attributed to F-proverbs; with regard to L-proverbs, however,
the matter is slightly more complicated, because not only non-pictorial
proverbs such as Nothing ventured, nothing gained or Exceptions prove
the rule would belong to this category, but also sayings containing
lexical tropes, such as Speech is silver, silence is golden or A lie has no
legs.
In practice, the classi cation of tropical and proverbial types may
turn out to be more complicated, due fact that the exact de nition of a
component may be no straight-forward procedure, but the result of a
set of complex interrelations. As has been mentioned before, according
to Permjakov’s text-based approach, analytical and synthetic clichés
may be distinguished “depending on the character of links between
the component words” (Permjakov, 1979: 106). This formulation is
likely to be interpreted in favor of a component- rst approach, implying
that an analysis of the components’ status allows for conclusions as to
the status of the proverbial whole – in fact, the components’ status is,
however, but a result of using a proverb as a whole. The word apple,
however (by default denoting a round fruit with red, yellow, or green
skin, rm yellow-white esh and little pips inside), remains to denote
this fruit and not, for example, a pear, independent of the fact if an
apple denoted by this word falls far from a tree or not, unless this word
occurs, for example, in a proverbial sentence like The apple does not
fall far from a tree, i.e., when used as a proverb, to refer to a situation
which has nothing to do with apples. It is thus the use of the proverb
as a whole, which turns the overall meaning out to be proverbial, and
only a posteriori, i.e., as a consequence of proverb usage, its individual
components may turn out to be gurative, and then we can say
something about the gurative status of their components in their
intra-textual interrelations.
Starting the analysis from individual words may be an interesting
occupation for linguists and folklorists, who are interested in
theoretical possibilities. It may also be a necessary procedure in case of
unknown proverbs (in this case representing a task to be solved, in this
respect similar to riddling processes), or when either a proverb user or
a scholar is concerned with proverbs from a culture other than the one
s/he is enculturated in. Yet, there is no reason to assume this to be the
standard direction of the genesis of proverbs’ gurative meanings;
rather, knowledge about proverb usage (including internalized about
previous usages) in terms of cultural (paremiological) competence
seems to play the crucial role. Researchers, oscillating between
participation and observation, may eventually forget about this, in this
case running into to a methodological trap known by the name of
metagenetic fallacy.
The lessons to be learnt from these observations are manifold.
First, it is obvious that component-whole strategies may exist, but that
they may di er for ordinary users and analytical researchers.
Moreover, and maybe more importantly, they may di er across users,
depending on familiarity with a given proverb. In this context, the
status of individual tropes is not independent of the status of the
proverbial whole; but it would be wrong to assume that the
components’ status determines the status of the whole – rather, the
status of the whole determines the components’ status, which then
can be understood to stand in speci c intra-proverbial interrelations.
This concerns not only, of course, the fact that we are generally
concerned with a trope, and not only can eventually determine a
speci c kind of trope, but also its further semantic interpretation:
when used as a proverb as, e.g., in the proverbial sentence A rolling
stone gathers no moss, individual component like rolling, stone, or
moss may turn out to be used guratively, but how rolling is
interpreted (desirable exibility and diligence, or hyperactivity?), if
semantic features of stone are activated or not, or if moss is understood
to be something like material wealth or a i.e., desirable to be obtained,
or rather avoided,23 depends, rst of all, not on lexical semantic
processes, but on the overall paremic meaning, concerning the
proverb’s overall relation to the denoted (extra-linguistic) segment of
reality, which plays the crucial role in this respect.
As a result, it turns out that problems of proverb semantics
obviously cannot be solved without reference to some kind of
extensional semantics (i.e., taking into account, in one way or another,
extra-proverbial reality), and that some concept is needed for what has
repeatedly been termed the proverbial whole, the abstract proverb idea,
or the paremic information beyond the proverb text as such. In other
words: as it is admitted that a proverb contains paremic information
beyond the linguistic information given in the text (and that this
additional information is not only provided ad hoc by verbal co-texts
or situational contexts, but is part of cultural memory at large, based
on previous textual and pragmatic experience), no componential
semantic description will arrive at an adequate description of proverb
meaning; as a consequence, paremiology is in need of having (a) to
de ne referential aspects of proverb usage, and (b) to discuss how this
additional information can be semantically described and if a special
meta-language is needed for this description. For this purpose, a short
theoretical discussion of semiotic foundations seems to be necessary.

4.6 Sign Concepts: System-based vs. Process-

oriented Semiotics
In most sign concepts, particularly those used in the eld of
linguistics, and here rst of all those which feel obliged, in one way or
another, to the Saussurean tradition, a sign is understood as a binary
relation between a signifying expression and a signi ed content24, as
illustrated in Figure 4.1:

Figure 4.1: Bilateral sign concept

In this framework, a sign is considered to be an element of (or belong

to) a given sign system, its meaning depending on its relation to (or
rather di erence from) the other signs of that system. On the basis of
the sign’s di erential relations, the denotative level of signi cation is
determined as the basis of any sign process, from which more complex
relations are possible in two directions: either towards a meta-
linguistic or towards a connotative sign. In the rst case, the combined
expression and content planes of a given (denotative) sign serve as the
content of a meta-linguistic sign; in the second case, expression and
content of the denotative sign function as the expression of a
connotative sign. This approach goes back to Danish linguist
Hjelmslev’s ideas in his Outline of Glossematics (1957). It was later
popularized by scholars such as Roland Barthes, who applied this
concept not only to individual signs, but transferred it to texts (e.g.,
myths), using text in the broad semiotic meaning of this term, not
restricting it to verbal texts, treating them as super-signs as outlined
above. Usually, both processes are depicted separately; as compared to
this, Figure 4.2 is an attempt to represent both levels simultaneously.
Figure 4.2: Simultaneous representation of both levels of sign

As can easily be seen, in this concept the question of an adequate

meta-language is complicated by the fact that the meaning of a
connotative sign, like that of a denotative, can only be described by
meta-linguistic procedures. A crucial question thus is if that meta-
language which covers the rst (denotative) level of meaning, can (or
should) also cover the second (connotative) level of meaning, or if
special meta-language is needed for each of them.
Moreover, such a scheme is almost perfectly suited to evoke
objections from a theoretical point of view for other reasons:
a) it includes only two levels of signi cation, not taking into
consideration the possibility that there might be multiple levels in the
process of meaning generation;
b) it appears to operate on both levels of signi cation with xed
assignments between expression and content, which may not be less
relevant in semiotic reality;
c) it seems to suggest the possibility of a strict distinction between
denotation and connotation, neglecting uent transitions between
both;
 d) it gives rise to the impression that we might be concerned with
an allegedly successive generation of connotative meaning, implying
the need of a literal reading of the denotative meaning rst, ignoring
the option that the connotative meaning might be accessed directly,
leapfrogging the denotative one.
Further objections might come not only from post-structuralist and
deconstructivist positions, but from a process-oriented semiotic
perspective as well. As compared to system-based approaches, rooting
in the Saussurean tradition, process-oriented approaches, particularly
in the tradition of Charles S. Peirce25, are principally dynamic:
semiosis here is characterized by signs principally referring to other
signs, the process of meaning generation thus turning out to be,
theoretically, an in nite regress. In this respect, Peirce’s 19th century
ideas meet current post-structuralist and deconstructivist ideas: not
only is the assumption of a xed relation between signifying and
signi ed repealed, also becomes the strict separation of denotative and
connotative structures of signi cation void. Whereas such views thus
rub theoretical salt into the wounds of methodological shortcomings of
structuralist approaches, they are not compatible with practical needs
to describe meanings, e.g., for a lexicographic or, in our case,
paremiographic purposes. In a way, they even seem to be inconsistent
with the long and productive traditions in these elds, as insu cient,
unsatisfactory or authoritative as the attribution of allegedly xed
meanings may seem to (post) modern theorists.
Such theoretical discussions must be as strange to paremiographer
and paremiologists, striving for semantics descriptions of proverbs, as
is the assumption of “invariant meanings” for contemporary post-
structuralist and deconstructivist semiotic approaches. In this respect,
it is important to note an essential di erence between the original
Peircean concept and these modern ideas: in contrast to current
approaches, which see the principally in nite regress as an absolute
and indispensable principle, the possibility to communicate is ensured
in Peirce’s pragmatic approach by the circumstance that at the end of
the theoretically in nite regress in semiosis, there stands what he
termed a nal logical interpretant, which does not nish, but interrupt
the potentially in nite semiosis.26
As compared to the system-bound bilateral sign concept above,
process-oriented semiotics thus might eventually provide an
alternative theoretical, but obviously impractical basis; this approach
might also, under certain conditions, seen to be not fully in contrast to
meaning descriptions in terms of a culturally accepted consensus. In
this respect, one should not forget that although each process of
meaning generation is in principle an individual act of meaning
generation and interpretation, in case of proverbs we are speci cally
concerned with collectively or culturally conventionalized and agreed-
upon meanings. This view would not claim such culturally accepted
meanings, or their descriptions, to be xed, obligatory once and for all;
rather, taking into account individual proverb use, all factors of
semantic inde niteness pointed out above would persist, the meaning
description thus turning out to be exactly that semantic potential it
has been postulated to be above. Seen from this perspective,
connotative meanings and their semantic descriptions thus
– would not be con ned to two meanings, or levels of meaning, but
include possibly multiple planes, of which the denotative and the
connotative ones are those which most likely to incorporate inter-
subjective consensus;
– would not imply any assumption as to successive stages in
comprehension processes, i.e. they would not make, for example, any
predictions as to some stepwise succession as, e.g., in terms of a
denotation-before-connotation approach;
– would not go along with the authoritative claim to represent the
only, true or ultimate meaning; rather it would be understood to be as
one of many possible meanings in the course of an eventually longer
(and theoretically in nite) chain of meanings;
– would represent some kind of temporary snapshot, subject to
diachronic changes, rather than eternal truth;
– would remain to have the status of a semantic potential, along
with other elements of semantic inde niteness as acknowledged in the
eld of paremiology.
Under these conditions, semantic concepts distinguishing between a
denotative and a connotative plane of signi cation might be unfettered
from structuralist restrictions without at the same time forfeiting the
chance to describe meanings which lend themselves to inter-subjective
consensus within a given culture, despite all potentiality and
tentativeness. The remaining methodologically crucial question how
paremiologists can provide reliable semantic descriptions is a process
which includes two di erent aspects: (a) insight into proverbs
meanings, and (b) their meta-linguistic description. Both issues have
been dealt with before: one the one hand, the inevitable oscillation
between (intrinsic) participation and (extrinsic) observation, on the
other hand, the choice of concrete meta-language in the process of
nding a balance between speci city and generality.
Attempts to avoid getting lost in a circle of arguments and counter-
arguments have referred to the above-mentioned concept of
connotative semiotics, de ning the proverb as a connotative semiotic
super-sign. One of the rst to apply this concept to proverbs was
Canadian anthropologist Crépeau, referring to a rather peripheral
remark by Greimas (1970: 310), seeing proverbs as connotative elements
[éléments connotés]: “On the rst level, signi cation is determined by
denotation, i.e., by an immediate (albeit arbitrary) relation between
designating and designated. On the second level, signi cation is
determined by connotation, i.e., by a mediated relation between
connotating and connotated” (Crépeau, 1975: 288). Crépeau was not
the rst to propagate this concept: with explicit regard to proverbs
Russian scholar Čerkasskij (1978) had already promoted this idea some
years before him, assuming that the aggregate of expression and
content is but the verbal realization on the linguistic level, at the same
time representing the substance of expression for the supra-linguistic
semiotic level of an inhomogeneous text, in which more than one sign
system is simultaneously operative. In this context, Čerkasskij made
an important distinction: according to him, a sentence such as The
apple does not fall far from the tree is the complex sign to denote a
particular, individual situation, of one may say that the text represents
a verbal model of that situation; as a proverb, however, it serves as a
sign not of an individual situation, but of a class of situations, and thus
serves not (only) as a primary, but as a secondary modeling system.
 Illustrating the application of these ideas to the concept of
connotative semiotics outlined above results the graphical
representation depicted in Figure 4.3.

Figure 4.3: Application of Čerkasskij’s and Crépeau’s ideas to the concept of

connotative semiotics

Both Čerkasskij and Crépeau thus, independent of each other,

developed similar ideas, although with slightly di erent (not
necessarily contradictory) foci as to the conclusions drawn: whereas
Čerkasskij paved the way for model-oriented interpretations, Crépeau
emphasized the importance of analogy – two interpretations which do
not necessarily contradict each.

4.7 Logics and Analogics

Crépeau (1975) illustrated the distinction between two levels of
signi cation, and the importance of analogy, referring to the following
proverb: Dog of the king – king of the dogs. If the implicit analogy, so
his argument, were to be determined on the basis of the rst level of
signi cation only, one would arrive at an absurd formulation like DOG :
KING :: KING : DOG. In fact, however, we are rather concerned with a
di erent analogy, which may be expressed in terms of KING’S DOG :
OTHER DOGS :: KING : DOG. Crépeau’s considerations are relevant in
several respects, not only with regard to the important distinction of
two levels of signi cation. They also deserve special mention here
because they introduce the important concept of analogy,27 which
opens the doors in two directions: rst, they allow for the conceptual
integration with attempts to logically formalize proverbial structures;
and second, they can perfectly be combined with theoretical concepts
distinguishing di erent types of situation, relevant in context of the
proverb and its usage. Both lines shall brie y be outlined here, starting
with those attempts concerned with logical modelings of proverbial
structures.
Earlier works in this direction, including those from Klaus (1964) or
Kanyó (1981), focused on the level of denotation only; moreover, they
tended to neglect important di erences between phrasemes, idioms,
and proverbs. As compared to this, Krikmann (1984) took into account
the distinction of both levels of signi cation, and presented a coherent
concept with a theoretically substantiated distinction between
phraseological and paremiological entities. This distinction is based
on the fundamental juxtapositions of phraseological information (Px)
and paremic information (Px⊃ Qx), on the one hand, and existential
(∃x) and universal (∀x)quanti cation (there exists and for all), on the
other.28
In detail, it is a matter of scholarly tradition, of course, how the
resulting categories may terminologically be distinguished from each
other, and how they are logically symbolized. In any case, three kinds
of basic categories29 result from the above distinctions:

Items to be classi ed as phrasemes thus are characterized by

existential quanti cation and ask for the choice of an individual
argument (denoted as x = a, or xi) complementing the phraseological
information Px as, e.g., in expressions such as to spill the beans, or to
bury the hatchet, linguistically resulting in an expression such as
*Peter spilled the beans. As compared to this, proverbial phrases such
as to put the cart before the horse or to set a fox to keep the geese would
also be related to existential quanti cation with an individual
argument, but – in contrast to phrasemes – contain paremic
information (Px⊃ Qx), that is, concern the relation between two
concepts and/or the attribution of a property to (at least) one of them.
Finally, proverbs are by de nition complete propositions,
prototypically represented by items such as The apple does not fall far
from the tree or Water always ows downhill, as heterogeneous as these
may two examples may seem to appear at rst sight; in this respect, it
is important to note that proverbs are logically, but not necessarily
grammatically complete statements, universal quanti cation being
obligatory and characteristic for them from a logical perspective.30
Items of all three classes have partly been dealt with by di erent
disciplines: phrasemes and proverbial sayings have been in the focus
of phraseology, or idiomatics, the lacking distinction between these
two classes being favored by the fact that, in languages like English,
they have been sub-summarized under the common term idiom
without further distinction. Proverbial sayings and proverbs, as
compared to this, have been studied by paremiology, the group of
proverbial sayings thus having received scholarly attention from both
elds.
One of the reasons for these disciplinary overlappings is of course
the existence of uent transitions between phrasemes and proverbial
sayings as well as between the latter and proverbs. But such zones of
possible interferences, which eventually make the attribution to one of
the categories di cult, may also be related to di erences in meta-
language. Expressions such as a wolf in sheep’s clothing or to make a
mountain out of a molehill may, one the one hand, be paraphrased
mono-lexically (e.g. in terms of pretender, hypocrite, pharisee, or
exaggerate, overemphasize, respectively), resulting in the perception of
one concept only; on the other hand, they may also be interpreted to
explicitly relate two concepts with each other (e.g., something small
and unimportant vs. something big and important, or peaceful looks vs.
dangerous character, etc.), thus the relation between two di erent
concepts tending to being focused. By way of a pragmatic solution, it
may seem reasonable, from a semiotic point of view, to consider such
items to represent some kind of phraseo-paremiological homonyms
(Grzybek & Eismann, 1994).
Quite obviously, the distinctions discussed here concern both
proverbs’ textual surface (i.e. the denotative level of signi cation) and
the meta-linguistic modeling of their connotative meaning structures;
in this case, the concrete attribution to one of the categories again
depends on speci cs of usage, rather than on textual characteristics
only. Usage, however, now concerns not so much situational
circumstances, but rst and foremost cognitive processes, the relevant
question concentrating on the point if a user tends to see the items
verbalized in the given phraseo-paremiological expression to represent
an individual concept or a speci c relation between concepts – a task
not only for the disciplines of phraseology and paremiology, but rst
and foremost for psycholinguistics, which might nd a promising eld
of research here, using more re ned theoretical distinctions than has
hitherto been the standard.
Despite a number of open questions and unsolved problems
outlined above, we can thus return to Crépeau’s conclusion that a
proverb’s paremic meaning results from the structural integration of
two levels of signi cation, which in general way can be represented in
terms of the logical formula A : B :: C : D.31

4.8 Analogy, Double Analogy, and the Concept of

Situativity
This analogy should not be confounded, however, with the analogical
processes involved in proverb usage, as pointed out by folklorist Peter
Seitel in a number of papers, in which he suggested a useful heuristic
model (Seitel, 1969; 1972). Seitel’s schema is based on the central
assumption that the situation in which a proverb is used (the
interaction situation) is of course not identical with the situation
verbally represented in and by the proverb text (the proverb situation),
and that both of them are not identical with the situation the proverb
refers to32, i.e., the situation to which it is intended to be applied (the
reference situation).33 According to Seitel, proverb usage is thus related
to two distinct, though closely related processes: (i) the process of
relating proverb situation to reference situation, and (ii) the speech act
of applying the proverb in an interaction situation. This resulting
di erentiation is illustrated in Figure 4.4.

Figure 4.4: Basic distinction of three types of situation involved in proverb usage

As can be seen, proverb usage thus is related to two distinct though

closely related processes: (a) the speech act of applying a proverb in a
given interaction situation34, and (b) the process of relating proverb
situation to reference situation. Concentrating on the second process,
Seitel sees it as an analogy between the relationship of entities of the
proverb situation and entities of the reference situation, which he
expresses in terms of A : B :: C : D (Figure 4.4).
Quite obviously, the situational schema refers to the rst,
denotative level of the proverb situation (i.e. the proverb text), ignoring
the existence of two levels of signi cation outlined about and the
structural analogy resulting from it. In fact, we thus seem to be
concerned with two di erent analogies which; unfortunately, both of
them have been symbolized in an identical manner (i.e., by way of A :
B :: C : D), what may give rise to di culties when attempting to
integrate both views. In fact, such attempts, as e.g. suggested by
Grzybek (1984a: 235), have not always been correctly understood
(Honeck, 1997), last not least due to the fact that identical symbols
have been used to refer to di erent things; as a consequence, it seems
reasonable to explicate the argumentation stepwise again.
For the purpose of the necessary integration of both approaches, it
seems rst reasonable to maintain the symbolization A : B for the
denotative signi cation of the proverb situation, and to replace
Crépeau’s symbols for the second level of signi cation (i.e., C : D) by
the symbolic notation of p : q; the structural analogy outlined by
Crépeau would thus be symbolized as A : B :: p : q. Under this
condition, the extralinguistic reference situation can be symbolized as
C : D, as in Seitel’s schema; and since it is rather the paremic meaning
of the second (connotative) level of signi cation, which is related to
the reference situation, the analogy outlined by Seitel might is then
symbolized as p : q :: C : D. All in all, this would result in the double
analogy A : B :: p : q :: C : D, as suggested by Grzybek (1984a), and as
illustrated in Figure 4.5.

Figure 4.5: Double analogy in proverb usage

Although this schema, attempting to integrate two di erent concepts,

pays due attention to the processes involved, it has later turned out
that it needs some additional speci cation and modi cation (Grzybek,
1998; 2000; 2007; Chlosta & Grzybek, 2005), a major problem to be
seen in the (at least implicit) identi cation of two abstraction results,
which de facto are not identical. This becomes evident from a closer
look at model-theoretical concepts, in line with modern paremiological
ideas, which have emphasized the important role of models and
modeling inherent in proverbs and proverb usage. Given a principally
in nite set S = {P1,2,3,…} of individual proverbs (i.e., of proverb texts),
and given a principally in nite set R = {RS1,2,3,…} of (possible)
reference situations to which any one P of the proverbs may refer, all
those proverbs from S, which express one and the same meaning, can
be considered to be variants, or variations35, of one and the same
proverb invariant, or model situation; and all those individual
reference situations RS from R, to which a given proverb (or one of its
variants, or variations) may refer to can be considered to be some
situational class, or type, which is represented in terms of a situation
model. These assumptions can be illustrated as follows:36

At closer sight, we rather seem to be concerned with two di erent

abstraction processes: rst, it has been argued, a general (paremic)
meaning is abstracted from the denotative text of the proverb situation,
and the term model situation has been suggested to denote it; and
second, the individual and unique reference situation as a situational
token a proverb refers to must be sub-categorized under, or attributed
to a general type (or class) of situations, which might be termed
situation model. The resulting schema might thus be illustrated as in
Figure 4.6:
Figure 4.6: Additional distinctions of proverbial situation types

The schema represented in Figure 4.6 does not contain (any more) the
previous (at least implicitly contained) assumption of a single
abstraction process, represented above by the relation p : q (Figure
4.5). Rather, Figure 4.6 expresses the idea that we are concerned with
two (di erent) abstraction processes.37
Comparing the basic implications of the conceptions illustrated in
Figs. 5 and 6, one may say that the relation p : q is related to the
proportional analogy of A’ : B’ :: C’ : D’, which might as well be
expressed in terms of the relation of two distinct sets of related objects,
i.e.: {R1(A’,B’)} R {R2(C’,D’)}. Seen from this perspective, p : q would but
express the ground of the similarity between two relations of the sets
(A’, B’) and (C’, D’), along with the assumption of at least one common
feature between these sets, determining in what respect(s) A’ is to B’
(as C’ is to D’), the feature(s) resulting from an interpretative process.
In other words, if (and only if), within a process of proverb usage, such
a proportional analogy is drawn, on the basis of and resulting from
some interpretive process, one can speak of successful proverb usage.
However, although this schema is much more elaborated and
di erentiated, it still contains a major problem, primarily to be seen in
the alleged symmetry it expresses: this symmetry is, however, but a
nal state of successful proverb usage, and it might give rise to the
(wrong) assumption that one might reliably arrive at the abstract
meaning (i.e., the model situation) starting from a proverb’s verbal
surface, or without taking account of the reference situation (or rather
the situation model related to it). Abstracting proverb meaning from
the verbal surface of a proverb’s text seems to be possible, particularly
to persons enculturated in a given culture; a er all, semantic potential
and inde niteness are increasingly reduced by any further (successful)
proverb usage. Actually, however, such interpretations are based on
previous encounters and experiences with usages of the given proverb
– de facto, they are (more or less) reliable only a posteriori, knowing
all (pragmatic and semantic) conditions and restrictions of usage and
reference, that is, only if both some situation model and some model
situation have repeatedly been related to each other. As a matter of
fact, even paremiologists may fall (and have repeatedly fallen) into this
meta-genetic trap, interpreting proverb texts by way of a (conscious of
subconscious, correct or incorrect) transfer and extrapolation of
proverb knowledge from their own culture(s).
Figure 4.7 is an attempt to schematically represent not only the
synchronous nal state, but the process of model generation in its
genesis.

Figure 4.7: Genesis of proverb meaning – integration of heterogeneity,

polyfunctionalilty, and polysemanticity

This schema illustrates, among others, that a semantic interpretation

(and classi cation) of proverbial utterances is not reliably possible
without knowledge of the culturally accepted contexts and admitted
reference situations (i.e., the situation models). It also illustrates the
close interrelation between pragmatics and semantics, emphasizing
that the reliable generation of a model situation is impossible without
the (repeated) exposure to adequate reference situation, i.e., the
without repeated processes of referentialization (or the semiotically
mediated knowledge about them).
Referring to the model-theoretic assumptions dealt with above, it is
thus possible to derive an important aspect of a proverb de nition in
general, which might be phrased as follows:
A proverb is a model of some situation denoted by it, if – eventually within a given
INTERACTION SITUATION (I) – such a MODEL SITUATION (IIb) can be derived from a
given PROVERB SITUATION (IIa), that stands in isological relation to some
SITUATION MODEL (IIIb), derived from a concrete REFERENCE SITUATION (IIIa) and
eventually previous ones.

Given these assumptions, it is obvious that for participants of a given

culture, scholars of paremiology among them, the description of
model situation and situation model seemingly coincide or are
identical – in principle they are, however, heuristically speaking, two
faces of a double-faced coin called successful proverb usage. The
illustration in Figure 4.7 does not only make it clear that it is not, or
not necessarily, possible to derive the abstract proverb meaning from
its verbal surface form; it also makes clear that a semantic description
cannot be based on verbal information alone.
As a consequence, it seems plausible to claim that a semantic
description – and, as a consequence, of semantic classi cation – of
proverbs ultimately asks for the description of situations, or of model
situations, to be more exact. The concentration on modeled situation
for the semantic classi cation has extensively been discussed by
Permjakov whose conception still today provides one of the most
elaborate systems for the semantic classi cation of proverbs.

4.9 From Proverb Semantics to Semantic Proverb

Classi cation
In his Grammar of Proverbial Wisdom, Permjakov (1979: 317) claims
proverbs to be “signs and at the same time models of various typical
situations”. Consequently, he postulates that “a classi cation of the
situations themselves” has to be worked out, if one wants to categorize
proverbs on the basis of their meanings (Permjakov 1979: 306). Since
the distinctions suggested above were not made at the time when
Permjakov developed his ideas, his notion of situation was not as
speci ed as in the di erentiations above. On the one hand, this has led
to a variety of misunderstandings and misinterpretations of his ideas
(Schveiger, Kanyó, Švydkaja and others), which can and need not be
discussed here in detail (see Grzybek 1984a); on the other hand, this
led to inconsistencies in Permjakov’s own classi cations, some of
which were rather based on the denotative, rather than the
connotative level of signi cation (i.e. on the proverb situation, not the
model situation).
Nevertheless, given the descriptions above, Permjakov’s claim out
to be completely reasonable and still today of high relevance, as long
(or as soon) as we take into consideration neither the proverb
situations nor the extra-linguistic reference situations as the basis for
the semantic description and classi cation of proverbs, but the model
situations of the second level of signi cation. With this in mind, it is a
tempting question to ask, which situations, or what kind of situations,
are modelled in proverbs, and how these situational models can be
described.
Permjakov’s approach can be seen as a speci cation of what has
been symbolized as the relation R (A’,B’) above. From his early writings
on, Permjakov distinguished four di erent Higher logico-semiotic
invariants, as he termed them. Two of them model the relationships
between objects or between objects and their properties, the other two
are more complex, modeling the dependence between the
relationships of things and the relationships of their properties. In
detail, we obtain the following four invariants:

Type Description Example

I A Every object has a particular quality or property. Water always ows
downhill.
 Each ower has its
own avor.
IB If there is one object, there is (will be) another object. No smoke without re.
Rain is followed by
sunshine.
II A The relationships between the properties of objects Like father, like son.
depend on the relationships between the objects The cat’s death is
themselves. holiday for the mice.
II B The interrelationships of objects depend on (the If two quarrel, the
existence of) particular properties of these objects. third will laugh.
A sparrow in the hand
is worth two in the
bush.

The logico-semiotic classi cation is more complex than the examples

above can show, and the system has been elaborated over the years by
Permjakov himself; in its latest version in the Grammar of Proverbial
Wisdom, each of the four types above is sub-divided into seven further
categories (and allowing for further speci cations and sub-
classi cations).
This logico-semiotic categorization is then necessarily
complemented by a thematic classi cation: analyzing three proverbs
such as (i) No smoke without re, (ii) No rose without thorns, and (iii) No
river without bank, all three would belong to invariant IA, each of them
containing the statement that one of the two objects mentioned cannot
exist without the second one. Still, the meanings of these three
proverbs di er completely – the rst (i) maintains that there can be no
indication of an object unless the object itself exists; the second claims
that there can be no good things without faults; and the third says that
no whole can exist without any one of its obligatory parts.
Consequently, a proverb’s meaning is principally described by the two-
fold reference: (a) to one of the logical categories, and (b) to a thematic
pair (or a combination of pairs) such as good – bad, cause – reason,
hot – cold, male – female, etc.), on the other.
The resulting proverbial model38 may additionally be submitted to
what Permjakov termed paremio(logical) transformations; according to
this view, the basic paremiological model like Own is good may be
logically transformed in various ways, the results belonging to one and
the same proverbial type; this concerns rst-order transformations
(Own is bad) as well as second-order transformations (Foreign is bad),
from which a number of further subtypes may be derived. Within this
framework, not only explicit negations (The face is no index to the
heart vs. The face is the index of the heart; (Norrick, 1985: 162)) can be
theoretically covered, but also proverbial synonyms ( Strike while the
iron is hot vs. Make hay while the sun shines) and antonyms (Out of
sight, out of mind vs. Absence makes the heart grow fond/er).
Permjakov’s approach owes, of course, very much to structuralist
approaches of the 1970s. Nevertheless, it is interesting to note that,
according to Permjakov, not more than 64 of such semantic
oppositions – which are very similar to those found to be relevant in
the semiotic analysis of culture in general –, are su cient to describe
ca. 97% of a culture’s proverbial stock. Permjakov’s system has
suitably been called a Mendeleevian Proverb Table, and the question
has been raised if his conception is kind of a hocus pocus system
(Krikmann, 1971, Kuusi, (1972), comparing it to Kuusi’s classi cational
schema as a God’s truth system. Such a view might seem to be justi ed
referring to Permjakov’s claim to describe not only all actually
existing, but also all possible (conceivable) proverbs with his model.
The juxtaposition of these two kinds of system originates in linguistics,
where it was brought into discussion by Householder (1952: 260): “On
the metaphysics of linguistics there are two extreme positions, which
may be termed (and have been) the ‘God’s truth’ position and the
‘hocus pocus’ position. The theory of the God’s truth linguists […] is
that language has a structure and the job of the linguist is (a) to nd
out what the structure is, and (b) to describe it […]. The hocus pocus
linguist believes that a language (better, a corpus, since we describe
only the corpus we know) is a mass of incoherent formless data, and
the job of the linguist is somehow to arrange and organize this mass,
imposing on it some structure […].” It was Jakobson (1962: 276) who
repeatedly pointed out the futility of such a controversy; Householder
(1952: 260), too, admitted that ultimately it seems to be rather a
question of ideological-philosophical di erences in approaching one
and the same question, partially arriving at identical results, and
confessed, “it may be that these two metaphysical viewpoints are in
some sense equivalent.” The direct relevance of these observations for
Permjakov’s and Kuusi’s models has been pointed out by Voigt (1977:
167): “Kuusi directly departs from the given material, and he tries to
arrive at the same results as Permjakov has, with the help of the
deductive method.”
As has been pointed out above, Permjakov’s notion of situation was
not as speci ed as this has later been suggested. As a consequence, his
own semantic classi cations are not void of interpretations which to
the rst, denotative level of signi cation, rather than the second,
connotative level, i.e., the proverb’s abstract meaning. In fact, his
system might theoretically be used to describe both levels, although he
ultimately had in mind the abstract proverb idea as a basis of his
semantic classi cation. In illustrating the problem at stake with
reference to but one example, it may be helpful, by way of a
comparison, to refer to the Kuusi system (Lauhakangas, 2001). In the
Lauhakangas-Kuusi system, the internationally broadly distributed
proverb One hand washes the other would fall into the general category
H Social Interaction, more speci cally, category H3 (Group Solidarity),
or H3A, respectively (Solidarity to one’s own people). Permjakov
attributed it to the invariant IB (see above), and within it into a sub-
category entitled Tendency of things to be close to each other;
Friendship – Hostility (9LA), in combination with the semantic
opposition of Le – Right; quite obviously, it is rather the concrete
spatial relation of two hands, which is in the focus of this
classi cation, both with regard to the logical and thematic
classi cation. As compared to this, Grzybek and Chlosta (Grzybek &
Chlosta, 2000), in their attempt to consequently apply Permjakov’s
system to the second level of signi cation, suggest to attribute it to the
sub-category Existential dependence of a thing or an action on another
one (8KA) of invariant IB, combining it with the semantic pair Action –
Reaction, If there is an action, there is / will be a reaction. As can be
seen, no statement as to the quality of action or reaction is included
into the model, what makes clear, how di cult it is to take account of
possible culture-speci c pragmatic restrictions: for cultures which
would use this proverb to refer to good favors as a reaction to good
favors only, the addition of the thematic pair good – bad might be
necessary. Quite evidently, this is related to the fact that semantic
descriptions of proverbs – and neither Permjakov’s nor Kuusi’s
systems are exceptions to this rule – principally cannot but provide
metalinguistic descriptions of the given proverb’s semantic potential in
Krikmann’s terms; further semantically relevant information – be that
of functional, pragmatic, situational, deontic, modal, or other kind –
at least to data cannot adequately be mapped onto the paremiological
model.
It turns out that attention has to be paid to the important
interdependence of three basic categories, which have been termed
polyfunctionality, polysemanticity, and heterosituativity (Grzybek,
1984a). Whereas the concepts of polyfunctionality and polysemanticity
refer to the fact that one and the same text may serve di erent
functions and may represent di erent meanings, the concept of
heterosituativity covers the fact that a proverb can convey di erent
meanings, depending on the situation in which it is used. None of
these three categories, which condition each other in one way or
another, can be interpreted in isolation. And it seems to be for this
speci c interrelation that no ultimate meaning can ever be described
to a particular proverb text.
On the one hand, this may sound like paremiological surrender; on
the other hand, this corresponds to those degrees of semiotic freedom,
necessary for successful proverb usages.
Systems like Permjakov’s thus provide a way to theoretically
describe and map the paradigmatic inventory of a culture’s proverbial
stock. In fact, this system is only partly deductively derived, consisting
of a systematic extrapolation of initially inductive classi cations; in
semiotics, it has again been Charles S. Peirce who coined the term
abductive reasoning to describe this scienti c process, oscillating
between induction and deduction. In our case, a paremiological
system has resulted, in which the individual slots represent
possibilities, which may be realized or not, within a given culture, thus
also possibly containing so-called empty cells (as known in the eld of
phonology, as well), i.e. theoretical models for proverbial utterances,
which are not even realized by concrete proverbs within a given
culture.
4.10 Theoretical and Empirical Paremiology and the
Semiotics of Culture
From the perspective of cultural semiotics, this opens new perspectives
to study the (social and cultural) function of proverbs as a genre,
allowing to ask the question, which proverbs are realized within a
given culture, and which are not. In this respect, paremiology can
immensely contribute to the more general study of culture from a
semiotic point of view, or in a semiotic perspective.
But culture is a process, a synchronous snapshot, at best, being
subject to constant changes. Searching an answer to the pro le and
size of a culture’s proverbial stock, thus is dependent on the previous
documentation of proverbs, which necessarily must represent some
past, recent or not. Of course, proverbial stocks do not change within a
day’s time – trying to nd an answer to the question outlined, and
necessarily relying on (more or less) obsolete documentation, cannot
be but paradigmatic by nature: the fact that a given proverb has been
realized and documented within a given culture and thus has been
part of it, does not mean that it is still used, and thus in function: a er
all, proverb collections consist of items which either may be current
still today, or which were current in some past, but are not any longer,
or even never have been used within the given culture, but translated
from some other(s).
It is at this point, where empirical work comes into play – empirical
paremiography as well as paremiology. Whereas empirical
paremiography, in this context, contributes by way of collecting and
documenting proverb usage, and the frequency of proverbs’
occurrences (including the analysis of current corpora), empirical
paremiology studies, by way of empirical methods, familiarity with
proverbs, as an obligatory rst step for further proverb-oriented
studies. This is not the place to discuss relevant methods at some
length here (see Chlosta & Grzybek 2004; Grzybek & Chlosta; 2009;
Grzybek 2009; 2012a). Yet, Permjakov’s attempts to empirically
establish what he termed a proverb minimum deserves mention here,
trying to nd out, which proverbs are known by all members of a given
culture or society. A er Western readers were had been made
acquainted with this approach (Grzybek, 1984b), which was rst tested
in 1991 with some language other than Russian (Grzybek, 1991), these
ideas were broadly propagated in paremiology (Mieder, 1992); since
then, relevant methods have been tested and developed over the last
decades, resulting in the modi ed basic question. As a result, the
crucial guiding question of empirical paremiology, from a
contemporary point of view, may be phrased as follows: “Which
proverbs are known in what (verbal) form by which members of the
given culture, and which collective overlaps and intersections exist
with regard to proverb knowledge and familiarity?” (Grzybek, 2012a)
Given the assumption that proverbs represent no isolation genre in
the semiotics of culture, but are closely interrelated with all other
genres, deep insight can be gained into cultural mechanisms from a
semiotic point of view. It should have become clear that theoretical as
well as empirical works are necessary to provide a su ciently broad
picture, and that semiotic approaches are able to provide an adequate
framework for any study in this direction.
References
Arewa, E. O. & Dundes, A. (1966). Proverbs and the Ethnography of Speaking
Folklore. American Anthropologist 64; 70–85.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Baranov, A. (2007): The problem of the metalanguage. In H. Burger et. al. (Eds.),
Phraseologie. Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung. Vol. I &
II (pp 77-90). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Barley, N. (1972). A structural approach to the proverb with special reference to the
Anglo-Saxon corpus. Proverbium 20, 737–750.
Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bertolet, R. (1994). Indirect speech acts. In S. L. Tsohatzidis (Ed.), Foundations of
speech act theory. Philosophical and linguistic perspectives (pp 335-349).
London/New York: Routledge.
Bogatyrëv, P. G. (1971). The functions of folk costume in Moravian Slovakia. The
Hague: Mouton. (The rst edition dates 1937).
Briggs, C. L. (1985). The Pragmatics of Proverb Performances in New Mexican
Spanish. In American Anthropologist 87/4; 793.
Burger, H. (2007). Semantic aspects of phrasemes. In H. Burger et al. (Eds.),
Phraseologie. Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung. Vol. I &
II (pp 90-109). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Catford, J. C. (1965). A linguistic Theory of Translation: An Essay in Applied
Linguistics. London: Oxford University Press.
Chankova, M. (2009). Indirect Speech Acts. The Mechanism of Meaning Generation
and the Semantics Pragamatics Boundary Crossing. In I. Vassileva & V.
Trenda lov (Eds.), Boundaries, Boundary crossing, Cross-boundary Transfer.
Blagoevgrad: South-Western University Neo t Rilski.
http://www.academia.edu/3048831/Indirect_Speech_acts._The_Mechanism_of_
Meaning_Generation_and_the_Semantics_Pragmatics_Boundary_Crossing
(accessed January 27, 2014).
Charteris-Black, J. (1995). Proverbs in communication. Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development 16/4, 259–268.
Chlosta, C. & Grzybek, P. (2004). Was heißt eigentlich „Bekanntheit“ von
Sprichwörtern? Methodologische Bemerkungen anhand einer Fallstudie zur
Bekanntheit anglo-amerikanischer Sprichwörter in Kanada und in den USA. In Cs.
Földes (Ed.), Res humanae proverbiorum et sententiarum. Ad honorem Wolfgangi
Mieder (pp. 37-57). Tübingen: Narr.
Chlosta, C. & Grzybek, P. (2005). Varianten und Variationen anglo-amerikanischer
Sprichwörter: Dokumentation einer empirischen Untersuchung. ELi_se. Essener
linguistische Skripte_elektronisch 5/2, 63-145.
Crépeau, P. (1975). La dé nition du proverbe. Fabula 16, 285–304.
Crystal, D. (1987). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Č
[Čerkasskij, M. A.] Черкасский М. А. (1978) Опыт построения функциональной
модели одной частной семиотической системы. In Г. Л. Пермяков (Ed.),
Паремиологический сборник: Пословица. Загадка (Структура, смысл,
текст) (pp. 35-52). Москва.
Firth, R. W. (1926): Proverbs in native life, with special reference to those of the
Maori. Folk-Lore 37, 134-153; 245-270.
Gibbs, R. W., Johnson, M. & Colston, H. (1996). How to study proverb understanding.
Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 11, 233–239.
Green, M. (2009). Speech Acts. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/speech-acts/ (accessed January
20, 2014).
Greimas, A. J. (1970). Les proverbes et les dictons. In A. J. Greimas (Ed.), Du sens.
Essais sémiotiques (pp 309-314). Paris: Editions du Seuil.
Grzybek, P. (1984a): Überlegungen zur semiotischen Sprichwortforschung. In P.
Grzybek (Ed.), Semiotische Studien zum Sprichwort – Simple Forms Reconsidered
I. [Special Issue of: Kodikas Code – Ars Semeiotica. An International Journal of
Semiotics 3/4], (pp. 215-250). Unter Mitarbeit von Wolfgang Eismann. Tübingen:
Gunter Narr.
Grzybek, P. (1984b): How to do things with some proverbs. Zur Frage eines
parömischen Minimums. In P. Grzybek (Ed.) Semiotische Studien zum Sprichwort
– Simple Forms Reconsidered I. (pp. 351-358). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Grzybek, P. (1984c) Zur Psychosemiotik der Sprichworts. In P. Grzybek (Ed.),
Semiotische Studien zum Sprichwort – Simple Forms Reconsidered I (pp. 409-
432) Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Grzybek, P. (1991): Sinkendes Kulturgut? Eine empirische Pilotstudie zur Bekanntheit
deutscher Sprichwörter. Wirkendes Wort 41/2, 239-264.
Grzybek, P. (1998): Paremiology. In P. Bouissac (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Semiotics (pp.
470-474). New York,: Oxford University Press.
Grzybek, P. (Ed.) (2000). Die Grammatik der sprichwörtlichen Weisheit. Mit einer
Analyse allgemein bekannter deutscher Sprichwörter. Herausgegeben, übersetzt
und bearbeitet von Peter Grzybek [Phraseologie und Parömiologie, 4].
Baltmannsweiler: Schneider-Verlag Hohengehren.
Grzybek, P. (2000). G. L. Permjakovs Grammatik der sprichwörtlichen Weisheit. In P.
Grzybek (Ed.), Die Grammatik der sprichwörtlichen Weisheit. Mit einer Analyse
allgemein bekannter deutscher Sprichwörter. Herausgegeben, übersetzt und
bearbeitet von Peter Grzybek (pp. 1-41). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider-Verlag
Hohengehren.
Grzybek, P. (2007). Semiotik und Phraseologie. In H. Burger, D. Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn
& N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseologie. Ein internationales Handbuch der
zeitgenössischen Forschung. 1. Halbband (pp. 188-208). Berlin/New York: de
Gruyter.
Grzybek, P. (2009). The Popularity of Proverbs. A Case Study of the Frequency-
Familiarity Relation for German. In R. J. B. Soares & O. Lauhakangas (Eds.),
Proceedings of the Second Interdisciplinary Colloquium on Proverbs (214-229).
Tavira: IAP.
Grzybek, P. (2012a). Facetten des parömiologischen Rubik-Würfels. Kenntnis ≡
Bekanntheit [⇔ Verwendung ≈ Frequenz] ?!? In K. Steyer (Ed.), Sprichwörter
multilingual. Theoretische, empirische und angewandte Aspekte der modernen
Parömiologie (pp. 99-138). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Grzybek, P. (2012b). Proverb Variants and Variations: A New Old Problem? In O.
Lauhakangas & R. J. B. Soares (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fi h Interdisciplinary
Colloquium on Proverbs (pp. 136-152). Tavira: IAP.
Grzybek, P. & Chlosta, C. (2000). Versuch macht klug! Logisch-semiotische
Klassi kation allgemein bekannter deutscher Sprichwörter. In P. Grzybek (Ed.)
Die Grammatik der sprichwörtlichen Weisheit. Mit einer Analyse allgemein
bekannter deutscher Sprichwörter. Herausgegeben, übersetzt und bearbeitet von
Peter Grzybek (pp.169-199). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider-Verlag Hohengehren.
Grzybek, P. & Chlosta, C. (2009). Some Essentials on the Popularity of (American)
Proverbs. In: K. J. McKenna (Ed.), The Proverbial ‘Pied Piper’. A Festschri Volume
of Essays in Honor of Wolfgang Mieder on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday (pp.
95-110). New York: Peter Lang.
Grzybek, P. & Eismann, W. (1994). Sprichwort, sprichwörtliche Redensart,
Phraseologismus: Vom Mythos der Nicht-Trennbarkeit. In C. Chlosta, P. Grzybek &
E. Piirainen (Eds.), Sprachbilder zwischen Theorie und Praxis. Akten des
Westfälischen Arbeitskreises Phraseologie/Parömiologie: (1991/1992) [Studien
zur Phraseologie und Parömiologie 2] (pp. 89-132). Bochum: Universitäts-Verlag
Brockmeyer.
Grzybek, P., Chlosta, C. & Roos, U. (1994). Ein Vorschlag zur Klassi kation von
Sprichwortvarianten in der empirischen Sprichwortforschung In B. Sandig (Ed.),
Europhras 92. Tendenzen der Phraseologieforschung [Studien zur Phraseologie
und Parömiologie, 1] (pp. 221-256). Bochum: Universitätsverlag Brockmeyer.
Hartshorne, C. & Weiss, P. (1931-1958). (Eds.) Collected papers of Charles Sanders
Peirce. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Hasan-Rokem, G. (1982). The Pragmatics of Proverbs: How the Proverb Gets Its
Meaning. In L. Obler (Ed.), Exceptional Language and Linguistics (pp. 169-173).
New York: Academic.
Hjelmslev, L. (1957). Outline of glossematics: a study in the methodology of the
humanities with special reference to linguistics. Copenhagen: Nordisk sprog-og
kulturvorlag.
Honeck, R. P. (1997): A Proverb in Mind. The Cognitive Science of Proverbial Wit and
Wisdom. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hörmann, H. (1986): Meaning and context. An introduction to the psychology of
language. New York: Plenum Press. (First edition in 1976).
Householder, F. W. (1952). [Rev.:] Z.S Harries, Methods in structural linguistics.
International Journal of American Linguistics 18, 260–268.
Hymes, D. (1962). The ethnography of speaking. In T. Gladwin & W. C. Sturtevant
(Eds.), Anthropology and human behavior (pp. 13-53). Washington, DC: An
Anthropological Society of Washington.
Jakobson, R. O. (1962). Zeichen und System der Sprache. In G. F. Meier, E. Seidel & F.
Steinitz (Eds.), Zeichen und System der Sprache 2. Verö entlichung des I.
 Internationalen Symposions „Zeichen und System der Sprache“ vom 28. 9. bis
2.10.1959 in Erfurt (pp. 50-56). Berlin: Akademie.
Jolles, A. (1930). Einfache Formen. Legende, Sage, Mythe, Rätsel, Spruch, Kasus,
Memorabile, Märchen, Witz. Halle (Saale): Niemeyer.
Kanyó, Z. (1981). Sprichwörter, Analyse einer einfachen Form. Ein Beitrag zur
generativen Poetik. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
Klaus, G. (1964). Moderne Logik. Abriss der formalen Logik. Berlin: VEB Deutscher
Verlag der Wissenscha en.
Klimenko, I. (1946). Das russische Sprichwort: (Formen und konstruktive
Eigentümlichkeiten). Bern: Francke.
Krikmann, A. (1971). Zur Problematik der Metasprache als Ausdruck der
Bedeutungsstreuung der Sprichwörter. Proverbium 17, 624-626.
Krikmann, A. (1974). On Denotative Inde niteness of Proverbs. Remarks on proverb
semantics 1. Tallinn: Academy of Sciences of the Estonian SSR. Institute of
language and literature. (Reprinted in 2009).
Krikmann, A. (1984). The great chain metaphor: an open sesame for proverb
semantics. Proverbium 11, 117–123. (Reprinted in 2009).
Kuusi, M. (1972). Towards an international type-system of proverbs. Proverbium 19,
699–736.
Lako , G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Lako , G. & Turner, M. (1989). More than cool reason. A eld guide to poetic
metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lauhakangas, O. (2001). The Matti Kuusi international type system of proverbs.
Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.
Lundberg, G. A. (1958). The semantics of proverbs. ETC: a review of general semantics
15/3, 215–217.
Mieder, W. (1992): Paremiological Minimum and Cultural Literacy. In S. J. Bronner &
W. F. H. Nicolaisen (Eds.), Creativity and tradition in folklore. New directions (pp.
185-203). Logan: Utah State University Press. (Reprinted in: W. Mieder (Ed.),
(1994). Wise Words. Essays on the Proverb (pp. 297-316). New York, London:
Garland.
Mill, J. S. (1843). A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive. London: John W.
Parker, West Strand.
Milner, G. B. (1969). Quadripartite structures. Proverbium 14, 379–383.
Morris, C. W. (1938). Foundations of the Theory of Signs. Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press.
Morris, C. W. (1946). Signs, Language, and Behavior. New York: Braziller.
Nahberger, G. (2000). Morgen ist auch noch ein Tag. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider-
Verlag Hohengehren.
Nahberger, G. (2004): „Eine Schwalbe macht noch keinen Sommer“ – eine
empirische Untersuchung zur Bedeutungsgenerierung und illokutionären
Schlagkra von Sprichwörtern. In Cs. Földes & J. Wirrer (Eds.), Phraseologismen
als Gegenstand sprach- und kulturwissenscha licher Forschung (pp. 309-324).
Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.
Norrick, N. R. (1982). Proverbial perlocutions: How to do things with proverbs. Grazer
linguistische Studien 17/18, 169–183.
Norrick, N. R. (1985). How proverbs mean. Semantic studies in English proverbs.
Berlin: Mouton.
Norrick, N. R. (2007). Proverbs as set phrases. In H. Burger et al. (Eds.), Phraseologie.
Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung. Vols. I & II (pp. 381-
393). Berlin de Gruyter.
Permjakov, G. L. (1979). From proverb to folk-tale: notes on the general theory of
cliché. Moscow: Nauka. (First edition in 1970).
[Permjakov] Пермяков, Г. Л. (1979). Грамматика пословичной мудрости. In Г. Л.
Пермяков (Ed.), Пословицы и поговорки народов Востока (pp. 7-57). Москва:
Наука.
Posner, R. (1985). La syntactique, sa relation à la sémantique et la pragmatique, à la
morphologie et la syntaxe, et à la syntagmatique et la paradigmatique. In H.
Parret & H. G. Ruprecht (Ed.), Exigences et perspectives de la semiotique. Recueil
d’hommages pour Algirdas Julien Greimas. Aims and Prospects of Semiotics:
Essays in Honor of Algirdas Julien Greimas (pp. 73-96). Amsterdam, Philadelpha:
John Benjamins.
Röhrich, L. & Mieder, W. (1977). Sprichwort. Stuttgart: Metzler.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts. An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and
semantics (pp. 59-82). New York/London: Academic Press.
Seiler, F. (1922). Deutsche Sprichwörterkunde. München: Beck.
Seitel, P. (1969). Proverbs: A Social Use of Metaphor. Genre 2, 148–161.
Seitel, P. (1972). Proverbs and the structure of metaphor among the Hayá of Tanzania.
University of Pennsylvania: Ph.D. diss.
Taylor, A. (1931). The proverb. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Voigt, V. (1977). Voprosy obščej teorii poslovic. Acta Ethnographica Academicae
Scientiarum Hungaricae 26, 164–167.

6 Indirect speech acts, in the tradition of Austin (1962) and Searle (1969), refer to the
situation when someone, in a given communication, says one thing (the locutionary
act), and means something di erent (or additional), thus performing an illocutionary
act, which has some (perlocutionary) e ect on someone else.
7 This refers back, of course, to D. Hymes (1962) postulation of an Ethnography of
Speaking, paradigmatically shi ing the focus from anthropological linguistics to
linguistic anthropology.
8 Heterogeneous signs may of course not only simultaneously accompany, but also
precede or succeed a given sign, thus implying syntactical sequentiality as outlined
above.
9 There is no need to enter a more detailed discussion here as to the semiotic status
of phonemes, as the smallest linguistic units bringing about a change of meaning, or
of morphemes, as the smallest grammatical units, or the smallest linguistic units
bearing meaning.
10 Later, Milner (1969) would elaborate on this observation, interpreting them as an
intralingual, though intercultural phenomenon.
11 In this respect, Norrick’s (1985: 101) appeal to pay attention to these di erent kinds
of tropes is important, although his assumption that no one has ever attempted to
de ne or catalogue the types of gures proverbs contain commonly, is far from being
correct, if one does not ignore older sources as, e.g., Klimenko (1946) detailed study
of tropes in Russian proverbs.
12 In linguistics and semiotics, di erent kinds of motivation have been distinguished,
originally referring to Saussure’s distinction of arbitrary and motivated signs. In a
more general sense, we are concerned with the derivation of form, meaning,
function, usage, or historical development of simple or complex signs, on the basis
of formal (morphological, syntactic, phonological, graphical), semantic, or sign-
external aspects.
13 Norrick uses both terms, obviously interchangeably, i.e., literal reading as well as
literal meaning.
14 The literal reading of the proverb Like father, like son, for example, would be
Father and son are alike.
15 At closer sight, even these demands are not met in Norrick’s approach; a er all, a
standard proverb interpretation Fear gives the ability to y of the proverb Fear gives
wings (Norrick, 1985: 194) is more than far away from any kind of customary
meaning, to give but one example.
16 More speci cally, depending on this relation, synecdochic, metonymic,
metaphoric (and eventually further) types of proverbs may be distinguished – see
e.g., Norrick (1985: 108).
17 Although the customary meaning may eventually be described with terms from
everyday language, this may not blind us to the fact that we are concerned with a
di erent, meta-lingual function of language. The (meta-linguistic) description of a
proverb’s customary meaning and its literal reading may of course coincide formally,
but not functionally, in this case both being but homonymous expressions. It is
therefore profoundly misleading to speak of a coincidence between literal and
customary meaning – a meta-language must principally not only have a logical
lexicon not smaller than that of the object language, but it must also necessarily have
variables belonging to a higher logical type than the variables of the object language.
Thus, for both ‘literal’ and gurative proverbs the literal reading must di er from its
meta-lingual description, and every change in the type of meta-linguistic description
would let this conception collapse like a house of cards.
18 A synoptic survey of Permjakov’s conception can be found in his 1970 book От
поговорки до сказки, which was translated into English in 1979 under the title of
From Proverb to Folktale. However, his theory of proverbs was signi cantly
elaborated upon in the 1970s and therefore is not contained in the English
translation, which is obsolete, in this respect.
19 Sometimes, such prognostic sayings have been termed weather proverbs, although
the term proverb is reasonably better reserved for synthetic clichés.
20 In one way or another, this concept thus is based on conventionalized meanings
of lexical signs. This does bit exclude, of course, that one might arti cially construe a
(situative) context, in which a gurative interpretation of a prognostic saying might
be possible; however, in this case we would not be concerned with an analytic cliché
any more, but with an instance of paremic homonymy.
21 Ultimately, it is this Generic-Speci c relation, which has been emphasized by
cognitive linguists from the 1980s on (e.g., Lako & Johnson (1980), in context of a
theory of metaphor, to be relevant for proverbs, too (e.g., Lako & Turner (1989 : 162).
Notwithstanding the lack of empirical evidence, including the danger of
overemphasizing subjective introspection (Gibbs et al. 1996), cognitivist linguistics
has attracted much attention by phraseologists and paremiologists, ignoring the
close resemblance of these ideas to Permjakov’s linguistic and folkloristic ideas, as
pointed out by Krikmann (1984) in his critical review of the cognitivist approach. In
this context, Krikmann suggests that the Generic-Speci c metaphor might be better
understood as a metonymy; this classi cation might be seen as a parallel to Norrick’s
(1985) classi cation of proverbs as scenic species-genus synecdoches – but in this
case, the proverb as a genre would generally be concerned and not – as Norrick
(2007: 389), basing his distinctions on the relation between ‘literal’ and customary
meaning, sees it –, only a speci c subtype of proverbs.
22 ‘Proverbial aphorisms’ and ‘proverbs proper’ in Permjakov’s terminology
23 Lundberg (1958), Milner (1969).
24 The fact of Saussure’s psychological (or cognitive) de nition of the sign and its
components is not of primary concern here.
25 Broadly speaking, in a Peircean framework, a sign process is a dynamic
interaction of three components: the representamen, a functionally de ned sign
carrier, an object, and the interpretant, an interpreting consciousness. The object
additionally is speci ed as an immediate object (as represented in the sign itself),
and the dynamic object (only indicated by the sign, to be cognized by collateral
experience only); similarly, di erent kinds of interpretants are distinguished, which
need not be discussed here in detail. In any case, an interpretant must not be
confused with the interpreter as the sign user.
26 According to Peirce (Hartshorne & Weiss, 1931-1958), this logical interpretant is
“what would nally be decided to be the true interpretation if consideration of the
matter were carried so far as that an ultimate opinion were reached”. The nal
interpretant thus ultimately is based upon some customary interpretive consensus,
which in principle is only an ideal and can be achieved only by way of some (quasi-
asymptotical) approximation.
27 In this respect, one should well be aware of the fact that, logically speaking,
analogy principally includes the relation between two ordered pairs (of terms or
concepts); quite characteristically, the ancient Greek term ναλογία (analogia)
originally meant proportionality, in the mathematical sense, and eventually was
translated into Latin is proportio as a set of equations in which two relations are
equated. There is no need to go into details here as to a discussion of analogy – a er
all, one may still today side with John Stuart Mill’s (1843) wise words saying that
“There is no word, which is used more loosely, or in a greater variety of senses, as
Analogy”.– Nevertheless, Crépeau may be seen fully right in arguing that proverbs
need not necessarily be characterized by fully explicit four-term analogies.
28 The background of these distinctions must be seen in philosophical and linguistic
theory, where a proposition includes nomination, predication, junction, and
quanti cation. In this context, nomination is a necessary condition for predication,
the latter implying the attribution of a property to a subject (or object). Whereas
phraseological information (Px) thus concerns nomination (which, grammatically
speaking, is not restricted to nouns, but may comprise verbs, too), paremic
information (Px É Qx) contains, by de nition, a predication, a proverb thus
corresponding to a proposition, which may either refer to the relation between two
(or more) objects, or to an object an (one of) its properties.
29 It goes without saying that within each of these basic categories, a number of
further subdivisions are possible and necessary.
30 The uent transitions from proverbial phrases to proverbs become most evident in
verbal constructions like “One/You should (not) …”.
31 There is no need to deal here in detail with the circumstance that not in all
proverbs, all terms of these relations must be explicitly expressed.
32 A proverb may, of course, but need not refer to the situation in which it is used;
but heuristically, both must be principally distinguished.
33 Seitel’s original term context situation is avoided here and replaced by the term
reference situation, since context might erroneously be applied the interaction
situation. Quite evidently, a proverb may refer to that situation, in which it is used,
but this is not necessarily the case; as a consequence, it is better to clearly
(heuristically, conceptually, and terminologically) distinguish them.
34 Here and throughout this text, particular forms of proverb usage as, e.g., in
literary texts, will not speci cally be dealt with.
35 As to a more detailed distinction between the notions of variant and variation (see
Grzybek et al., 1994; Grzybek, 2012b; Chlosta & Grzybek, 2005)
36 Although sets S and R both are, in principle, in nite, a given individual’s proverb
knowledge is, of course, characterized on the basis of a limited number of
experiences with individual proverbs and situations, what is correspondingly
symbolized.
37 It may be appropriate to bring up some restrictions and caveats here. First, the
assumption of two processes of abstraction does not necessarily imply that these
take place simultaneously during any cognitive processing of a proverb; also, there is
no need to discuss here in detail the complex (and controversely seen) interrelations
between abstraction and analogy, i.e. to analyze the role of analogical reasoning in
abstraction, or abstraction processes in analogy processing.
38 Only in Permjakov’s later writings, like his Grammar of Proverbial Wisdom (1979)
the model is a two-fold complementation of separate logical and thematic
components, whereas in his earlier writing (as his From Proverb to Folk-Tale,
translated into English in 1979), both components were fused into logico-thematic
classes.
Marcas Mac Coinnigh
5 Structural Aspects of Proverbs

5.1 Structure and Style

The challenge of de ning the proverb is one that has de ed the will,
patience, and intellect of scholars for millenia– from Homer, Plato,
Aristotle, and other classical scholars, to more recent pioneers in the
eld, such as Archer Taylor, Bartlett Jere Whiting, Lutz Röhrich, and
Wolfgang Mieder. Attempts at providing a de nition have yielded
varied results, but Taylor’s (1962: 3) now infamous quotation still holds
relatively true: “An incomunicable quality tells us this sentence is
proverbial and that one is not. Hence no de nition will enable us to
identify positively a sentence as proverbial.” This quotation is
important, I believe, not for the acknowledgment that a nite
de nition isn’t possible – as a “proverb is not a species with its genus
proximum and its di erentia speci ca as in a systemised science”
(Guershoon, 1941: 15) – but because Taylor rst raised the question of
“an incommunicable quality”. In recent years, scholars have begun to
investigate this abstract concept by identifying certain poetic and
structural features that appear frequently in proverbs and which
constitute, in very broad terms, the concept of proverbial style or what
Shirley Arora (1984) has termed proverbiality. These devices are a
veritable checklist for proverbial status: the more of these stylistic
features a sentence possesses, the higher the level of proverbiality, and
the greater the probability that the sentence is, or will be identi ed, as
a proverb.39
The phonological, semantic, and syntactic devices that occur
frequently in proverbs across languages may be termed proverbial
markers. These internal and external makers are warning signs that
indicate that a particular sentence is deviant from the surrounding
discourse, in that it exhibits stylistic and structural adornments that
are not typically found in naturally-occuring language. Furthermore,
from a pragmatic perspective, it alerts the listener that the expression
is important in some regard, be that in terms of its use, function, or
meaning. Scholars have identi ed a range of devices which operate in
ensemble to e ect the concept of proverbial style, amongst which the
most important are parallelism, ellipsis, alliteration, rhyme, metaphor,
personi cation, paradox, and hyperbole (Mieder, 2004: 7). Structural
elements are amongst the most universal and easily identi able
proverbial markers, and feature with high frequencies across world
languages, both in terms of (i) the traditional xed formulae, and (ii)
the set of optional syntactic devices that occur in proverbs, particularly
synactic parallelism, parataxis, and inverted word order in its various
manifestations. Language-speci c analyses of the use of proverbial
markers have focussed on these structural elements in a wide number
of languages, including Ancient Greek, Ancient Egyptian, (Cairene)
Arabic, English, Esperanto, French, Hebrew, Hausa, Hungarian, Igbo,
Irish, Italian, Latin, Russian, Spanish, Tamil, Welsh, Yoruba, and
numerous other African languages.40
The aim of this chapter is to provide a general overview of the
unique architecture of proverbs across a range of languages. The rst
section will deal with the role of di erent sentence types in proverbs,
both in terms of their linguistic structure and also their associated
functions; the second section will outline the most common proverbial
formulae, including some of the traditional and modern patterns; and
nally, the various optional syntatic devices (or markers) will be
described, particularly parallelism, inverted word order, and parataxis.
As a means of showing the universality of proverb architecture,
examples will be taken from a range of languages (together with an
English translation), although the majority will be from the major
English sources.

5.2 Sentences and Phrases

5.2.1 Sentence Type

Proverbs appear in a variety of di erent sentence types; from a
syntactic perspective, these sentences may be classi ed into four
distinct types according to the number of clauses and sub-clauses they
contain. These sentence types are: simple, compound, complex, and
compound-complex. (i) The most basic sentence is the simple sentence,
which contains one main clause (subject and predicate) and no
subclauses. They are typically simple, declarative, non-oppositional,
and stylistically unmarked i.e. they do not contain many stylistic
markers.41 They appear in both a rmative and negative form as can be
seen in the examples (1-2) below:

(1) Acqua cheta rovina i ponti. (Italian) A rmative (+)

[Silent waters run deep.]
(2) Comparaison n’est pas raison. (French) Negative (–)
[Comparison is no reason.]

(ii) Complex sentences contain one clause and one or more subclauses;
the subclauses may be adjectival, nominal, or adverbial. The structural
balance in these proverbs is asyemetrical, with the subclause being
dependant on the main clause as can be seen in No. 3 below, i.e. the
sublcause that will take no colour cannot stand alone grammatically,
and is tied to the main clause in which the subject bad cloth is
contained. The subordinate clause o en features a WH–subclause,
which in English begins with one of the following: what, where, who,
why, or when (see No. 4-5). A stylistic feature of these proverbs is the
repositioning of the subclause into sentence-initial position, usually
for the purposes of emphasis as also can be seen in No. 4-5.
(3) [It is a bad cloth] [that will take no colour].
[Clause] + [Subclause]
(4) [ Quand le vin est tiré], [il faut le boire]. (French)
When the wine is drawn, one must drink it.
[Subclause] + [Clause]
(5) [ Wer anderen eine Grube gräbt], [fällt selbst hinein]. (German)
Who digs a pit for other falls into it himself.
[Subclause] + [Clause]
(iii) Compound sentences possess multiple independant clauses which
are separated by a coordinator (in English these are for, and, nor, but,
or, yet, so). There is a grammatical equality in these sentences, which
balances the two clauses against one another through a central
fulcrum in the shape of the coordinator. These examples o en display
a type of semantic equality or contrast, which is created through the
replication of the syntactic pattern. In No. 6 below we can see the two
independant clauses Falseness lasts an hour and truth lasts till the end
of time located contiguously with the conjunction and acting as the
central pivot.
(6) . (Arabic)
[Falseness lasts an hour and truth lasts till the end of time.]
[Clause] + [coordinator – and] + [Clause]
O en verbs are omitted from these proverbs and instead phrases are
simply structurally juxtaposed with the implit suggestion that there an
underlying semantic relationship (I will discuss this in more detail
later in the paper when dealing with asyndetic coordination and
parataxis).
(iv) The compound–complex sentence is the most syntactically
complicated type as it o en features a multiplicity of clauses and
subclauses. The minimum syntactic requirement is for at least two
clauses and one subclause. The complex, extended structure is
prohibitive to proverb composition, presumably because they are more
di cult to memorise and recall in speech situations:
(7) When the oak is before the ash, then you will only get a splash; when
the ash is before the oak, then you may expect an oak.
[Adverbial subclause] + [Clause] ; [Adverbial subclause] + [Clause]
Closely related to the aforementioned sentence types is the nominal
sentence. This refers to a type of sentence with a predicate lacking a
nite verb. Words and phrases are juxtaposed for the purposes of
emphasis and intensity, but either there is no explicit grammatical
connection between these phrases or the verbal construct has become
redundant over time and is omitted. An o -cited example of a nominal
sentence is the proverb in No. 8 in which the substantive verb to be is
omitted:
(8) The more – the merrier.

5.2.2 Sentence Function

Sentences typically have four di erent functions: declarative (or
indicative); interrogrative; imperative; and exclamatory, which can be
drawn together into two larger main groups: A rmative and
Communicative. Proverbs exhibit all these di erent functions,
although some may be more frequently used than others. The rst
function is declarative (or indicative) which is a favoured one in
proverbs – as it is in natural speech – as it conveys information or
ideas in the form of a statement (No. 9). Interrogative sentences, on the
other hand, take the form of a question. The two most common types
in proverbs are (i) the Yes/No Interrogrative, which can either elicit a
yes or no response (No. 10), and (ii) the WH-Interrogative, which elicits
an open-ended response. These may, of course, be used rhetorically in
proverbs, so that a response is not required as in example (No. 11).

A rmative
declarative/indicative
(9) Bad news travels fast.

interrogative
(10) Does a chicken have lips? Yes/No
Interrogative
(11) What would you expect from a pig but a WH-Interrogative
grunt?

The communciative sentences types feature the imperative form in

which an order is given. These, as we can imagine, were extremely
common – although Mieder (2012: 147) has recently shown that this is
no longer the case – as proverbs o en give advice, counsel and
instructions on how individiuals should behave in both speci c
contexts and in general life. Once again, the a rmative and negative
imperative patterns are found frequently (No. 12-13). The exclamatory
sentence expresses strong emotion such as anger, surprise, frustration,
confusion, elation, joy, love, sorrow, etc. From a grammatical
perspective, formal English requires that it begin with either what or
how (e.g. No. 14), but in reality any declarative sentence can become
exclamatory in natural speech, and this is re ected in writing by the
inclusion of an exclamation mark at the end of the structure (No. 15).

Communicative
imperative
(12) Look before you leap.
(13) Entre l’arbe et l’écorce il ne faut pas mettre le doigt. (French)
[Don’t go between the tree and the bark.]
exclamatory
(14) What goes around comes around!
(15) All’s fair in love and war!

5.3 Syntax and Structure

5.3.1 Proverbial Formulae
All languages possess certain structural formulae that exhibit a high
degree of peculiarity towards the proverb as a linguistic form, as
Archer Taylor (1962, 16) states “New proverbs have o en been made on
old models. Certain frames lend themselves readily to the insertion of
entirely new ideas”. Studies have shown that these structural formulae
are common to a wide range of languages, which is evidence that
proverbs generally have a shared syntactic architecture as well as a
similar core-set of values and morals. A few of the most salient
traditional formulae that are to be found internationally are He who…,
…; If/when,… (then); Like …, …; Better … , than …; Every … has its own…
(Krikmann, 1998: 52). For example, the form Better X than Y is one of
the most widely dispersed and can be seen in the following examples:
(16) Más vale un presente que dos después. (Spanish)
[Better one now than two in the future.]
(17) Besser arm in Ehren als reich in Schanden. (German)
[Better a good name than riches.]
(18) Parempi karvas totuus kuin makea valhe. (Finnish)
[Better a bitter truth than a sweet lie.]
The high incidence of these particular formulae in international
collections of proverbs is undoubtedly related to the fact that proverbs
were distributed throughout Europe and beyond in four major periods
of linguistic borrowing: (i) the dissemination of proverbial forms from
classical antiquity through the Latin language, especially the medieval
Latin proverb tradition, pioneered by Erasmus of Rotterdam’s Adagia,
which witnessed the translation of proverbs into European languages;
(ii) the translation of the Bible in Europe and beyond, which dispersed
both formulae from classical antiquity and metrical patterns
associated with wisdom literature; (iii) the creation and distribution of
new proverbs in medieval Latin, the lingua franca of the Middle Ages;
and (iv) the spread of literature in the globalized age through the mass
media (see Mieder, 2004: 10-13). As well as universal proverbs
emanating from these sources, there are also indigenous proverbs
peculiar to one or more languages, which sometimes appear later as
loan proverbs in a neighbouring country’s repertoire. The transferal
and borrowing of proverbs formulae in these periods are best viewed
in cross-linguistic studies, particularly Paczolay’s European Proverbs
(1997) and Emanuel Strauss’ Dictionary of World Proverbs (1994) which
provide numerous examples of similar structures throughout the
proverbs of many world languages.
Just as languages evolve and change, the nature of the proverb also
alters to suit changing times and circumstances. From a diachronic
perspective, we can look back at proverbs over the centuries and see
that, from a structural vista, the vicissitudes of linguistic development
caused certain formulae to rise to prominence at certain times whilst,
on the other hand, some popular forms gradually became redundant
on account of lack of use. For example, as recently as 1931 Taylor
mentions the international form Young X, old Y as a common template,
but in modern times this form is extremely rare– only having one
example in the Oxford Dictionary of Proverbs (Speake, 2003: 344).42 In
spite of the conventional belief that proverbs are based on a small
number of traditional formulaic structures, Wolfgang Mieder’s (2012)
most recent study of modern Anglo-American Proverbs – and by
modern we mean a er 1900 – has shown that this is not actually true
in the modern age. Traditional formulae are no longer prevalent in the
process of composition and promulgation of new proverbs. His data
shows that ten of the traditional formulae each occur in less than 1.7%
of modern Anglo-American proverbs and, more signi cantly, eight of
these occur in less than 1% of the corpus. These traditional formulae
can be seen below where I have added some other languages as a
means of explicating the material:43
X is Y
(19) Aeg on raha. (Estonian)
[Time is money.]
X is better than Y / Better X than Y
(20) Bättre tiga än illa tala. (Swedish).
[Better to keep quiet than to speak badly (of someone).]
It’s not X, it’s (but) Y
(21) It’s not what you know, it’s who you know.
When you X, (you) X
(22) When you’re good, you’re good.
also
When you X (you) (Y)
Kun menee sutta pakoon, tulee karhu vastaan. (Finnish)
[When you ee from a wolf, you run into a bear.]
No X, no Y
(23) Ei ole huult, ei ole huunid. (Estonian)44
[No care, no buildings.]
X is (are) X
(24) A deal is a deal.
There is no such thing as X
(25) There’s no such thing as bad publicity.
There are no X, only (just) Y
(26) Det nns inget dåligt väder, bara dåliga kläder. (Swedish)
[There is no bad weather, only bad clothing.]
One man’s X is another man’s Y
(27) One man’s meat is another man’s poison.
Modern Anglo-American proverbs, according to Wolfgang Mieder
(2012: 144-147), now favour straight-forward indicative formulae, which
appear to be void of many of the traditional proverbial markers,
especially syntactic and phonological devices. The modern structures
appear to be simpli ed, reduced formulae as can be seen from the six
classes mentioned in his study:
A(n) / noun / verb…
(28) A diamond is forever.
A(n) / adjective / noun / verb …
(29) A wise head is better than a pretty face.
The / noun / verb …
(30) The world hates a quitter
You can’t (cannot) / verb …
(31) You can’t unscramble eggs.
Don’t (do not) / verb …
(32) Don’t believe everything you think.
Never / verb …
(33) Never work with children or animals.

5.3.2 The Wellerism

In Alan Dundes’ article „On the Structure of the Proverb” (1975), he
notes that “there appears to be a nite number of proverb
compositional or architectural formulas”, and amongst these
structures he notes the wellerism. The wellerism is a proverbial
subtype that has a distinctive syntactic formula and is used for
purposes of irony or humour. Typically the formula is triadic with three
distinct parts: a statement (o en a proverb) + a speaker + context
(phrase or subclause) as in No. 34. The context may also be replaced by
inserting another individual to whom the speaker is addressing the
statement: a statement (o en a proverb) + a speaker + a listener as in
No. 35.
(34) “Much noise and little wool,” said the Devil when he sheared a pig.
[statement/proverb] + [speaker] + [context i.e. sublause]
(35) “Two heads are better than one,” as the cabbage-head said to the
lawyer.
[statement/proverb] + [speaker] + [listener]
O en the third contextual element is not required as there is su cient
incongruence between the speaker’s characteristics and the statement
to facilitate humour or irony. For example, the phrase I see can be used
literally in its primary semantic form, i.e. I perceive with my two eyes,
or it can also be guratively invoked to mean I understand. This
ambiguity creates an incongruity with the adjective blind, which is the
source of the irony as can be seen in No. 36. These do not o en feature
proverbs as the statement, however.
(36) “I see,” said the blind man.
[statement] + [speaker]
Structurally, it is also possible to place the speaker at the start of the
sentence and then insert the statement, but this form is much less
common than the canonical form.
(37) For as the old maid remarked about kissing the cow, “It’s all a
matter of taste.”
[speaker] + [context] + [statement/proverb]45
Two major collections of wellerisms are well worth consulting for a
more complete overview of the genre, namely: A Dictionary of
Wellerisms by W. Mieder and S. A. Kingsbury, and Wellerisms in
Ireland: Towards a Corpus from Oral and Literary Sources by Fionnuala
Carson Williams.

5.3.3 Anti-proverbs
The formulation of anti-proverbs46 (Mieder, 1982) is also responsible
for the perpetuation of traditional formulae. We may de ne an anti-
proverb as “an allusive distortion, parody, misapplication, or
unexpected contextualization of a recognized proverb, usually for
comic or satiric e ect” (Doyle, Mieder & Shapiro, 2012: XI). One of the
methods for creating an anti-proverb is to amend one element of an
existing proverb e.g. a noun, an adjective, a verb, etc. by replacing it
with another item from the same grammatical category.47 The item
may be a homonym or homophone, but these pairs are limited, and it
more likely is a word that phonologically resembles the sound of the
original (e.g. No. 38), where here is replaced by hair. O en the
alteration merely involves the substitution of one letter for another to
a ect a pun (No. 39-40), the addition of an extra letter (No. 41), or the
substitution of a word (No. 42). What is important to note in all these
examples is that the syntactic structure is not changed. This is a
method by which new life can be breathed into older structures so that
they may enjoy another period of currency. Here are a few examples
from the largest collection of anti-proverbs, Old Proverbs Never Die,
They Just Diversify: A Collection of Anti-Proverbs, by T. Litovkina and
Mieder’s (2006: 18) collection:
(38) Hair today, gone tomorrow < Here today, gone tomorrow.
(39) The pun is mightier than the sword < The pen is mightier than the
sword.
(40) A good beginning is half the bottle < A good beginning is half the
battle.
(41) Strike while the irony is hot < Strike while the iron is hot.
(42) Great aches from little corns grow < Great acorns from little acorns
grow.

5.4 Structural Markers

5.4.1 Syntactic Parallelism

Linguistic studies on the stylistic markers that feature in proverbs, by
scholars such as Taylor (1931),48 Mahgoub (1968), Silverman-Weinreich
(1981)49 Arora (1984), Jang (2002), and Mac Coinnigh (2012), have
shown that parallelism – both structural parallelism and semantic
parallelism – is one of the most signi cant and frequently occurring
internal devices in proverbs. Rothstein has argued that it ful ls three
main functions in proverbs. Structural or syntactic parallelism is a
rhetorical device used for the purpose of emphasis or foregrounding. It
involves the contiguous justaposition of syntactically parallel elements
of the proverb text, such as individual lexical items, phrases, clauses,
or sentences, for the purpose of suggesting analogical relationships or
comparsisons (see Rothstein, 1968: 269). For example in No. 43, the
rst half of the structure – The dead to the tomb –is directly parallel to
the second half – the living to the rumba. The conjunction and
separates the two parallel structures in medial position and invites an
interpretation that will contrast the two phrases i.e. that the natural
order dictates that when one is dead the tomb is where he/she should
be, and that when one is alive, he/she should be at the rumba. It is
essentially an exhortation to enjoy life.

(43) El muerto a la tumba y el vivo a la rumba. (Spanish)50

[The dead to the tomb and the living to the rumba (=dance).]
There are two main methods by which the elements can be placed in
parallel (i) Syndetic coordination, and (ii) Asyndetic coordination. In
syndetic coordination the terms are explicitly linked by conjunctions
such as and, or, and but, and the elements of the proverb are bound
together in a cohesive grammatical unit (No. 44). Whilst in asyndetic
coordination the conjunctions are absent, but the conjoins are
syntactically mirrored or coordinated so as to suggest an analogical
relationship between the elements (No. 45).
Syndetic coordination
(44) Ein Feind ist zuviel, und hundert Freunde nicht genug. (German)
[One enemy is one too many, and hundred friends are not enough.]
Aysndetic coordination
(45) Nemico diviso, mezzo vinto. (Italian)
[Enemy divided, half won.]
Other related structural features that increase the level of the analogy
or comparison o en buttress syntactic parallelism. The rst is
grammatical parallelism, which is a more rigid form of syntactic
repetition in which the grammatical class of each individual element is
mirrored in the bipartite structure that follows. This is extremely
common in short phrases where the grammatical structure is quite
basic, o en relating to a simple Noun Phrase (NP) involving Noun +
Adjective (No. 46) or the Noun + Verb structure (No. 47). Extended
forms of grammatical parallelism are also found, however, as in No. 48
where the parallelism is linked at a grammatical level to the pattern
which features in both halves of the structure, although it is separated
by the conjunction but: NP plural + verb (present tense) + NP plural +
in nite verb + NP plural. The second feature is that of lexical repetition,
where lexical items are duplicated in the structure. This is an integral
part of syntactic parallelism that is almost impossible to examine in
isolation. The examples below show how individual lexical matches in
the proverbs (i.e. other, God, young folks/old folks/fools) are used for
comparative purposes, as it invites a focussed contrastive reading of
the non-identical elements.
(46) Andere Länder, andere Sitten. (German)
[Other countries, other customs.]
(47) Бог дал, Бог и взял. (Russian)
[God has given, God has taken.]
(48) Young folks think old folks to be fools, but old folks know young
folks to be fools.
In some instances the parallel noun-phrase or clause may be
syntactically reversed in the second half of the proverb, what we may
term inverted parallelism, as in the formula A1 A2: B2 B1. This is a
rhetorical device form classical times called chiasmus (sometimes
referred to as the Criss-Cross Pattern), which adds both a poetic
rhythm and semantic contrast to the proverb (see Taylor, 1931: 140;
Norrick 1991: 121). The following example (No. 49) from the Irish
language is an example of chiasmus:
(49) Is fearr eolas an oilc ná an t-olc gan eolas.
A1 A2 B2 B1
[Better the knowledge of misfortune than misfortune without
knowledge.]
A1 A2 B2 B1
Another feature associated with syntactic parallelism is medial ellipsis
or gapping (Greenbaum & Quirk, 1990: 279; Fabb, 1997: 147). This is the
omission of a lexical element, usually a verb, in the second half of the
binary structure.51 The implication being that it is so implictly
understood from the initial corresponding element that it becomes
redundant in the second or subsequent element of the proverb.
Gapping is to be found in a number of proverbs containing asyndetic
coordination as can be seen in the following example (No. 50) where
both the relativized form of the verb gets [a aigheann] and the object
cold [fuar] are both present in the rst sentence, whilst they are absent,
yet implicitly understood, in the subsequent conjoin. The reader must
elicit the missing element i.e. the verb and adjective from the rst
colon. The same is true in No. 51, where the substantive verb [will be] is
omitted but implicitly suggested.
(50) As a ceann a aigheann an bhean fuacht; as a chosa an fear.(Irish)
[Out of her head gets the woman cold; out of his feet *gets* the man
*cold*].
(51) The last will be rst, and the rst *will be* last.
It is worth mentioning at this stage that a closely associated feature of
syntactic parallelism is that of semantic parallelism, in which the
meaning of the parallel elements exhibit a semantic relationship –
either synonymous or antithetical. In synonymous parallelism the
parallel elements of the proverb express a similar (or tautological)
meaning; the second element essentially reiterates the meaning of the
rst “in di erent but equivalent terms”.52 For example in No. 52, the
parallel elements far-fetched and dear-bought both relate to the
aspects of the exquisite tastes of certain ladies i.e. that articles should
be expensive and exotic. The two adjectives essentially express a
similar quality in di erent terms. Whilst in antithetical parallelism the
second element expresses the opposite of the rst. This may occurs in
rigidly structured antonymic way where each lexical item is directly in
apposition to the rst e.g. in No. 53 the verbs marry vs repent, and the
adjectives haste vs leisure, are in direct opposition; or in more a
broader way, where the general meaning or sentiment is reversed, as in
No. 54 where it is suggested that the person physically closest to the
church nearer the church, is the least devout, using the gurative
expression farther from God.
[A] vs [B]
(52) [Far-fetched] and [dear-bought] is good for ladies.
(53) [Marry in haste] and [repent in leisure].
(54) [The nearer the church], [the farther from God].

5.5 Emphatic Word Order

Emphatic word order is a device for rearranging the structure of a
sentence so that particular constituent elements can be foregrounded
for the purposes of emphasis. There are a number of di erent methods
through which syntax may be rearranged in proverbs for this purpose
of which the most common are: cle ing, le dislocation,
topicalisation, and sub-clausal fronting.

5.5.1 Cle ing

Cle ing involves re-arranging the basic word order of an unmarked
sentence, and fronting constituents, such as nouns, adverbs, and
adjectives, to sentence initial position. The cle ing of basic sentences
is one of the main ways to achieve emphasis or foregrounding of a
particular constituent. This type of alteration may be invoked in the
proverb for emphatic, exclamatory or contrastive purposes. When it
occurs with other optional stylistic and poetic markers, it has the e ect
of increasing the level of proverbiality of an expression.53 In English
the fronted element follows an introductory structure such as: It
is/was...

(55) It’s an ill bird that fouls its own nest. [cle ed sentence]
An ill bird fouls its own nest. [canonical sentence]
(56) It’s a good horse that never stumbles [cle ed sentence]
A good horse never stumbles. [canonical sentence]

5.5.2 Le -dislocation
Le -dislocation is a feature of spontaneous or narrative style and is
used for purposes of emphasis or to clarify ambiguity in cases where
the topic contains a lengthy relative clause. It involves placing the
constituent element in sentence-initial position and an anaphoric
pronominal coreferent placed in its canonical position in the following
main clause. In No. 57 the subject of the sentence contains a sublcause
i.e. who lies with dogs, so the entire subject is foregrounded in sentence
initial position, and then the prepositional prounoun he used as a
coreferent in the following clause. Repetition of the topic through le
dislocation is one of the most salient structural alterations found in
proverbs.
(57) An té a luíonn leis na madraí, éireoidh sé leis na dreancaidí. (Irish)
[He who lies with the dogs, he will rise with the eas.]

5.5.3 Topicalisation
In topicalization, the constituent element is cle ed into sentence
initial position and a gap le in the main clauses which it is construed
as lling (Gregory & Michaelis, 2001: 1665).
In No. 58, the Biblical proverb from Matthew XII. 34 (Authorized
Version) is a example where the basic sentence is reconstructed and
the noun phrase out of the fullness of the heart is placed in initial
position for the purposes of emphasis. Similarly, the object of the
Yiddish proverb – a counterfeit coin – is fronted in No. 59.

(58) Out of the fullness of the heart the mouth speaks. marked
The mouth speaks out of the fullness of the heart. unmarked
(59) a falshe matbeye farlirt men nit. (Yiddish) marked
[a counterfeit coin – one doesn’t loose]54

5.5.4 Sub-Clausal Fronting

Subordinating subclauses are fronted in many proverbs for emphasis,
especially conditional and adverbial subclauses. It is widely believed
that the initial elements of sentences are regarded as more important
that latter ones, and in these examples the foregrounding creates a
sense of apprehension or expectation, which is then completed in the
main clause that follows.
(60) Quando il gatto non c’è il topo balla. (Italian)
[When the cat’s away, the mice will play.]
(61) Wenn das Haupt krank ist, trauern alle Glieder. (German)
[When the head is sick, all members mourn.]
(62) En la duda, abstente. (Spanish)
[When in doubt, abstain.]
5.6 Parataxis
Parataxis (equal para arrangement taxis) is one of the most frequently
occurring syntactic features in proverbs. This term refers to the linking
of constructions of the same grammatical and semantic level through
juxtaposition or punctuation, instead of using formal conjunctions,
either coordinating conjunctions (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so) or
subordinating conjunctions (although, because, since, unless). When
constructions are linked together in close proximity, a semantic
relationship between them is inferred through other methods e.g.
logical, temporal, or causal connections, or through manner (Wales,
2001: 285). The coordination challenges the listener to interpret the
grammatical and semantic relationships to infer a meaning. Ordinary
naturally occurring speech is peppered by paratactic constructions
and it is no coincidence that it is also found in proverbs.55
Parataxis can occur at the level of the individual lexical item, the
phrase, or indeed the clause, but there is a clear preference for simple
phrases. In speech, of course, there would be a caesura between the
binary elements to clearly delineate the introduction of a second
structure. In printed collections of proverbs, this caesura is indicated
by the use of punctuation marks to indicate a fulcrum separating the
elements. Phrases are the most commonly found structure located in
parataxis, but sentences are also found as can be seen in the examples
below. In English, ellipsis of the verb, most o en the substantive verb
to be, is frequently found in these paratactic constructions:
(63) A mali estremi, estremi remedi. (Italian)
[Extreme disease, extreme treatment.]
(64) El poeta nace, el orador se hace. (Spanish)
[The poet is born, the orator is made.]
(65) Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on you.
Parataxis does not only occur in binary constructions however, and a
particular type of proverbial comparison, or enumerative proverb,
links multiple constituent units together like the example in No. 66
below:
(66) For want of a nail the show was lost; for want of a shoe the horse
was lost; for want of a horse the man was lost.
Hauser (1980: 26) has contended that parataxis o en displays a
paucity of “conspicuous links” between the juxtaposed constituents.
This is not true of proverbs, however, as there are, more than not, other
syntactic, phonemic, or semantic markers which emphasis the
connection between the elements. Amongst the most important are
semantic parallelism (antithetical and synonymic), rigid grammatical
parallelism, lexical repetition (word category repetition), and
phonemic devices such as rhyme and alliteration. The proverb A er
dinner rest a while, a er supper walk a mile is a example of this type of
successful parataxis.

A er1 – dinner2 – rest3 – a while4 || a er1 – supper2 – walk3 – a mile4.

The structure is syntactically identical and follows the pattern
preposition1 – noun2 – verb [imperative]3 – inde nite noun4 in both
sides of the structure. This symmetric framework indicates a semantic
correlation. Not only are the grammatical categories identical but we
also see that the mood of the verb, i.e. imperative, is the same. From a
lexical perspective, there is lexical repetition in the initial position (1)
with the preposition a er; the verbs rest and walk are semantically
opposed (antithetical parallelism) which creates a distinct binary
contrast, and the nouns dinner and supper are semantically linked by
being members of the same lexico-semantic category i.e. daily meals.
This intricate balance of similarity and contrast in the parallel
elements is like a mathematical puzzle, which the listener must
decipher to access the meaning. The rhythmic quality, which adds to
the memorability of the proverb, is also signi cant in this example as
the nouns while and mile display perfect rhyme. These phonemic
markers occur in conjunction with varying degrees of lexical repetition
and syntactic parallelism, and identify the proverbs as salient
utterances that are quite distinct from naturally occuring speech
patterns.

5.6.1 Relationship Between Juxtaposed Phrases /

Clauses
Phrases joined by asyndetic juxtaposition have a relationship that is
implied rather than explicitly stated. The semantic connections are not
always clear, especially in decontextualised printed collections, yet
cultural literacy and experience of proverb performance enable us to
identify some common relationships. These relationships may be
classi ed by three main types: (i) Equality or Identi cation [X=Y]; (ii)
Cause and E ect; and (iii) Antonymy or Contrast.
(i) Equality or Identi cation [X=Y]
Paratactic structures indicate a relationship of equality or similarity
between the two phrases i.e. the rst is equal, or similar, to the second.
The association may be schematically paraphrased by the formula [X =
Y]:
(67) First come, rst served.
(68) The greater the sinner, the greater the saint.
(ii) Cause and E ect
A causal relationship is also found between the constituents, of the
cause and e ect or “cause-consequence” sequence (Boyle, 1996: 118).
In this framework, the realization of the rst phrase renders the
second phrase a natural consequence. These proverbs may be read by
the closely-associated formulae [If there is X, then there is Y] or
[If one has A, then one gets/has B]:56
(69) Full cup, steady hand.
(70) No pain, no gain.
(iii) Contrast and Antonymy
Phrases are also set against each other for the purpose of contrast and
antonymy. The e ect is to enhance the overall meaning of the two
separate noun phrases by placing them in parallel to one another, so
that meaning of the entire proverb is more important than the sum of
the overall equal noun phrase constituents. These contrastive proverbs
are the most stylised and lyrical and are based on bipartite and
quadripartite syntactical repetition:
(71) Lá brónach dá phósadh, lá deorach dá chur. (Irish)
[A sad day for one’s marriage; a tearful day for one’s burial.]
(72) Selon l’argent, la besogne. (French)
[What pay, such work.]

5.7 Concluding Remarks

In conclusion, we can say proverbs of all languages demonstrate a
closer resemblance to one another in terms of their structure than they
do in aspects of their semantics. We have seen that proverbs features
all possible manner of sentence type – simple, compound, compound-
complex, and nominal – although some languages display a
preference for one over the other. Functions also vary, but there
appears to be a clear preference for simple indicative statements over
the majority of other forms in modern English-language proverbs. Of
particular note, is the disappearance of the imperative forms – as
Mieder states (2012: 147) “Perhaps this is due to the fact that people
today are less willing to be told what to do or not to do. In other words,
the obvious didactic nature of many traditional proverbs appears to be
on the decline.” Change is also visible in the proverbial formulae that
are used as a skeletal structure for the composition of new proverbs for
modern times; old formulae are clearly on the wane. This opens up a
new eld of investigation for paremiologists as we need to know what
formulae have replaced them. Paremiologists can no longer be wed to
older published collections of proverbs, but we must actively seek out
proverbs and proverbial expressions that are current in today’s world.
The analysis of types of proverbial formulae is a neccesarry
accompaniment to such work, as not only will it provide us with a
description of our current proverb formulae, but it will also enable us
to examine changes that have occured in individual languages from a
diachronic perspective. The stylistic devices used in proverbs may also
be changing in accordance with the decline of older formulae and the
creation of new forms. The increase in antiproverbs may to some small
extent counteract any major changes in style, but it will be interesting
to see if parallelism, parataxis, and emphatic word order continue to
feature in proverbs as optional markers. The emphasis on
straightforward indicative sentences may leave syntactic devices more
redundant than they have been in previous generations, but if this is
true then there may be corresponding compensatory rise in other
devices, possibly semantic tropes, puns or word-play. Comprehensive
linguistic studies of proverb corpora in a wide range of languages are a
pre-requisite to the validation of such hypotheses.
References
Agozzino, M. T. (2007). “Leek and ye shall nd”: Locating Structure and Poetics in
Welsh-language Proverbs. Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb
Scholarship 24, 1-16.
Arora, S. L. (1984). The Perception of Proverbiality. Proverbium: Yearbook of
International Proverb Scholarship 1, 1-38.
Boyle, R. (1996). Modelling Oral Presentations. ELT Journal 50, 115-126.
Carson Williams, F. (2002). Wellerisms in Ireland: Towards a Corpus from Oral and
Literary Sources. Supplement Series of Proverbium: Yearbook of International
Proverb Scholarship 12. Burlington: The University of Vermont.
Culicover, P. W. (2010). Parataxis and Simpler Syntax. In M. José Béguelin, M. Avanzi,
& G. Corminboeuf (Eds.), Actes du 1er Colloque International de Macrosyntaxe Vol.
2. Bern: Peter Lang.
Doyle, C. C., Mieder, W., & Shapiro, F. R. (2012). The Dictionary of Modern Proverbs.
Yale: Yale University Press.
Dundes, A. (1975). On the Structure of the Proverb. Proverbium, 25 961-973. (also in
W. Mieder and A. Dundes (Eds.). 1981. The Wisdom of Many. Essays on the
Proverb, (pp. 43-64). New York: Garland Publishing.
Ezejideaku, E. & Okechukwu O. (2008). A Morpho-syntactic Analysis of Igbo
Proverbs. Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb Scholarship 25, 79-93.
Fabb, N. (1997). Linguistics and Literature: Language in the Verbal Arts of the World.
Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Fiedler, S. (2010). Proverbs in Esperanto. In O. Lauhakangas & R. Soares (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 3rd Interdisciplinary Colloquium on Proverbs (pp. 146-156).
Tavira: Tipogra a Tavirense.
Grandl, C. (2010). “The Perception of Proverbiality” in Extinct Languages. In O.
Lauhakangas & R. Soares (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd Interdisciplinary
Colloquium on Proverbs (pp. 146-156). Tavira: Tipogra a Tavirense. (NB. Abstract
only).
Greenbaum, S. & Quirk, G. (1990). A Student’s Grammar of the English Language.
Essex: Longman Group.
Gregory, M. L. & Michaelis, L. A. (2001). Topicalization and Le Dislocation: A
Functional Opposition Revisited. Journal of Pragmatics, 33 1665-1706.
Guershoon, A. (1941). Certain Aspects of Russian Proverbs. London: Frederick Muller
Ltd.
Hasan-Rokem, G. (1982). Proverbs in Israeli Folk Narratives: A Structural Semantic
Analysis. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.
Hauser, A. J. (1980). Judges 5: Parataxis in Hebrew Poetry. Journal of Biblical
Literature 99/1, 23-41.
Jang, T.-S. (2002). Aspects of poetic balance and cohesion in Hausa proverbs. Journal
of African Cultural Studies 15/2, 215-236.
Klimenko, I. (1946). Das Russische Sprichwort (Formen und konstruktive
Eigentümlichkeiten). Bern: A. Francke AG Verlag.
Krikmann, A. (1998). On the Relationships of the Rehetorical, Modal, Logical, and
Syntactic Planes in Estonian Proverbs. Folklore: Electronic Journal of Folklore 8,
51-99.
Levin, M. I. (1968). The Structure of the Russian Proverb. In C. Gribble (Ed.), Studies
Presented to Professor Roman Jakobson by his Students (pp. 180-187).
Cambridge, Massachusetts: Slavica Publications.
Litovkina, A. T. & Csábi, S. (2002). Metaphors we love by: The cognitive models of
romantic love in American proverbs. Proverbium: Yearbook of International
Proverb Scholarship 19, 369-398.
Litovkina, A. T., & Mieder. W. (2006). Old Proverbs Never Die, They Just Diversify: A
Collection of Anti-Proverbs. Veszprém: University of Veszprém Press.
Litovkina, A. T. (1990). Hungarian and Russian Proverbs: A Comparative Analysis.
Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb Scholarship 7, 241-252.
Mac Coinnigh, M. (2012). Syntactic Structures in Irish-Language Proverbs.
Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb Scholarship 29, 95-136.
Mac Coinnigh, M. (2013). The Heart of Irish-Language Proverbs? A Linguo-stylistic
Analysis of Explicit Metaphor. Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb
Scholarship 30, 113-150.
Mahgoub, F. M. (1968). A Linguistic Study of Cairene Proverbs. Bloomington, Indiana:
Indiana University.
Mieder, W. (1982). Antisprichwörter. Volume 1. Wiesbaden: Verlag für deutsche
Sprache.
Mieder, W. (2004). Proverbs: A Handbook. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press.
Mieder, W. (2012). “Think outside the box”: Origin, Nature, and Meaning of Modern
Anglo-American Proverbs. Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb
Scholarship 29, 137-196.
Mieder, W. & Kingsbury S. A. (1994). A Dictionary of Wellerisms. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Norrick, N. R. (1991). “One is none”: Remarks of Repetition in Proverbs. Proverbium:
Yearbook of International Proverb Scholarship 8, 121-128.
Osoba, G. A. (2005). Words of Elders, Words of Wisdom: A Thematic and Stylistic
Study of Some Yoruba Proverbs. Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb
Scholarship 22, 273-287.
Paczolay, G. (1997). European Proverbs: In 55 Languages, with Equivalents in Arabic,
Persian, Sanskrit, Chinese and Japanese. Veszprém: Veszprémi Nyomda.
Russo, J. (1983). The Poetics of The Ancient Greek Proverb. Journal of Folklore
Research (Special Dual Theme Issue: Verbal Folklore of Ancient Greece and French
Studies in Oral Literature) 20/2-3, 121-130.
Rothstein, R. A. (1968). The Poetics of Proverbs. In C. Gribble (Ed.). Studies Presented
to Professor Roman Jakobson by his Students (pp. 265-274). Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Slavica Publications.
Silverman-Weinreich, B. (1981). Towards a Structural Analysis of Yiddish Proverbs. In
W. Mieder & A. Dundes (eds.). The Wisdom of Many: Essays on the Proverb (pp.
65-85). New York: Garland.
Speake, J. (Ed.) (2003). The Oxford Dictionary of Proverbs. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Sorrentino, A. (1989). Folkloristic Structures of Proverbs in the “Tirukkural”
Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb Scholarship 6, 129-137.
Strauss, E. (1994). Dictionary of European Proverbs. 3 Vols. New York: Routledge.
Taylor, A. (1931). The Proverb. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press;
rpt. as The Proverb and an index to The Proverb. Hatboro, Pennsylvania: Folklore
Associates, 1962 (also: Copenhagen: Rosenkilde and Bagger, 1962).
Thompson, J. M. (1974). The Form and Function of Proverbs in Ancient Israel. The
Hague – Paris: Mouton.
Valdaeva, T. (2003). Anti-proverbs or New Proverbs: The Use of English Anti-proverbs
and their Stylistic Analysis. Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb
Scholarship 20, 379-390.
Wales, K. (2001). A Dictionary of Stylistics (Second Edition). Essex, London: Pearson
Education Limited.
Whiting, B. J. (1932). The Nature of the Proverb. Harvard University Studies and Notes
in Philology and Literature 14, 273-307. Also In J. Harris and W. Mieder. (1994).
When Evensong and Morrowsong Accord: Three Essays on the Proverb.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

39 “It stands to reason that the more markers a given saying possesses, the greater its
chances of being perceived as a proverb at initial hearing; and conversely, a genuinely
traditional but unmarked saying may well fail as a proverb the rst time it is heard,
merely because the listener does not recognise it as such.” (Arora 1984: 13)
40 Guershoon (1941) [Russian], Kilimenko (1946) [Russian], Mahgoub (1968) [Cairene
Arabic], Rothstein (1968) [aspects of Russian, French, Latin], Levin (1968) [Russian],
Thompson (1974) [Hebrew, Arabic], Silverman-Weinreich (1981) [Yiddish], Hasan-
Rokem (1982) [Hebrew], Russo (1983) [Ancient Greek], Arora (1984) [Spanish],
Sorrentino (1989) [Tamil], Tóthne Litovkina (1990) [Hungarian, Russian], Norrick
(1991) [English], Tóthné Litovkina and Csábi (2002) [American English], Jang (2002)
[Hausa], Valdaeva (2003) [English], Osoba (2005) [Yoruba], Agozzino (2007) [Welsh],
Ezejideaku and Okechukwu (2008) [Igbo], Fiedler (2010) [Esperanto], Grandl (2010)
[Ancient Egyptian], and Mac Coinnigh (2012; 2013) [Irish].
41 Recent corpus studies by Mac Coinnigh (2012) and Tóthné Litovkina (1990) have
shown this type of sentence to be the most prevalent in Russian, Hungarian, and
Irish-language proverbs. Whilst Wolfgang Mieder (2012: 144) has stated that most
modern Anglo-American proverbs are now straightforward indicative sentences also.
42 Young saint, old devil
43 I have combined the type X is better than Y and Better X than Y as, from a
structural perspective, the latter is a merely an emphatic form of the former base
sentence type.
44 Sincere thanks to Professor Arvo Krikmann who furnished me with a
comprehensive list of Estonian and Russian examples.
45 Mieder and Kingsbury (1994: 135).
46 Originally coined as Antisprichwort (anti-proverb).
47 See Mieder and Litovkina (2006: 17-26) for a discussion of the various types of
proverb transformations responsible for anti-proverbs.
48 “A rhetorical trait which is found is parallelism of structure with its almost
inevitable accompaniment, contrast.” (Taylor, 1931: 143)
49 “Ellipsis of the verb (usually accompanied by other stylistics features such as
parallelism or contrast) is another important grammatical clue (of proverbiality).”
(Silverman-Weinreich, 1981: 77)
50 Arora (1984: 28).
51 This is termed forward/right gapping and is the more common than backward/le
gapping.
52 These terms are borrowed from Robert Lowth, who rst introduced the concept of
parallelism to the eld of poetics in his translation of Isaiah (London, 1779).
53 See Arora (1984), Silverman-Weinreich (1981:75), and Mac Coinnigh (2012) for
treatments of emphatic word order.
54 Silverman-Weinreich (1981: 75).
55 It is found in international collections proverbs in languages including, Ancient
Greek, Arabic, Czech, English, French, German, Latin, Polish, Russian, Spanish,
Yiddish, yet statistical analyses such as Maghoub (1968: 37), Silverman-Weinreich
(1981: 76) and my own study of Irish proverbs (Mac Coinnigh 2012, 2013) show that it
is not amongst the primary proverbial markers.
56 For a broader examination of parataxis in xed expressions, proverbs and sayings
in English, including many productive examples, see Culicover (2010).
Vida Jesenšek
6 Pragmatic and Stylistic Aspects of
Proverbs

6.1 Introduction and Theoretical Framework

Proverbs possess diverse stylistic and pragmatic potential and thus
ful ll many di erent functions within a text. The aforementioned fact
can be accessed in relevant works on the topics of stylistics and
pragmatics as well as in various publications from the eld of
phraseology and paremiology.
Traditional stylistics57 observes phraseology in general, including
proverbs, particularly with regard to elocutio, or in other words, with
regard to the manner of their objective-and-situation-related linguistic
interpretation. In this connection, stylistics focuses predominantly on
the normative linguistic approach. Traditional stylistics is a theory
about “good” style, therefore it focuses on qualities of style such as
correctness, clearness, appropriateness and conciseness. It also
discusses the choice and e ects of individual linguistic or lexical
devices respectively, which act as stylistic instruments or stylistic
elements to which proverbs are assigned as well. In traditional
stylistics we proceed from the premise of a language system and
assume that the system o ers stylistically relevant lexical (and
grammatical) verbalization possibilities with inherent style-forming
potential. The essence of a stylistic device emanates from its
standardized deviation from natural language use. Stylistic devices are
linked to various e ects (in uencing attention, meeting aesthetic
standards – ornatus as a means of adorning and ennobling the pattern
of communication, diversity of expressions, exempli cation etc.).
The functions of lexical stylistic devices mainly emanate from their
connotations. In this regard, we speak about stylistic markedness or
stylistic labeling (with regard to a speci c level of style or register), and
about stylistic coloring in terms of function and semantic expressivity
(i.a. Sowinski, 1991; Sandig, 1986; Fleicher & Michel & Starke, 1993).
Lexicography in particular distinguishes between the following types
of register: Literary, neutral, colloquial, slang and vulgar, which are
assigned as labels to lexical items based on their characteristics.
Lexicography also distinguishes between the following types of
semantically-expressive stylistic coloring: facetious, euphemistic,
pejorative, crude etc. (Sowinski, 1991: 129). For example, the proverb
Solang der Arsch in die Hosen passt, wird keine Arbeit angefasst [ww: As
long as the pants t the ass, laziness shall cause no distress] featured
in the Duden 11 (2013) dictionary, is marked as crude, while the
proverb Wer nie sein Brot im Bette aß, weiß nicht, wie Krümmel piken
[ww: Whoever has never eaten their bread in bed, does not know how
crumbs prick] is marked as colloquial.
The modern discipline of linguistic stylistics58 on the other hand
proceeds from the premise of a di erent approach towards
understanding the notion of style and aims at “complete stylistic
analysis of a speci c text” in communicative contexts, based on the
proposition that “each statement can be ascribed its respective style”
and that style represents both language use and text production
(Sandig, 2006: 2). “Style is the HOW – it represents the signi cant
function-and-situation-related variation of language use” (ib.: 1).
Stylistics of such kind is pragmatically oriented, since style is regarded
as a manner of performing an act (Sandig, 1986 & 2006). It is founded
from a text-linguistic perspective since it holistically describes style as
a feature of texts, thus it does not address only the individual elements
of style. It rather addresses aspects such as plot structure, cohesion,
coherence, topic progression, situationality, materiality, culturality, as
well as other structural features of text. Furthermore, it is acquiring a
more and more distinctive interdisciplinary character by becoming
amenable to argumentation theory, persuasion research, and
discourse analysis (Bußmann, 2002: 652). The holistic pragmatic
action-function-and-e ect potential of proverbs is in the focus of
observation in such contexts, but can be described only if observed in
speci c textual constellations.
It can thus be ascertained that the traditional, conservative concept
of stylistics regards proverbs as stylistic devices, to which it assigns
individual characteristic stylistic attributes outside of textual use,
while modern stylistic theories understand style as a functional-
pragmatic factor and focus on observing proverbs in complex textual-
situational contexts of use.
Similarly to modern, pragmatically-oriented stylistics, pragmatics
also proceeds from the premise that vocabulary elements of various
kinds, including proverbs, possess many textual functions. Although
Filatkina (2007: 134) states that pragmatics – as a scienti c sub- eld of
linguistics –shows “a lack of interest in phraseological problems” and
this “substantial void becomes apparent […], if it is compared to the
vast amount of attempts to explain grammatical and syntactical
phenomena with the assistance of pragmatics” (also Kindt, 2002), the
study of phraseology has taken the ndings of pragmatics into
consideration since the 1970s.59 For example, descriptive pragmatic
approaches can be observed when determining the scope of
phraseology. The most important approach in this regard is the
introduction of the class of pragmatic phrasemes or routine formulae,
which can only be described with pragmatic categories (greeting
phrases, congratulatory phrases, and other). Proverbs also belong to
the aforementioned class (Harnisch, 1995; Lüger, 1999), because their
functionality can only be identi ed and described in detail in textual
and discourse contexts. Coulmas (1981) includes proverbs in his
deliberations on the “pragmatic foundation of idiomatics” as well. He
justi es his approach by stating that proverbs have the capacity to
constitute speech acts (see Nahberger, 2002).
From a historical point of view, proverbs have ful lled various
functions, “ranging from instructions within the con nes of monastic
education, quick-witted responses in accordance with the rules of
conversation at a royal court, all the way to comments emanating from
the humanist intellectual discourse regarding the experiential content
of the proverb” (Eikelmann, 2002: 95; quoted from Filatkina, 2007:
151).60 Presently, we are speaking about the social function of proverbs
(termed by Grzybek, 1984), since they are “regarded as socially
accepted formulations of convictions, values, and norms particular to
a speci c culture and era” (Burger, 2010: 107). In concrete
communicative situations, they can function as expressions of speech
acts such as warning, persuasion, argument, con rmation, comfort,
appeasement, conviction, admonition, reprimand, assessment,
characterization, explanation, description, justi cation, or
summarization (Röhrich & Mieder, 1977). In such cases, we speak
about the contextual (pragmatic) function of proverbs. The
relationships between both functions is to be observed as a reciprocal
relationship, because “for example, a proverb can support an
argument (= contextual function) only if the speaker and the recipient
understand it as a formulation of a general rule (= social function)”
(Burger, 2010: 108). A few contextual examples of the usage of
proverbs use shall illustrate the aforementioned. The proverbs
featured in examples (1) and (2) are explicitly expressing values and
norms that are part of the socio-cultural convention, while the proverb
featured in example (3) is used as a means for verbalizing advice.
(1) Ich bin schon lange alleinerziehend und frage mich, ob ich vielleicht
in manchen Dingen zu streng war. Erst die Arbeit und dann das
Vergnügen [ee: Business before pleasure], so bin ich erzogen worden.
(SprichWort, 2010)
(2) Lügen haben kurze Beine [ee: Lies have short legs] ... so haben es
die meisten schon in der Kindheit gelernt. Es lohnt sich nicht zu lügen,
mit Lügen schadet man sich und andern. (SprichWort, 2010)
(3) „Sie sollten nicht mit zu viel Ehrgeiz an die Sache herangehen“, riet
Jung den etwa 100 Zuhörern zu Beginn. Eile mit Weile [ee: Haste makes
waste] sei vielmehr das Motto. Bevor der Anfänger oder Wiedereinsteiger
überhaupt mit dem Sport beginne, sei erst einmal ein Gesundheitscheck
fällig. (SprichWort, 2010)

The pragmatic theory of action61 represents an important step within

the scope of pragmatic or holistic stylistic observation of proverbs
respectively (Kühn, 1987; Čermák, 1998; Lüger, 1999). Based on this
premise, it is possible to consequently, systematically, methodically
and methodologically observe their illocutionary62 und
perlocutionary63 potential.
 For all functions of proverbs can be applied that (1) they can be
identi ed only in speci c contexts; (2) a proverb can, in principle, be
assigned various functions (polyfunctionality); and (3) a speci cally
and intentionally applied proverb can ful ll many functions at the
same time (functional cluster). Thus, an important realization is
implied that proverbs cannot be attributed any functions per se
without being inserted in a speci c context. The functions of proverbs
can only be identi ed through a context-and-situation-based
interpretative analysis.
Lüger (1999) presents a fundamental functional-pragmatic study on
German proverbs. However, part from this volume, the pragmatic
potential of proverbs is prevailingly treated separately in works
focusing on types of texts such as works on language use in political
discourse (i. a. Koller, 1977; Elspaß, 1998), in advertising (i.a. Hemmi,
1994), in literary and journalistic texts (i.a. Lüger, 1989 &1999; Racette,
1997; Eikelmann, 1999; Nöcker & Rüther, 2002; Preußer, 2004;
Umurova, 2005; Lewandovska, 2008; Ptashnyk, 2009), or in works on
verbal communication (Nahberger, 2004). Based on previous ndings
it can be generally assessed that proverbs can be speci cally and
intentionally used in a functional-stylistic manner, which can bring
forward a huge spectrum of stylistic-pragmatic e ects. One can
observe the di erences regarding the text-type-related use of proverbs,
namely their polyfunctional character is more distinctive in literary
texts, as well as other kinds of opinion-based, persuasive types of text
(journalistic commentaries, advertising texts). This is connected with
the simultaneous activation of the literal and idiomatic way of reading
a proverb (Burger, 2010).
To summarize: A consensus is in place that an analysis and
interpretation of the stylistic-pragmatic functionality of proverbs is
possible only in a context, that is on the basis of concrete texts. Since
the following considerations are largely based on pragmatically
oriented and text-linguistically in uenced stylistics, it has to
emphasized at the very beginning that both studies – the study of
stylistics as well as the study of pragmatics – are di cult to separate
clearly, therefore on several places there will be certain instances of
overlapping64.
 The following introductory lead is of methodical-methodological
nature. The identi cation and evaluation of stylistic-pragmatic
characteristics and functions of proverbs is substantially subject to
interpretation. The style-related intentions of each author and the
reader-speci c stylistic e ects can namely be deduced only by
assessing individual situations and by analytically observing
individual textual statements in communicative contexts based on our
linguistic and stylistic competence (Sandig, 2006: 29). Consequently,
the following part will feature a discussion on the functional stylistic
and i.e. pragmatic potential of proverbs, more precisely what proverbs
can cause and achieve, and not what proverbs actually cause and
achieve, due to the fact that it is di cult to assess the e ects
empirically, and in the scope of the present paper even impossible.
The following chapters will present an overview of the stylistic and
pragmatic aspects of proverbs from two perspectives. Based on the
perspective of traditional stylistics, section 2 discusses the
(supposedly) inherent stylistic features that substantiate the speci c
stylistic-pragmatic e ect potential of proverbs. In section 3, proverbs
are described from the perspective of a holistic, functional-pragmatic
perception of style, whereas it is their communicative- discourse
potential that will be put under discussion. Section 4 provides an
outlook on the possibilities for future research. The empirical basis for
the following considerations consists of mainly German proverbs,65 in
this case the presentation predominantly leans on contemporary
German linguistic proverb-related ndings.

6.2 Stylistic of Proverbs

As it has already been stated, the traditional stylistic considers
proverbs as lexical stylistic devices, or elements of vocabulary that
have a considerable stylistic potential (see Koller, 1977; Kühn, 1987 &
1994; Sowinski, 1991; Fleicher & Michel & Starke, 1993; Dietz, 1999;
Filatkina, 2007; Sandig, 1986 & 2007; Wirrer, 2007; Burger, 2010). It
assigns characteristic stylistic properties to proverbs, aside of their
usage in the text, according to which they can also assist in
constructing the style of a text. These properties are particularly visible
when it comes to the usage of slightly modi ed proverbs that represent
a deviance from the expected and conventional due to which their
stylistic markedness rises. The stylistic features include properties like
rhetorical gures, belonging to stylistic levels and stylistic colouring,
together with the question of their degree of expressivity. The
following chapters are going to shortly elaborate on certain aspects
mentioned here.

6.2.1 Proverbs and Rhetorical Devices

If we consider the terminology of the classical rhetoric, we can state
that proverbs account to the Ornatus (ornament) of the speech, as they
use their properties as rhetorical gures. It means that their
communicative potential is founded in the rst place in their rhetorical
form. (Sandig, 2007: 161). In the German and Slovenian proverbial lore
we can therefore observe di erent phonetic-prosodic, syntactic and
semantic gures, as will be shown in the examples below:
a) Phonetical-prosodical gures:
Rhyme in di erent variations (internal rhyme, end rhyme, alliteration)
Eile mit Weile. (German) [ee: Haste makes waste]
Borgen macht Sorgen. (German) [ee: Better buy than borrow]
Ohne Fleiß kein Preis. (German) [ee: No pain, no gain]
Mit Geduld und Spucke fängt man jede Mucke. (German) [ee: So ly,
so ly, catchee monkey]
Kindermund tut Wahrheit kund. (German) [ee: Children and fools tell
the truth]
Brez dela ni jela. (Slovenian) [ee: No pain, no gain]
Gliha vkup štriha. (Slovenian) [ee: Birds of a feather ock together]
Probieren geht über studieren. (German) [ee: The proof of the pudding
is in the eating]
Jedem Tierchen sein Pläsierchen. (German) [ee: Di erent strokes for
di erent folks]
Rhytmical pattern
Was du heute kannst besorgen, das verschiebe nicht auf morgen.
(German) [ee: Never put o until tomorrow what you can do today]
Morgen, morgen, nur nicht heute, sagen alle faulen Leute. (German) [ee:
Never put o until tomorrow what you can do today]
Kjer se prepirata dva, tretji dobiček ima. (German) [ee: When two
people quarrel, the third one rejoices]
b) Syntactic gures:
Figures of addition (repetition, accumulation): anaphora, epiphora,
anadiplosis, kyklos, tautology
– anaphora, repetition of a word at the beginning od the following
part of the sentence
Andere Länder, andere Sitten. (German) [ee: When in Rome, do as the
Romans do]
Aus den Augen, aus dem Sinn. (German) [ee: Out of sight, out of mind]
– epiphora, repetition of a word at the end of the following part of
sentence
Geteiltes Leid ist halbes Leid. (German) [ee: A sorrow shared is a
sorrow halved]
Wer A sagt, muss auch B sagen. (German) [ee: In for a penny, in for a
pound]
Kdor se zadnji smeje, se najslajše smeje. (Slovenian) [ee: He laughs
best that laughs last]
Kdor hitro da, dvakrat da. (Slovenian) [ee: He who gives quickly gives
twice]
– anadiplosis, repetition of the last word of a sentence at the
beginning of the following sentence
Wer zuletzt lacht, lacht am besten. (German) [ee: He laughs best that
laughs last]
Wo Rauch ist, ist auch Feuer. (German) [ee: There’s no smoke without
re]
– kyklos, repetition of a word as a frame
Nikoli ne reci nikoli. (Slovenian) [ee: Never say never]
Pomagaj si sam in bog ti bo pomagal. (Slovenian) [ee: Help yourself
and God will help you]
– tautology, repeating the contents to enhance its e ect
Sicher ist sicher. (German) [ww: Sure is sure]
Versprochen ist versprochen. (German) [ee: A promise is a promise]
Figures of omitting: ellipsis
– ellipsis, omitting one or more of the grammatically necessary parts
of sentence
[Das] Ende [ist] gut, alles [ist] gut. (German) [ee: All’s well that ends
well]
Konec [je] dober, vse [je] dobro. (Slovenian) [ee: All’s well that ends
well]
Figures of positioning/repositioning: parallelism, oxymoron
– parallelism, sequence of identical syntactic structures
Kommt Zeit, kommt Rat. (German) [ee: Time will tell]
Vertrauen ist gut, Kontrolle ist besser. (German) [ee: Trust, but verify]
Dvakrat premisli, enkrat stori. (Slovenian) [ee: Think twice before you
act/speak]
– parallelisms, sequence of clauses with identical contents
Auge um Auge, Zahn um Zahn. (German) [ee: An eye for an eye and a
tooth for a tooth]
Oko za oko, zob za zob. (Slovenian) [ee: An eye for an eye and a tooth
for a tooth]
– parallelism, sequence elements with contrastive content
Kdor visoko leta, nizko pade. (Slovenian) [ee: Pride comes bevor a fall]
Was sich liebt, das neckt sich. (German) [ee: Teasing is a sign of
a ection]
– oxymoron, linking oppositions that usually exclude each other
Weniger ist mehr. (German) [ee: Less is more]
Eile mit Weile. (German) [ee: Haste makes waste]
Manj je več. (Slovenian) [ee: Less is more]
Hiti počasi. (Slovenian) [ee: Haste makes waste]
c) Semantic gures (tropes):
Comparison
Wie man sich bettet, so liegt man. (German) [ee: As you make your bed,
so you must lie on it]
Wie der Vater, so der Sohn. (German) [ee: As father, as son]
Kakor ti meni, tako jaz tebi. (Slovenian) [ee: Tit for tat]
Metaphor (with personi cation)
– empty bag standing for hungry people
Ein leerer Sack bleibt nicht stehen. (German) [ww: An empty bag
cannot stand upright]
Prazna vreča ne stoji pokonci. (Slovenian) [ww: An empty bag cannot
stand upright]
– dogs for people
Hunde, die bellen, beißen nicht. (German) [ee: Barking dogs never bite]
– still waters for people
Stille Wasser sind tief. (German) [ee: Still waters run deep]
Metonymy (with personi cation)
– pars pro toto, full stomach for people who are fed
Ein voller Bauch studiert nicht gern. (German) [ww: A fat belly, a lean
brain]
Poln želodec nerad študira. (Slovenian) [ww: A fat belly, a lean brain]
– pars pro toto, lots of hands for lots of people
Viele Hände, schnelles Ende. (German) [ww: Many hands make light
work]
Več rok več naredi. (Slovenian) [ww: Many hands make light work]
The rheotorical-stylisitc potential of such proverbs is very versatile and
reaches from exempli cation, explanation, speci cation, intensifying,
accentuation, and exaggeration to pointing, poeticizing, concealment
and heightening the images and expressivity (among others in
Sowinski, 1991: 130; Sandig, 2007: 161). The e ects that are
accomplished are actually the noticeable deviation from the expected
in certain contexts, i.e. from what is actually normal and stylistically
neutral in certain communicative contexts.
6.2.2 Proverbs and Stylistic Registers
According to Koller (1977: 54), the stylistic potential of proverbs exists
in their belonging to di erent stylistic registers. It is actually an
aesthetic quality, namely the “distinction that goes back to the three
styles of the ancient rhetoric […], literary, normal, and colloquial”
(Bußmann, 2002: 654; Sowinski, 1991: 127). The corresponding
registers are thus connected with the positive (literary-elevated) and
negative connotations (colloquial). The lexicography mentions here
the term stylistic labeling, and we can very o en read registers as
vulgar- rough- colloquial- simple/neutral – below neutral, whereas in
the new lexicography the starting point are the three “main registers”:
above neutral – neutral – below neutral (Sandig, 2006: 291). This is due
to the fact that the subregisters in the negative scope of connotation
(colloquial, slang) are very di cult to distinguish clearly (more
information about this can be read in the Chapter 2.3 of this paper),
but also because the lexicographically inherited stylistic labels are less
based on theory and, practically seen, not consistent and therefore
questionable (Burger, 2010: 195). The labeling of proverbs as colloquial
in older lexicography was introduced by Koller (1977: 59) and was
based on the widespread opinion that they occur in everyday
situations; therefore the label colloquial is to be understood as an
indicator of their occurrence in speech and not as a register. In written
communication proverbs function as colloquial expressions with
higher expressivity and clarity. Besides, labeling proverbs as colloquial
is o en connected with their folkloristic and gurative character.
We can conclude that Sandig (2006: 291) was right when he stated
the “there are no sharp boundaries” between the stylistic registers,
mostly because the variable individual experience and language or
stylistic competence, as well as the versatile usage of proverbs. It is
therefore appropriate to start from the fact that some expressions
isolated from the text are very di cult to assign to a stylistic register. It
is namely “due to the connection with elements of other language
levels and also with the versatile text features” (Sandig: 291). In other
words: if we attempt to obtain a comprehensible assigning to stylistic
registers, it is necessary to consider the complex factors of proverb
usage in context.

6.2.3 Proverbs and Stylistic Colouring

As it has already been mention, the stylistic potential of proverbs
implies also the so called stylistic colouring with their functional and
semantically-expressive nature (Sowinski, 1991: 129).
Under functional stylistic colouring, there are the connotations
understood, “which a word /here it is a proverb/ receives through its
way of creation and functional usage” (Sowinski, 1999: 129). Proverbs
receive their stylistic potential according to their usability/not usability
in certain communicative areas/text types (diatextual label), according
to their occurrence in oral and written communication (diamedial
label), their appearance in formal/informal situations (diaphasic
label), according to the usage restricted to a social group (diastratic
label). An example of diamedial label of a proverb would be colloquial
(see Koller’s quote above, 1977), which, unlike the unmarked neutral,
is considered to be limited in terms of usage to the spoken language. A
diaphasic label is formal/informal, according to the criteria of level of
formality in a communicative situation. Under diatextual marking
could be a poetic/literary/administrative understood for the preferred
proverb usage in literary, poetic and administrative types of texts. A
diastratic marking is e.g. familiar/child language and stands for the
restrictive usage within a social group (Hrisztova-Gotthardt, 2010: 123
according to Hausmann, 1989).
Under the term semantic-expressive style colouring there is a
“transposition of stylistic synonyms in the same context or /…/
expressions that exhibit additional connotations within a stylistic
register or more stylistic registers” understood (Sowinski, 1991: 129),
the lexicographic markings being humorous, euphemistic, pejorative,
ironic etc. Here also we can consider the problem of an isolated
assigning of certain markings to concrete proverbs, as discussed
above. Therefore it can happen that the same proverb is marked
di erently or several times in dictionaries, as is shown in the case of
the following proverb: Adel verp ichtet/noblesse oblige:
bildungssprachlich, o scherzha [the gentry indebts: formal, usually
humorous] (Duden Universalwörterbuch), o ironisch [usually ironic]
(Duden 11), no marking (Duden online).

6.2.4 Proverbs and the Feature of Expressivity

Proverbs (and similar strongly idiomatic non-sentence-like
phraseological units) are understood as particularly expressive,
strongly eidetic lexical means with a metaphoric foundation based on
Bally’s understanding of stylistics (1909), according to which
particular lexical means are predestined for conveying expressive
content. In contrast to non-idiomatic expressions, proverbs possess so-
called semantic added value in the sense of emotional-expressive
coloring (Schmale, 2010: 99 and works referenced there). The main
question in this regard is if the expressive potential is inherent to
proverbs and if proverbs are expressive a priori or if expressivity is just
a feature, which proverbs develop during actual textual usage in a
particular interaction situation only. The assumption of presupposed
expressivity emanates from the brie y outlined lexicographic practice,
in accordance with which individual expressions, which are isolated
from text, are, for example, labeled with style markers referring to an
emotional-expressive register. Drescher (1997) postulates a contextual
dependency of the expressive feature of lexical utterances
(phraseological in particular), according to which it can be realized,
identi ed, and analyzed only in concrete contexts. The following
example from a German talk show shall be used for the purpose of
illustration:
(4) F fragt einen jugendlichen Stra äter, ob er nachts gut schlä
F: dann sacht ma:n- ähm (n) schlechtes Gewissen is nich n gutes
Ruhekissen also- geht di:se Geschichte mit einem in die Nacht rein, […]
also träumst du davon (cited from Schmale, 2010: 107)
A precise analysis of the sequence organization does not reveal a high
degree of expressivity for the proverb Ein gutes Gewissen ist ein san es
Ruhekissen [ee: A clear conscience is a good pillow] – which was
intensely modi ed to express negation (the modi ed statement
roughly translated into English establishes the fact of a guilty
conscience not being a good pillow) – compared to the degree of
expressivity attributed to the subsequent non-phraseological
paraphrase (Schmale, 2010: 107). Thus, proverbs with gurative
metaphors cannot be regarded as more expressive than
nonphraseological expressions per se. The degree of expressivity
clearly does not depend on structure-based metaphorical vividness
alone (or primarily) (see paragraph 2.1), but it depends more on the
contextual, situational factors. A possible exception is represented by
proverbs, which topic are emotions and threefore yield expressivity.
For example:
(5) Liebe macht blind [ee: Love is blind], heißt es, und ohne in
Erklärungsnöte zu geraten, kann man behaupten: Im streng
medizinischen Sinne stimmt das nicht. Will man damit aber ausdrücken,
dass ein wenig der Blick für die Realität verloren geht, dann ist da etwas
dran. (SprichWort-Plattform)
Since the present paper proceeds from the argument that expressivity
represents a quality of proverbs that can be established only by
analytically observing respective context-dependent relations, it seems
appropriate to speak about “possible sequential expressivity”
(Schmale, 2010: 104). An important factor for the higher degree of
expressivity are the so called conversational processing or meta-
discursive activities (Schmale, 2010: 101), that accompany the usage of
individually selected idiomatic expressions and can be interpreted as
indicators of or hints to the degree of expressivity of a text segment or
an expression containing proverb:
(6) Der Spruch klingt banal, hat aber immer Gültigkeit: Zeit ist Geld [ee:
Time is money]. Deshalb helfen den Eisenbahn-Gesellscha en auch die
besten Image-Kampagnen nichts, wenn der Lkw trotz Staus,
Mautschranken und Zollstellen seine Fracht früher beim Kunden
abliefern kann.

Proverb-speci c modi ability,66 or, in other words, a deviation from

what is expected as the norm in concrete communicative situations
that triggers surprising e ects at the same time, contributes to
increases in the degree of expressivity as well. However, the various
e ects of modi cations strongly depend on the recipient’s previous
knowledge. The recipient has to be able to identify the usual form –
the form objectively regarded as “normal”, in order to understand
speci c modi cations – the creative, playful usage of language has to
be identi ed. In this regard, Ptashnyk (2009: 187) refers to an
“intriguing, expressive, and unexpected verbalization of thought”; for
example Liebe geht durch die Steuerprüfung [roughly adapted into
English as The way to a man’s heart is through tax auditing]; a
modi cation of the proverb Liebe geht durch den Magen [ee: The way to
a man’s heart is through his stomach], implying that whoever has an
aptitude for cooking, will not struggle to gain the a ection of others.
To summarize: Proverbs generally become stylistically relevant in
textual contexts and having speci c conventional rules of usage in the
background, whereas any deviation from a norm or from the usual,
anticipated usage in a communicative situation increases the stylistic
potential and triggers certain e ects at the listener/reader. For this
reason, the stylistics of proverbs shall henceforth also be observed
from the perspective of pragmatics.

6.3 Pragmatic Aspects of Proverbs

The term pragmatics commonly refers to the study of language use and
theory of speech acts in concrete communicative situations (Linke &
Nussbaumer & Portmann, 1996: 169). If a speech act is perceived as an
intention-driven and goal-oriented act of writing or talking, then the
central aspects of the so-called phraseopragmatics (Lüger, 1999), are
aspects of function “what is uttered with communicative intent, ful ls
a function, and has a purpose” (Lüger, 1999: 177). As indicated in the
introductory part of this paper, proverbs possess many textual
functions and can function as expressions of speech acts in concrete
communicative situations. We will therefore observe which functions
proverbs ful ll in speci c communicative situations, what is their
purpose, their speech-act potential, and what do they mean as
expressions in communication.

6.3.1 Argumentative Functions of Proverbs

Proverbs o en and e ectively contribute to the linguistic forming of
argumentative structures (Kindt, 2002: 278; Wirrer, 2007: 175). The
argumentative potential of proverbs has been known since the
classical period of rhetoric. Aristotle, for example, regarded the so-
called maxims, to which he assigned proverbs as well; as the most
important argumentative tools, and the argument itself as the most
important tool of persuasion. Proverbs are particularly relevant in
argumentative contexts because they represent generalizing
statements “about factual and normative regularities (in the broad
sense), which can act as argumentative warrants” (Kindt, 2002: 280).
They do not explain the concrete or the particular, but rather the
general and the abstract, and can therefore function as generalized
advice, instructions how to act, justi cations of actions, or
explanations of actions. Hence, they possess particular persuasive
power due to which they serve as convincing arguments in relevant
contexts (Wirrer, 2007: 175)67.
How are then proverbs utilized for the purposes of argumentation?
In the following, three aspects of the argumentative potential of
proverbs will be observed with reference to Wirrer (2007) and his
multi-perspective explanation of phraseology (and proverbs) with
regard to the notion of argumentative function.
a) The argumentative function of proverbs is based on their syntactic-
logical structure.
The hypothesis is based on the widespread opinion according to
which proverbs; as hinted above; are regarded as universal statements
or generalizing propositions respectively, which provide arguments,
i.e. justi cations and explanations for acts.68 In Wirrer (2007), the
potential claim of generalization is both speci ed and relativized. In
this regard there are proverbs that contain explicit universal
quanti ers69:
Aller Anfang ist schwer [ee: All beginnings are di cult] → It applies for all
beginnings that they are di cult;
Alle Wege führen nach Rom [ee: All roads lead to Rome] → It applies for all roads
that they lead to Rome; it applies for all di erent ways and manners that they can
lead to success or reaching the goal;
Jeder ist seines Glückes Schmied [ee: Every man is the architect of his own
fortune]→ It applies for every person that they are the architect of their own
fortune; it applies for everyone that they are able to actively and positively
in uence the outcome of certain situations and are therefore solely responsible
for what they achieve.

The following context-based example shall illustrate the

aforementioned:
(7) Jeder ist seines Glückes Schmied [ee: Every man is the architect of
his own fortune]; so könnte das Credo unserer Leistungsgesellscha
lauten. Und da ist auch viel Wahres dran. Wir haben die Verantwortung,
unser Leben zu gestalten. (OWID Sprichwörterbuch)
The validity of the content of the proverb implying that everyone is
“able to actively and positively in uence the outcome of certain
situations and are therefore solely responsible for what they achieve”
(see OWID Sprichwörterbuch) is valid n the individual level, while also
being transferred to the social level at the same time.
On the other hand, there are also proverbs without explicit
quanti ers where the potentially generalizing content becomes
recognizable only if the missing quanti ers are inferred70. This means
that the respective recipient complements them based on active
previous knowledge. This may possibly lead to di erent interpretation
of the text and the corresponding argument. For example:
Ausnahmen bestätigen die Regel [ee: The exceptions prove the rule] → It applies
for all/some/many exceptions that they prove the rule;
 Ende gut, alles gut [ee: All’s well that ends well] → If the end is well, then all is
well → It always/o en applies that: If the end is well, then all is well;
Wer rastet, der rostet [ee: He who rests, rusts] → It applies for all/some/many who
rest that they rust.

The following example shows that inferences can also emanate from
doubts in and negations of a generalized statement:
(8) Mit dem eigenständigen Tarifvertrag haben die Kontrahenten ihren
wichtigsten Kon iktpunkt o ensichtlich vom Tisch. [...] Ende gut, alles
gut also? Wohl kaum. Mit Ruhm bekleckert haben sich beide Seiten in
den vergangenen Monaten nämlich nicht gerade. (OWID
Sprichwörterbuch)
The possible doubt in the validity or the negation of the proverb-
speci c universal statement (→ It always/o en applies that: If the end
is well, then all is well) leads to the conclusion that the argumentative
function of proverbs, which is founded in the syntactic-logical
structure, is not stable or not absolutely given. It can only be carried
out and understood in and interpretative and concrete contextual
frame.
b) The argumentative function of proverbs is based on their occurrence
in syllogistic structures.
Aristotelian rhetoric regards proverbs as elements featured in
syllogisms71: they either verbalize one of the two premises
(propositions) or the conclusion.
In the following example, the proverb represents the second premise (
Ausnahmen bestätigen die Regel [ee: The exceptions prove the rule]),
from the generalizing interpretation of which (→ Alle Ausnahmen
bestätigen die Regel [All exceptions prove the rule]) a conclusion is
derived (→ in Spielhallen darf man rauchen [Smoking is allowed in
gambling establishments]):
(9) Grundsätzlich gilt das Rauchverbot in allen Gastronomiebetrieben
und ö entlichen Räumen, aber Ausnahmen bestätigen bekanntlich die
Regel: In niedersächsischen Spielhallen zum Beispiel darf geraucht
werden, [...] (OWID Sprichwörterbuch)
Contrary to the previous example, in the following example the
proverb functions as a conclusion (Was sich liebt, das neckt sich [ee:
Teasing is a sign of a ection]). Based on the generalizing interpretation
(→ Alle, die sich lieben, necken sich [All who love each other,
quarrel]), the conclusion is regarded as an inductive conclusion
derived from the rst (→ Christoph wird von Stefan beschimp
[Christoph is being berated by Stefan]) and the second premise (→
Christoph ist Stefans bester Freund [Christoph is Stefan’s best friend]):
(10) Und obendrein muß Christoph in Schach gehalten werden, denn der
beschimp ihn abwechselnd mit „Olte Hex!“ und „Kampfmaschine!“.
Also entspinnt sich zwischen den beiden ein Dialog, der genausogut aus
dem Büroalltag gegri en sein könnte: „Olte Hex!“, „Macker!“ [...] usw.
Christoph ist Stefans bester Freund und was sich liebt, das neckt sich
eben. (OWID Sprichwörterbuch)
c) The argumentative function of proverbs is based on the fact that
they verbalize topoi.
Proverbs also occur as linguistic realizations of topoi within
syllogistic argument structures. Topoi are understood as
“argumentative resources from which the individual making an
argument derives what best ts their purpose” (Ottmers 1996; quoting
Wirrer, 2007: 180). Proverbs are regarded as such argumentative means
because they are ideal for verbalizing one particular or several
di erent topoi72: the topos of time, cause, consequence, potentiality,
means, similarity etc.73 There are following dominant topoi that can be
deduced from the proverbs below: Kommt Zeit, kommt Rat [ee: Time
will tell] → time; Übung macht den Meister [ee: Practice makes perfect]
→ cause; Wer A sagt, muss auch B sagen [ee: In for a penny, in for a
pound]→ consequence; Wer wagt, gewinnt [ee: No guts, no glory]→
potentiality; Mit Speck fängt man Mäuse [ee: Good bait catches ne
sh]→ means; Der Apfel fällt nicht weit vom Stamm [ee: The apple
doesn’t fall far from the tree]→ similarity. Although, it can be
determined only a er observation of the textual usage which topos is
in the foreground. Let us compare the following two contextual
examples:
In the example (11) it is the topos of similarity in the foreground;
but the typical usage of the proverb Der Apfel fällt nicht weit vom
Stamm [The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree] does not convey
similarity alone. It additionally conveys genetically and otherwise
determined traits one shares with their ancestors74 – consequently, the
particular proverb also represents the topos of cause (Kindt, 2002:
280):
(11) Der Apfel fällt nicht weit vom Stamm: Jack Osbourne [...]be ndet
sich zum Drogen- und Alkoholentzug in einer Klinik. Schuld an der Sucht
sei unter anderem der Rummel um seine Person[...] Sein Vater Ozzy
Osbourne kämp seit Jahrzehnten gegen seine Drogen- und
Alkoholsucht. (OWID Sprichwörterbuch)
On the other hand, the topos central to the proverb Mit Speck fängt
man Mäuse [ee: Good bait catches ne sh], used in example (12), is the
topos of means, while the topoi of potentiality (→ die Aussicht mit den
Wählern zu sprechen [the prospect of speaking with the voters]) and
consequence (→ die Wähler dadurch für die aktuelle politische Idee zu
gewinnen [to convince the voters to embrace the topical political
agenda as a result]) can be identi ed as well. The lexis and the usage
of metaphors are bound to the proverb-speci c eidetic character
(Raclette, auf den Geschmack bringen [raclette, to whet one’s appetite])
and additionally enhance the argumentative function of the proverb:
(12) Mit Speck fängt man Mäuse. Isabella Stäheli will übers Raclette
mit den Wählern ins Gespräch kommen und sie so auf den grünen
Geschmack bringen. (OWID Sprichwörterbuch).
The argumentative potential of proverbs is substantiated on various
levels. It is substantiated in their syntactic-logical formal structure, in
their usage in syllogistic schemes, as well as in their usage as means
for verbalizing argumentative topoi. It appears though, as if the
convincing e ect of proverbs in argumentative contexts grounds
primarily on the category-speci c topos of authority (Wirrer, 1999: 431;
Ho mann, 2009: 11). Proverbs are perceived as so-called universally
applicable expressions of folk wisdom with a convincing e ect. Until
the period of enlightenment the authority of the argumentative
proverbial saying was highly regarded, whereas later these were
degraded as stereotypical sayings. Currently we speak about a shi in
the function of proverbs and consequently about the loss of their
argumentative function (Burger, 2010). As it has been shown, proverbs
are still being used as argumentative means. Referring to Ho mann
(2012), proverbs re ect important structures of argumentative thinking
in a speech community, which are still being used, as before. It has not
yet been established what their validity and their e ciency ground on.
It may be assumed that the category of authority does not play an
important role anymore and that the general psychological and social
principles, combined with their connectedness with the abstract
patterns of everyday argumentation, are what is central here.75
Based on the fact that proverbs are still being used both commonly
and frequently in argumentative contexts, it would be of advantage to
subject proverbs to additional research from the argumentation-
theoretical and pragmalinguistic point of view.

6.3.2 Proverbs as Items of Speech Acts in Non-

argumentative Contexts
As presented above, proverbs are frequently used to carry out speech
acts in argumentative contexts, but they are also used similarly
frequently to perform speech acts in non-argumentative contexts.
Pragmatics, or speech act theory (introduced by Austin and Searle) to
be more precise, distinguishes between representative (assertive),
direct, commissive, expressive and declarative speech acts, and
proceeds from the assumption that phrasemes (including proverbs)
also contribute to the textual realization of speech acts. Proverbs can
therefore function as assessments, demands, advice, warnings, threats
etc.
a) Proverbs as xpressions of representative (assertive) speech acts
Representative or assertive speech acts express the commitment of the
speaker/writer to stating the truth (to declare, to ascertain, to claim, to
report, to describe, to notify, to inform, to predict, to classify etc). The
proverb Alles hat ein Ende [ee: All good things must come to an end],
featured in example (13), represents an assertion, while the proverb
Übung macht den Meister [ee: Practice makes perfect], featured in
example (14), represents a prediction.
(13) „Jeder Sommertag könnte der letzte sein. Das denke ich jetzt ö er.
Alles hat ein Ende”, sagte er leise und schaute dabei wehmütig aus
dem Fenster. (Sprichwort-Plattform)
(14) Übung macht den Meister. Und regelmäßiges Training macht
Beine, Bauch und Popo top t für den Sommer. (Sprichwort-Plattform)
b) Proverbs as expressions of directive speech acts
Directive speech acts are used as demands directed to the
recipient/reader in order to convince them to take a particular action
or to refrain from taking a particular action (to demand, to assign, to
request, to order, to threaten, to advise, to allow, to advise, to forbid, to
force; as well as other imperative verbs). The proverb Den Mutigen
gehört die Welt [ee: Fortune favors the brave], featured in example (15),
is used to emphasize a demand, the proverb Man kann nicht auf zwei
Hochzeiten tanzen [ee: You cannot dance at two weddings], featured in
example (16), is used to express a restriction, the proverb Erst denken,
dann handeln [ee: Think before you act/speak], featured in example
(17), can be interpreted as advice, while the proverb Übung macht den
Meister [ee: Practice makes perfect], featured in example (18),
expresses encouragement.
(15) Keine Ausreden mehr, kein Herumreden mehr, Handeln ist gefragt.
Den Mutigen gehört die Welt, die Zauderer werden vergessen. Alle
schauen auf die ÖVP und erwarten etwas – das muß man in den
Parteizentralen doch erkennen. (SprichWort-Plattform)
(16) „Warum sollen wir in Europa nicht zwei Pässe haben“, fragt ein
Mann, der sich als „Türke mit deutschem Paß“ zu erkennen gibt, einen
älteren Herrn. „Man kann nicht auf zwei Hochzeiten tanzen“, sagt
der. (SprichWort-Plattform)
(17) „Erst denken, dann handeln“, raten die Dreieicher Grünen dem
Magistrat und da namentlich dem Sozialdezernenten und Ersten
Stadtrat Berthold Olschewsky (CDU). Es geht um die geplante
Erweiterung des Jugendzentrums in der Sprendlinger Benzstraße.
(SprichWort-Plattform)
(18) Nun können wir gemeinsam tanzen und können mit Sicherheit
behaupten, dass das Tanzen unser größtes Hobby ist. Also: Wenn es am
Anfang nicht klappt – nur nicht aufgeben – Übung macht den Meister
(SprichWort-Plattform)
c) Proverbs as expressions of commissive speech acts
Commissive speech acts commit a speaker to (voluntarily) do or refrain
from doing something in the future. A speaker uses commissives to
express intent (to promise, to assure, to threaten, to guarantee, to
comply etc.) Under the proverb Aufgeschoben ist nicht aufgehoben [ww:
Postponed is not abandoned], featured in example (19), a promise/as
reassurance can be implied, the proverb Man beißt nicht die Hand, die
einen füttert [ee: Do not bite the hand that feeds you], featured in
example (20), can be understood as a warning, the proverb Wer wagt,
der gewinnt [ee: No guts, no glory], featured in example (21), expresses
a guarantee, while the proverb Wer schön sein will, muss leiden [ee:
Beauty knows no pain], featured in example (22), can be interpreted as
acceptance of an otherwise unreasonable approach:
(19) Aufgeschoben ist nicht aufgehoben, das versichert [...] Bernd
Michelitsch, der Projektleiter des Hotels [...]. Zwar soll es nun doch erst
2009 erö net werden, an ein Aus für die Pläne ist aber nicht gedacht.
(SprichWort-Plattform)
(20) Ob dies als Drohung zu verstehen sei? Haider: „So geht man nicht
mit einem Partner um, der den anderen bis zur Stunde gut behandelt
hat. Man beißt nicht die Hand, die einen füttert.” (SprichWort-
Plattform)
(21) Alles was Sie anpacken gelingt. Waage: Wer wagt, der gewinnt.
Venus schenkt Ihnen viele zauberha e Stunden mit Ihrem Herzblatt.
(SprichWort-Plattform)
(22) Wer schön sein will, muss leiden. Das spürt jetzt auch Victoria
Beckham. Weil sie seit Jahren nur super-hohe High-Heels trägt, sind ihre
Füße total kaputt. (SprichWort-Plattform)
d) Proverbs as expressions of expressive speech acts
Finally, proverbs are also used to carry out expressive speech acts. The
speaker’s current state of emotion plays here a central role (to
apologize, to praise, to criticize, to congratulate, to complain, to
reprimand, to console). This way the proverb Irren ist menschlich [To err
is human], featured in example (23), expresses an apology, the proverb
Das Werk lobt den Meister [ww: The work praises the cra sman],
featured in example (24), expresses praise, the proverb Eigenlob stinkt
[ee: A man’s praise in his own mouth stinks], featured in example (25),
expresses criticism, while the proverb Wie man sich bettet, so liegt man
[ee: As you make your bed, so you must lie on it], featured in example
(26), expresses reproval.
(23) Irren ist menschlich, besagt ein Sprichwort. Das stimmt, jeder
macht einmal einen Fehler – das muss zu verzeihen sein. (SprichWort-
Plattform)
(24) Mit dem grossen Spielrasen, einem weiträumigen Hofplatz, den
Teer ächen, den grosszügigen Veloständern und dem geplanten
Kinderspielplatz ... wird auch das Umfeld der Mehrzweckhalle für Schule
und Dor evölkerung zu einer Attraktion werden. Das Werk lobt den
Meister. Die Schulgemeinde tritt als Bauherr auf. (SprichWort-
Plattform)
(25) Die Kanzlerin klop e sich zufrieden auf die Schulter: Deutschland
sei bei der Eindämmung der Finanzkrise unter Europas führenden
Nationen. Das Eigenlob stinkt gleich mehrfach. Zum einen investiert
etwa Frankreich gleich sechs Mal mehr Geld pro Jahr zur Ankurbelung
der Wirtscha : 26 statt zagha er sechs Milliarden Euro. Zum anderen
verdient das Maßnahmenpaket, das die Kanzlerin durch den Bundestag
brachte, kaum den Namen Konjunkturprogramm. (SprichWort-
Plattform)
(26) Wie man sich bettet, so liegt man bekanntlich. Von daher
verwundert es schon, mit welch ungeeignetem Werkzeug manche
Heimwerker sich ans Basteln, Schrauben und Renovieren machen.
(SprichWort-Plattform)
However, it is di cult to clearly identify and distinguish between the
various functions of proverbs in non-argumentative communicative
contexts. Due to the dominant interpretative methodological approach
towards observing the functions of proverb usage76, it is o en possible
to detect combinations of functions, among which one or more
functions can be prevalent.77 In this regard, the proverb Aller Anfang
ist schwer [ee: Every beginning is di cult], featured in example (27),
may express either an apology, praise and/or consolation (expressive
speech acts), while it can also be perceived as argumentative
justi cation at the same time.
(27) Es ist eine kni ige Arbeit, die Sorgfalt und eine leichte Hand
erfordert. Eine Menge Leisten landen im Müll. „Das macht gar nichts,
aller Anfang ist schwer“, tröstet Linke, der das Bemühen der Jungen
honoriert. (SprichWort-Plattform)
Therefore, it is valid to pose the question if certain types or groups of
proverbs may particularly be suitable for carrying out individual
speech acts, and if particular proverbs may be preferred as means for
performing individual speech acts, (as has been ascertained with
regard to the verbalization of topoi above). To my knowledge,
something similar has not been concluded yet, so that further research
on the topic of speech-act-related functions of proverbs remains still
an important desideratum for paremiological pragmatics.
6.3.3 Proverbs in Text-constituting and Text-
structuring Functions
Proverbs are considerably used as means of organising and structuring
the text (Burger, 1987; Lüger, 1999: 190; Rothkegel, 2000; Sandig, 1996;
2007: 168); Ptashnyk, 2009: 180). What is meant here is the facilitation
of coherence and cohesion, in other words, the construction of
thematically structured texts, that can be interpreted as
cohesionandcoherence-providing functions or text-forming potential
respectively (Dobrovol’skij, 1980; Sabban, 2007).78 The functional
potential of proverbs regarding text-organizing and text-structuring is
generally substantiated in their structural and semantic separability
and particularly in their relation to individual texts types (Sabban,
2007: 239).
The contribution of proverbs to text-organizing is o en related to
the manner in which they are positioned in a text. Even though
proverbs can essentially appear in any textual position, the usage of
proverbs is functional-pragmatically heterogeneous and stylistically
conspicuous (also due to their distinctive modi ability) when they are
featured in prominent parts of a text; such as the beginning or the end
of a text, the beginning or the end of a text segment, the title, the
subtitle, or even in the text (segment) frame. This particularly applies
to opinion-based journalistic texts. Therefore, the following examples
of proverb usage have been chosen from this particular type of text.
The following will be observed in this regard:
a) The proverb located at the beginning of a text (segment)
(anteposition according to Čermák, 1998);
The proverb determines the topic of a respective text and institutes the
general situational frame – the function of introducing the topic
(Lüger, 1999: 193; Ptashnyk, 2009: 183) or constituting it globally
(Sandig, 2007: 168).
(28) Scherben bringen Glück [ee: Shards bring happiness]- das gilt
auch in der Ukraine. Bei ihrer ersten Probe für den Eurovision Song
Contest hatte die ukrainische Sängerin Ruslana mit ihrem »Wild Dance«
letzte Woche die gläserne Bühne [...] in Istanbul zertrümmert; im Finale
am Samstagabend siegte sie auf der hastig erneuerten Glas äche
souverän. (SprichWort-Plattform)

Proverbs are o en prominently featured in the titles or the subtitles79

of mass media texts. Proverbs featured in headlines enable short,
concise and opinion-based (expressive) introductions of the topic and
thus perform an attention-directing pragmaticstylistic function, acting
as “retainers” (Rothkegel, 2000: 240). They are supposed to establish
contact with the reader, facilitate and possibly evoke their attention,
and provide an incentive for reading (all in the function to
emotionalise), while establishing coherence with the content of the
respective text at the same time.
(29) Kommt Zeit, kommt Rat [ee: Time will tell]
Europa scheitert nicht an einer 58-tägigen Urteils ndung. Karlsruhe ist
gut beraten, sich für die Urteile die notwendige Zeit zu nehmen.
(http://www.theeuropean.de)
The attention-directing e ects of proverbs, which are located at the
anteposition, o en emanate from occasional modi cations that are
adapted to the content of a text, as they are perceived as marked
stylistic deviations from the anticipated norm in particular situation-
related communicative contexts. In example (30), the lexical
expansion, along with the semantic alteration (the addition of the
lexeme nicht [not]) of the usual proverb Ende gut, alles gut [ee: All’s
well that ends well] to Ende gut, nicht alles gut [All’s not well that ends
well], classi es both the central topic of the text (di culties that have
become apparent a er the end of the festival) and its expressive value
(30) Berlinale in der Krise
Ende gut, nicht alles gut
Die Berlinale steckt in einer schweren Krise im Wettbewerb der
großen Festivals.
(http://www.tagesspiegel.de, 16. 2. 2013)
The prominent featuring of proverbs in titles or at the beginning of a
text is o en indicated trough additional typographical marking in the
form of altered typography or through the addition of quotation marks,
indicating the speaker’s/writer’s intention to in uence the
recipient’s/reader’s attention;
(31) »Unkraut vergeht nicht« [ee: Bad weeds grow tall]
Formel-1-Weltmeister Michael Schumacher hat sich beim ersten
ö entlichen Au ritt nach dem Horror-Crash in Monza gut erholt gezeigt
und freut sich auf den Großen Preis von Italien. (SprichWort-Plattform)
(32) »Einmal ist keinmal« [ee: Once does not count]- das mögen viele
denken, die zum ersten Mal zu illegalen Drogen wie Cannabis greifen.
Aber wie gefährlich solche Substanzen sind, unterschätzen gerade
Jugendliche, die erstmals mit Cannabis in Berührung kommen.
(SprichWort-Plattform)
When particular media and speci c contexts are considered
(newspaper articles, advertising, comics, cartoons, online media
communication), the usage of proverbs for the purpose of gaining
attention is o en supported by non-verbal means (images, artwork).
Such means are applied to illustrate particular contexts or, in other
words, to visualize the literal meaning of proverbs, which can enhance
the pragmatic e ects of proverb usage.80
In example (33), the proverb Der Krug geht so lange zum Brunnen, bis er
bricht [ee: The pitcher will to the well once too o en], located in the
anteposition, is understood as expressive emphasis of the central
statement of the text (the city wells are degenerating). The generalizing
content of the proverb (questionable action lead to failure) is projected
to a concrete situation and introduces what is to follow in the text
(description of unreasonable actions that facilitated the decaying of
the wells). The explicit repetition of an element of the proverb
(Brunnen, City-Brunnen [wells, city wells]) and of assorted components
of the proverb’s content (verkommen, defekt, trocken [degenerate, out
of order, dry]) in the proceeding text leads to semantic correlation on
the surface of text, facilitates a literal reading approach, establishes
cohesion and coherence:
(33) Brunnen in der Stadt verkommen
Stuttgart – Der Krug geht so lange zum Brunnen, bis er bricht.
Dieses Sprichwort gilt vor allem für die Sparpolitik bei den 250
städtischen Brunnen in Stuttgart. Für jedes Wasserspiel darf das
Tie auamt dieses Jahr nur noch 4515 Euro ausgeben. 2010 waren es
noch 7792 Euro – 3277 Euro mehr!
Resultat: Obwohl die Stadt kurz nach Ostern alle City-Brunnen
anstellen wollte, sind jetzt – vier Wochen später – viele von ihnen
noch defekt und trocken. Und in den Becken sammelt sich Dreck,
Unrat, Müll!
(http://www.bild.de, 28. 4. 2013)
In this regard, Ptashnyk (2009: 187) refers to the function of thematic
progression; the progression of the topic of a respective text, and in this
coherence-inducing frame rightfully includes the expressive,
argumentative, emphasizing, and accentuating stylistic-pragmatic
functions of (modi ed) phraseological expressions (including
proverbs). Lüger (1999: 190) refers to this process as sequence control
and emphasizes its text-structuring function: “Sentence-like
phraseological units /are/ preferably used for the purposes of
structuring […]: for initiating a sequence or the entire text, as well as
for the purpose of summarizing or concluding extended segments of
text respectively“ (Lüger 1999: 193).
b) The proverb located at the end of a text (segment) (postposition
according to Čermák, 1998);
The most important function of a proverb, which is located at the end
of a text or text segment respectively, is to summarize what has been
stated before (generalizing and/or commenting pointed emphasis).
(34) Bislang zahlen die Jüngeren, soweit sie arbeiten, für die Rentner. Im
Bonner Frühling wird davon geträumt, jeden seine Rente selbst ansparen
zu lassen, was ein großer Schritt von der Solidarität zur
Individualisierung wäre. Jeder ist seines Glückes Schmied [ee: Every
man is the architect of his own fortune]. (SprichWort-Plattform)
(35) Unter einem Polterabend versteht man den Brauch, einem
Brautpaar vor dessen Heirat durch das Zerbrechen von Porzellan ein
Gelingen der Ehe zu wünschen, nach dem Sprichwort: »Scherben
bringen Glück« [ee: Shards bring happiness]. (SprichWort-Plattform)
It is not only the speci c, stylistically conspicuous conclusion of a text
sequence understood here, through the gurative character of a
proverb emerges a certain expressivity of expression, and with it also
the “aesthetic or persuasive topping of a text”(Sandig, 1996: 290). The
usage of phraseological expressions (including proverbs) in such
manner is o en text-type-speci c. Phraseological units o en represent
the focal “point” – the punchline of a joke or an anecdote (Wotjak,
1994 & 1999).
c) Proverbs in the function of a text (sequence) framing elements
Proverbs are particularly used in opinion-based journalistic text types
(articles, squibs etc.) for the purpose of establishing the structural
frame of a respective text;
(36) „Wir sitzen alle in einem Boot“ [ee: We are all in the same boat]
ist eine Charakterisierung von Solidarität in der Erklärung der beiden
großen Kirchen zur sozialen und wirscha lichen Lage. Sie haben Recht.
Wir sitzen in einem Boot. Aber einige müssen rudern. (Die Zeit, 28. 3.
1997; example quoted from Ptashnyk, 2009: 203).
The pragmatic text-organizing or text-structuring function is based on
the repetitive occurring of a proverb in a contextual frame, in which
the main statement (the text or a text segment) can be interpreted as
expressive and argumentative.
To summarize: Proverbs are o en featured in prominent parts of
texts relevant to text structure: in the headline, at the beginning and at
the end of a text. This way they function as text-constituting and text-
structuring elements. The prominent featuring of proverbs in a text
hints at conspicuous usage and facilitates additional stylistic and
pragmatic e ects such as in uencing the attention of the
recipient/reader, an increase in the degree of expressivity, emotions
etc. Proverbs evidently contain features, which enable speci c usage of
text. Therefore, it would be of advantage to systematically observe and
to determine the relations between proverbs and texts from the
perspective of text linguistics. The correlation between types of
phraseological expressions and text types or, in other words, between
the features and functions of proverbs and text types, would be of
particular interest in this regard. In concrete terms, the question
hinted by Sabban (2007: 238) could thus be posed as follows: How can
proverbs be used based on their distinct properties to contribute to the
various dimensions of texts in an extraordinary, if not crucial manner?

6.4 Conclusion and Outlook

The observation of the stylistic and pragmatic aspects of proverbs
within the scope of this paper was conducted from the perspective of
traditional stylistics and from the perspective of the modern pragmatic
and text linguistic concept of style. We have seen that the traditional
narrow understanding of style considers proverbs as stylistic devices
and assigns them characteristic stylistic labels aside of the textual
usage. If we however understand style as a functional-pragmatic
textual dimension, it is essential to observe proverbs in complex
textual-situational contexts.
This concise presentation of stylistics and pragmatics of proverbs is
not thorough or absolute in terms of interpretation Particularly on the
grounds of the extraordinary diversity of proverbs, the present paper is
intended as an initial orientation and aspires to be considered as an
impulse for further research in this area. A requirement for further
studies is evident in many respects. With regard to the frequently
criticized lexicographic practice, it would be necessary to determine
the criteria and principles for the classi cation of labels for denoting
register and the type of style coloring. It would be interesting to
observe if particular types or groups of proverbs are particularly
suitable for realizing individual speech acts, and if particular proverbs
may be preferred as means for realizing speech acts to a larger degree
than others. Additionally, it would also be of advantage to ascertain if
all proverbs appear in argumentative contexts in equal measure, and if
certain proverbs are preferred in speci c situation-and-text-type-based
contexts with regard to their respective degree of argumentative force.
What is generally missing as well are theoretical methods for assigning
functions to proverbs in textual and discursive contexts based on the
usage of proverbs in concrete, context-related statements (see Kindt,
2002: 277). From an interlingual perspective, it would be necessary to
establish so-called functional interlinguistic paremiological
equivalence in order to consider stylistic-pragmatic parameters of
comparison to a greater extent when determining equivalence
relations. Proverbs contain signi cant stylistic-pragmatic potential,
which is why there is a demand for a holistic pragmalinguistic
approach towards studying the usage of proverbs. In conclusion, it is
to be emphasized that detailed studies of the stylistic-pragmatic
potential and functions of proverbs require interdisciplinary research,
which consider the stylistic-pragmatic perspective, the perspective of
text linguistics, the perspective of corpus linguistics, as well as the
perspective of contrastive phraseology/paremiology.
References
Bally, C. (1909). Traitè de stylistique française. Volume I. Paris: Klincksieck.
Burger, H. (1987). Funktionen von Phraseologismen in den Massenmedien. In H.
Burger & R. Zett (eds.), Aktuelle Probleme der Phraseologie (pp. 11-28). Bern:
Peter Lang.
Burger, H. (2010). Phraseologie. Eine Einführung am Beispiel des Deutschen. 4., neu
bearb. Aufl. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.
Bußmann, H. (ed.) (2002). Lexikon der Sprachwissenscha . 3., aktualisierte und erw.
Aufl. Stuttgart: Alfred Kröner Verlag.
Columas, F. (1981). Routine im Gespräch. Zur pragmatischen Fundierung der
Idiomatik. Wiesbaden: Akademische Verlagsgesellscha Athenaion.
Čermák, F. (1998). Usage of Proverbs. What the Czech National Corpus Shows. In P.
Ďurčo. (ed.), Europhras‘97: Phraseology and Paremiology. International
Symposium, September 2–5, 1997, Liptovský Ján (pp. 37–45). Bratislava:
Akademia PZ.
Dietz, H.-U. (1999). Rhetorik in der Phraseologie. Zur Bedeutung rhetorischer
Stilelemente im idiomatischen Wortschatz des Deutschen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Dobrovol’skij, D. (1980). Zur Dialektik des Begri s der textbildenden Potenzen von
Phraseologismen. Zeitschri für Phonetik, Sprachwissenscha und
Kommunikationsforschung 33, 690-700.
Drescher, M. (1997). Wie expressiv sind Phraseologismen? In A. Sabban (ed.),
Phraseme im Text. Beiträge aus romanistischer Sicht (pp. 67–95). Bochum:
Brockmeyer.
Duden Deutsches Universalwörterbuch (2006). Berlin: Bibliographisches Institut &
FA Brockhaus.
Duden online. Berlin: Bibliographisches Institut. http://www.duden.de/woerterbuch
(accessed November 29, 2013).
Duden Redewendungen (2013). Wörterbuch der deutschen Idiomatik. 4., neu bearb.
und aktual. Aufl. Berlin/Mannheim/Zürich: Dudenverlag.
Eikelmann, M. (2002). Zur historischen Pragmatik des Sprichworts im Mittelalter. In
D. Hartmann, & J. Wirrer (eds.), Wer A sägt, muss auch B sägen. Beiträge zur
Phraseologie und Sprich wortforschung aus dem Westfälischen Arbeitskreis (pp.
95–105). Baltmannsweiler: Verlag Hohengehren.
Elspaß, S. (1998). Phraseologie in der politischen Rede. Zur Verwendung von
Phraseologismen in ausgewählten Bundestagsdebatten. Opladen, Wiesbaden:
Westdeutscher Verlag.
Filatkina, N. (2007). Pragmatische Beschreibungsansätze. In H. Burger et al. (eds.),
Phraseologie. Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung. 1.
Halbband (pp. 132–158). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Fleischer, W., Michel, G. & Starke, G. (1993). Stilistik der deutschen
Gegenwartssprache. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Grzybek, P. (1984). Überlegungen zur semiotischen Sprichwortforschung. P. Grzybek
(ed.), Semiotische Studien zum Sprichwort. Simple Forms Reconsidered I. Special
 Issue of Kodikas Code – Ars Semiotica. An International Journal of Semiotics 3/4,
215-249
Harnisch, R. M. (1995). Proverbs and Pragmatics I: Prolegomena to a Comparison of
English and Hungarian. In K.Sornig et al. (eds.), Linguistics with a Human Face:
Festschri für Norman Denison zum 70. Geburstag (pp. 135–146). Graz: Grazer
Linguistische Monographien 10.
Hausmann, F. J. (1989). Die Markierung im allgemeinen einsprachigen Wörterbuch:
eine Übersicht. In F. J. Hausmann et al. (eds.), Wörterbücher. HSK. Teilbd. 1 (pp.
649–657). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Hemmi, A. (1994). Es muss wirksam werben, wer nicht will verderben. Kontrastive
Analyse von Phraseologismen in Anzeigen-, Radio- und Fernsehwerbung. Bern:
Peter Lang.
Ho mann, S. (2009). Wer A sagt, muss auch B sagen. Sprichwörter in der
Argumentation. In A. Raev, M. Wagner-Braun & M. Schambek (eds.), Kolloquium
2009. Beiträge Bamberger Nachwuchswissenscha lerinnen (pp. 9–23). Bamberg:
University of Bamberg Press.
Ho mann, S. (2012). Argumentative Strukturen in Sprichwörtern. Frankfurt am Main:
Peter Lang.
Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H. (2010). Vom gedruckten Sprichwörterbuch zur interaktiven
Sprichwortdatenbank. Überlegungen zum linguistischen und lexikographischen
Konzept mehrsprachiger Sprichwortdatenbanken. Bern: Peter Lang.
Janz, B. (1992). Dan nach sprichwortten pflegen die bauren gerne zu sprechen.
Überlegungen zur Rolle von Rechtssprichwörtern im spätmittelalterlichen
Gerichtsverfahren. Proverbium 9, 81–106.
Kindt, W. (2002). Kommunikative Funktionen von Sprichwörtern: Ein Beispiel für die
notwendige Verbindung von Phraseologie und Pragmatik. In E. Piirainen & I. T.
Piirainen (eds.), Phraseologie in Raum und Zeit. Akten der 10. Tagung des
Westfälischen Arbeitskreises „Phraseologie/Parömiologie (Münster 2001) (pp.
273–286). Baltmannsweiler: Verlag Hohengehren.
Koller, W. (1977). Redensarten. Linguistische Aspekte, Vorkommensanalysen,
Sprachspiel. Tübingen: de Gruyter.
Kühn, P. (1987). Phraseologismen: Sprachhandlungstheoretische Einordnung und
Beschreibung. In H. Burger & R. Zett (eds.), Aktuelle Probleme der Phraseologie.
Symposium 27. –29. 9. 1984 in Zürich (pp. 121–137). Bern: Peter Lang.
Kühn, P. (1994). Pragmatische Phraseologie: Konsequenzen für Phraseographie und
Phraseodidaktik. In B. Sandig (ed.), Europhras 92. Tendenzen der
Phraseologieforschung (pp. 411–428). Bochum: Brockmeyer.
Lewandowska, A. (2008). Sprichwort-Gebrauch heute. Ein interkulturell-kontrastiver
Vergleich von Sprichwörtern anhand polnischer und deutscher Printmedien.
Bern: Peter Lang.
Linke, A., Nussbaumer, M., & Portmann, P. R. (1996). Studienbuch Linguistik. 3. Aufl.
Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Lüger, H.-H. (1989). Stereotypie und Konversationsstil. Zu einigen Funktionen
satzwertiger Phraseologismen im literarischen Dialog. Deutsche Sprache 17, 2-
25.
Lüger, H.-H. (1999). Satzwertige Phraseologismen. Eine pragmalinguistische
Untersuchung. Wien: Praesens Verlag.
Nahberger, G. (2002). Ende gut, alles gut – Anmerkungen zu einer
sprechakttheoretischen Analyse von Sprichwörtern. In D. Hartmann & J. Wirrer
(eds.), Wer A sägt, muss auch B sägen. Beiträge zur Phraseologie und
Sprichwortforschung aus dem Westfälischen Arbeitskreis (pp. 255–272).
Baltmannsweiler: Verlag Hohengehren.
Nahberger, G. (2004). Eine Schwalbe macht noch keinen Sommer – eine empirische
Untersuchung zur Bedeutungsgenerierung und illokutionären Schlagkra von
Sprichwörtern. In C. Földes & J. Wirrer (eds.), Phraseologismen als Gegenstand
sprach- und kulturwissenscha licher Forschung. Akten der europäischen
Gesellscha für Phraseologie (Europhras) und des Westfälischen Arbeitskreises
„Phraseologie/Parömiologie“ (Loccum 2002) (pp. 309–324). Baltmannsweiler:
Verlag Hohengehren.
Nöcker, R. & Rüther, H. (2002). Es ist besser in Ehre zu sterben, als mit Schande zu
leben. Zur Verwendung situationsmodellierender Phraseologismen in
mittelhochdeutschen Romanen des 12. und 13. Jahrhunderts. In E. Piirainen & I. T.
Piirainen (eds.), Phraseologie in Raum und Zeit. Akten der 10. Tagung des
Westfälischen Arbeitskreises „Phraseologie/Parömiologie (Münster 2001) (pp.
101–112). Baltmannsweiler: Verlag Hohengehren.
Ottmers, C. (1996). Rhetorik. Stuttgart: Metzler Verlag.
OWID Sprichwörterbuch. www.sprichwort-plattform.org (accessed December 21,
2013).
Preußer, U. (2004). Phraseologismen in literarischen Texten – Zwischen Linguistik
und Literaturwissenscha . In C. Földes & J. Wirrer (eds.), Phraseologismen als
Gegenstand sprach- und kulturwissenscha licher Forschung. Akten der
europäischen Gesellscha für Phraseologie (Europhras) und des Westfälischen
Arbeitskreises „Phraseologie/Parömiologie“ (Loccum 2002) (pp. 267–284).
Hohengehren: Schneider.
Ptashnyk, S. (2009). Phraseologische Modi kationen und ihre Funktionen im Text.
Eine Studie am Beispiel der deutschsprachigen Presse. Hohengehren: Schneider
Verlag.
Racette, D. (1997). Wie das Färberpferd umd die Rolle: Sprichwörtliches in G.E.
Lessings Komödien. Proverbium 14, 303–346.
Röhrich, L., & Mieder, W. (1977). Sprichwort. Stuttgart: Metzler.
Rothkegel, A. (2000). Phraseme: Fenster zur Textkohärenz. In G. Gréciano (ed.),
Micro- et macrolexèmes et leur gement discursif: études de linguistique
comparée ançais/ allemand (pp. 233–246). Louvain: Editions Peeters.
Sabban, A. (2007). Textbildende Potenzen von Phrasemen. In H. Burger et al. (eds.),
Phraseologie. Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung. 1.
Halbband (pp. 237–253). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Sandig, B. (1986). Stilistik der deutschen Sprache. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Sandig, B. (2006). Textstilistik des Deutschen. 2., völlig neu bearb. u. erw. Aufl.
Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Sandig, B. (2007). Stilistische Funktionen von Phrasemen. In H. Burger et al. (eds.),
Phraseologie. Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung. 1.
Halbband (pp. 158–175). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Schmale, G. (2010). Ist ein idiomatischer Ausdruck immer expressiv? Korpusbasierte
und fragebogengestützte Beobachtungen zu einer verbreiteten Prämisse.
Yearbook of Phraseology 1, 97–124.
Searle, J. R. (1983). Sprechakte. Ein sprachphilosophischer Essay. Frankfurt am Main:
Suhrkamp.
Sowinski, B. (1991). Stilistik. Stiltheorien und Stilanalysen. Stuttgart: Metzler.
Sprichwort-Plattform. http://www.sprichwort-plattform.org/ (accessed November 30,
2013).
Umurova, G. (2005). Was der Volksmund in einem Sprichwort verpackt ...: moderne
Aspekte des Sprichwortgebrauchs anhand von Beispielen aus dem Internet. Bern:
Peter Lang.
Wirrer, J. (1999). Phraseologie und Rhetorik. In R. S. Baur, C. Chlosta & E. Piirainen
(eds.), Wörter in Bildern, Bilder in Wörtern. Beiträge zur Phraseologie und
Sprichwortforschung aus dem Westfällischen Arbeitskreis (pp. 421–455).
Hohengehren: Schneider.
Wirrer, J. (2007). Phraseme in der Argumentation. In H. Burger et al. (eds.),
Phraseologie. Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung. 1.
Halbband (pp. 175–187). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Wotjak, B. (1994). Fuchs, die hast du ganz gestohlen. Zu au älligen Vernetzungen
von Phraseologismen in der Textsorte Anekdote. In B. Sandig (ed.), EUROPHRAS
92. Tendenzen der Phraseologieforschung (pp. 619–650). Bochum: Brochmeyer.
Wotjak, B. (1999). Zu textuellen Vernetzungen von Phraseologismen am Beispiel von
Sprachwitzen. In: N. Fernandez-Bravo, I. Behr, & C. Rozier (eds.), Phraseme und
typisierte Rede (pp. 51–62). Tübingen: Stau enburg.

57 Traditional stylistics is founded in the rhetorical theory on connotative

(impressive) function and convincing (persuasive) e ect of language communication
58 It became established in the eld of German Linguistics particularly due to the
in uential works of Barbara Sandig.
59 Filaktina (2007) provides a comprehensive overview of descriptive pragmatic
approaches in the eld of phraseological research.
60 Proverbs in ancient legal texts reveal speci c functionality. Ancient Germanic
Law, which was passed on through oral tradition, is re ected and preserved in
written form through the use of proverbs – legal rules and principles are portrayed
and culture-historical contexts explained. De er zu der mul kumt, der melt e. [First
come, rst served](Filatkina, 2007: 151; Janz, 1992).
61 Speech acts are generally regarded as objective- or goal-oriented activities
respectively. Rather than objectively given occurrences, they represent occurrences
interpreted by the recipient. They are e ectively “constituted only a er they have
been interpreted and attributed to an occurrence by the recipient.” (Lüger, 1999: 144).
62 Illocution denotes the function of an utterance or the performative character of a
sentence respectively. In addition to their meaning, utterances also contain a speci c
illocutionary force, a property which enables them to function as advice, cautions,
recommendations etc.
63 Perlocutions are understood as the consequences of a speech act that follow the
completion of a speech act. Pragmatics states „dass man illokutionäre Akte vollzieht,
indem man sich äußert, und perlokutionäre Akte dadurch, dass man sich äußert”
[that one prerforms an illocutionary act by uttering a statement, while a
perlocutionary act or e ect respectively is the result of one having had uttered a
statement]
64 A substantiated explanation of the correlations between stylistics, pragmatics,
and text linguistics is, for example, presented by Ptashnyk (2009: 176).
65 The majority of the textual examples have been accessed from the German
paremiological database SprichWort (http://www.sprichwort-plattform.org/) and
from the German OWID Sprichwortwörterbuch (http://www.owid.de/) dictionary of
proverbs. Individual examples were also borrowed from project papers and
graduation theses of German Philology students from the Faculty of Arts of the
University of Maribor.
66 Ptashnyk (2009) presents a comprehensive analytical illustration of
phraseological modi cations and their respective textual functions.
67 According to Searle’s explanation of illocutionary acts (1983) argumentative
speech acts are classi ed as assertives (statements, claims etc.), with which the
speaker makes reference to the level of validity and reliability (primarily to the verity
or falsity) of an argument and thus performing a perlocutionary act (the speaker
achieves an e ect that goes beyond the illocutionary act). See paragraph 3.2.
68 Burger (2010: 118): “Since proverbs are generally universal statements, they are
suitable for supporting particular statements as inference rules in argumentative
contexts.” Although according to Burger, this particular function is a historical
function, which is not regarded as central in contemporary proverb usage.
69 A universal quanti er is considered as a basic predicate logic symbol that is
verbalized in German as alle (all) or jede/r (each, every) respectively.
70 Inference is an act or a process whereby textual information is complemented by
active previous knowledge in a manner that enables the recipient to draw
conclusions and derive meaning from the context.
71 Syllogism are logical arguments in which one proposition (the conclusion) is
inferred from two or more others (the (major or minor) premises) of a speci c form.
Each of the premises has one term in common with the conclusion in a major
premise, this is the major term (i.e., the predicate of the conclusion); in a minor
premise, it is the minor term (the subject) of the conclusion. The premises and the
conclusion are statements that are either true or false
72 Wirrer (2007: 181): “It can be generally assessed that [...] topoi and phrasemes
express varying degrees of a nity.”
73 Wirrer (2007; 181) provides an illustration of the topoi and the corresponding
phrasemes (incl. proverbs).
74 The examples of meaning and usage illustrated in the OWID Sprichwörterbuch
dictionary of proverbs: “Is said when children in the course of their lives develop the
same way as their ancestors, because there are certain characteristics or ways of
behaviour within a family that are being passed on to next generations or inherited.”
75 Ho mann (2012) presents a detailed study on the argumentative structures of
German proverbs.
76 Lüger (1999: VII): “Describing the aspects of function requires the application of
interpretative methods.”
77 In this regard, Kindt (2002: 284) refers to vast complexes of action, which facilitate
the argumentative and non-argumentative communicative functions of proverbs.
78 The term text-forming potential emanates from Soviet phraseological research
(Černyševa) and its function-oriented observation of phraseology in textual contexts.
79 However, in this regard Čermák (1998) speaks about non-prototypical usage of
proverbs.
80 Interesting examples concerning the relation between texts and images are
presented by Lüger (1999: 167; 170).
Anna Lewandowska, Gerd Antos In cooperation with
Dana Gläßer
7 Cognitive Apects of Proverbs81

7.1 Introduction
From the cognitive point of view proverbs are linguistically and
culturally coined frames. Especially in spoken language, these frames
work well for knowledge transfer due to their conciseness. Usually,
proverbs are linguistically easy to identify based on their stereotyped
character and consistence. Their economised form helps the speaker to
remember and recognise them easily. Therefore, proverbs can be
referred to as verbal stereotypes of knowledge which allow their users
to comment on, standardise and evaluate new situations with the help
of known social clichés. Against this background, we pose the
following questions: What makes proverbs stereotyped? Which
in uence has the linguistic form of proverbs on our ability to memorize
and duplicate them? Which role do proverbs play for social knowledge
transfer? Henceforth, we will discuss the above questions under a
cognitive point of view. We will concentrate on Lako and Johnson’s
Conceptual Metaphor Theory as frame to create a cognitivist
understanding of proverbs (Lako & Johnson, 1992).

7.2 Lako and Johnson’s Conceptual Metaphor Theory

The Conceptual Metaphor Theory by George Lako and philosopher
Mark Johnson is based on the assumption that “metaphor is pervasive
in everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action. Our
ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which we both think and act,
is fundamentally metaphorical in nature” (Lako & Johnson, 1992: 3).
 Around 1980, this thesis82 was revolutionary. It is premised on a
then new cognitivist approach which has been de ned more precisely
through the central term metaphorical concept (MC):
The concepts that govern our thought are not just matters of the intellect. They
also govern our everyday functioning, down to the most mundane details. Our
concepts structure what we perceive, how we get around in the world, and how
we relate to other people. Our conceptual system thus plays a central role in
de ning our everyday realities. If we are right in suggesting that our conceptual
system is largely metaphorical, then the way we think, what we experience, and
what we do every day is very much a matter of metaphor (Lako & Johnson, 1992:
3).

The new idea behind Lako and Johnson’s theory is that metaphors
are no longer seen as purely linguistic phenomena, but from the
cognitivist point of view as a basic rational instrument of orientation
and world interpretation:
In cognitive linguistics, the metaphor leaves its past as a mere
embellishment once and for all behind. She is no longer a stylistic
device to illustrate a circumstance visually, but she is part of the
knowledge of this circumstance as well as a part of its perspectival
evaluation. Simultaneously, in terms of language she is irreplaceable in
the communication of new thoughts or new semantic contents. She
serves as a link between the known and the unknown, the speci c and
the abstract. And she serves as a link between language and cognition
(Drewer, 2003: 10).83
The question remains of why metaphors work so well for both the
creation of frames and the transfer of knowledge. According to Lako
and Johnson the main function of a metaphor entails making abstract
and complex contexts linguistically and cognitively more
comprehensible using well-known images. Therefore, metaphors
systematically close the loop between a cognitively elusive eld of
experience, the so-called target domain of the metaphor, with a more
comprehensible second eld of experience, the source domain of the
metaphor, by projecting a part of the source knowledge onto the target
domain84. Please remark that instead of isolated components entire
bodies of knowledge/ frames are created. Hence, we call the feature of
cognitively creating abstract knowledge on the basis of speci c images
projection.

7.3 Metaphorical Concepts

In this section we would like to explain the central term of the proverb
and metaphorical concept (MC) Time is money using the trope about
time and money as an example. This concept is unique in each time
and culture, but has developed in our modern Western industrial
society in the rst place. Not only does it re ect an apparently quite
natural everyday experience in dealing with time and money in market-
based societies, but it also pre-structures our speech about this (new)
experience in multiple variations. The following chart illustrates this
correlation with (a slightly modi ed version of) Lako and Johnson’s
examples (1992):
Metaphorical Concept TIME IS MONEY
You’re wasting my time.
This gadget will save you hours.
I don’t have the time to give you.
How do you spend your time these days?
I’ve invested a lot of time in her.
I don’t have enough time to spare for that.
You’re running out of time.
You need to budget your time.
Is that worth your while?
Do you have much time le ?
He’s living on borrowed time.
You don’t use your time pro tably.
I lost a lot of time when I got sick.
Thank you for your time.
The relationships between the expressions listed above, the
metaphorical concept and the typical everyday activities within a
society can be distinguished regarding the following three levels:
Language: In phrasing the metaphorical concept we orientate
ourselves initially by the language use: Some expressions “…refer
speci cally to money (spend, invest, budget, pro tably, […]), others to
limited resources (use, […], have enough of, run out of), and still others
to valuable commodities (have, give, lose, thank you for)” (Lako &
Johnson, 1992: 9).
Cognition: „The metaphorical concepts TIME IS MONEY, TIME IS A
RESOURCE, and TIME IS A VALUABLE commodity form a single system
based on subcategorization, since in our society money is a limited
resource and limited resources are valuable commodities. These
subcategorization relationships characterize entailment relationships
between metaphors. TIME IS MONEY entails that TIME IS A LIMITED
RESOURCE, which entails that TIME IS A VALUABLE COMMODITY” (Lako &
Johnson, 1992: 9).
Actions: Not only do we talk in an exempli ed way nor do we have
only one respective metaphorical concept, but we act that way, too:
“telephone message units, hourly wages, hotel room rates, yearly
budgets, interest on loans, and paying your debt to society by ‘serving
time’. These practices […] have arisen in modern industrialized
societies and structure our basic everyday activities in a very profound
way” (Lako & Johnson, 1992: 8]).
According to Lako and Johnson the accomplishment of the
metaphor entails the ability to operate on all three levels (and not only
on the language level). Further on, metaphors can become more
intense in a reciprocally feed-backed way85.

7.4 Epistemological Essentials

The Conceptual Metaphor Theory by Lako and Johnson86 is based on
an epistemology which contradicts the objectivistic understanding of
thinking and meaning:
 Thought is […] not understood as a re ection of reality. In fact, the aspect of being
able to deal with the world as a human has priority, the optimal human function
in his environment. Both the human nature and his style of interaction with the
world coin his thoughts, which will now come across as embodied (Baldauf, 1997:
65).87

Johnson claims that the human body and what we experience with it is
the starting point of every theory of meaning. It is supposed to show
“how physical experiences, perceptions and well-rehearsed physical
procedures […] [coin] the meaning of language and things” (Liebert,
1992: 35). To put it simply, higher thinking is based on a pre-
linguistically or pre-conceptually experiencable embodiment in the end.
Thus, Johnson as well as Lako represents the “primacy of the
structure of the pre-conceptual embodied experience” (Liebert, 1992:
36). Lako and Johnson’s approach emanates from the priority of the
cognitive opposite to language. Therefore, the creation of meaning
goes one-way from the pre-linguistic experience, from images and
corporeality towards their manifestation in language:
[If] basic ideas emerge directly from non-conceptual, graphic or basic level
structures, they are determinated by both these pre-conceptual structures just
like the so deriving ideas. There is no way back from language or ideas to
experienceable structures (Liebert, 1992: 79).88

We will comment on this idea again subsequently.

7.5 Proverb Concepts (PCs)

Especially in the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth
centuries, proverbs were used to express the cultural identity of a
particular society (or nation, time, profession etc.). Like in fairytales
and folk songs, proverbs re ected the soul of a nation89.
From the cognitivist point of view, proverbs can be perceived as
stereotyped speech-forms that, like metaphors, are based on socially
e cient cognitive concepts!
 The underlying hypothesis is that many proverbs and metaphors
share a similar or even identical cognitive structure. Evidence for this
link between metaphors and proverbs can be found in their equivalent
imagery90. Aristotle’s Rhetoric already states that proverbs “…are
explicitly referred to as metaphors; even if it is not explicitly said that
metaphoricity is an obligatory feature of proverbs, or only optional
(though common)” (Grzybek, 1998: 133).91
The cognitive in uence of proverbs as well as metaphors rests upon
the pre-linguistic and pre-conceptual imagery although there is a
di erence between gurative (or metaphorical) and non- gurative
proverbs92. Especially in so-called motivated93 proverbs this
correlation is conveyed, such as No rose without a thorn. The message
of this rose-metaphor is easily understood: Even the most beautiful
things have (minor) disadvantages.94
In the extension of Lako and Johnson’s approach, we will now
take the manifold parallels between the cognitivist interpretation of
metaphors and proverbs into account in order to de ne metaphors and
the comprehension of proverbs. Let us look at the following analogies:
Imagery: Many paremiologists regard the imagery as the central
characteristic of proverbs.
Projection / Model function: Both metaphor and proverb have a
similar function in bridging new concepts with known ones: They are
linguistically stereotyped models for a standardizing organization of
new concepts (situational or other).
Form: Proverbs as well as metaphors have a concise form which is
based on holism.95
Taking these similarities into account, we need to accept proverb
concepts (PCs) in order to de ne proverbs (Lewandowska & Antos,
2001). That is to say the comprehension of proverbs is predicated on
certain cognitive concepts which can be compared to metaphorical
concepts (MC). Not only do these concepts pre-structure our thoughts
and actions to a great extent, but at the same time they put
linguistically catchy words into our mouth.
We will now look at the role of PCs in two proverb examples whose
lexical units are easily understood, but not their proverbial sense. The
 rst example is from Kenya: With the brother’s stick the brother is
beaten.96
It is almost impossible to catch the meaning of this proverb, which
is incredible because it contains a “pictorial message […] that [does]
not seem completely incomprehensible in the […] translation at rst
sight” (Lüger, 1999: 20). Despite its verbal image we need the
knowledge of the underlying proverb concept for a full
comprehension. This concept can be based on cultural background
knowledge among others. Here, the Kenyan proverb means as much as
You will be blamed for the actions of your relatives; for them you expose
yourself to the rage of others or have to accept other disadvantages.
The second example is from China and translates into English as
follows:
He is the grass on the wall.97
Like with metaphors or certain idioms, for instance, most people
would not be able to extrapolate the meaning of this proverb merely
from its wording. That is why we use it as a proverb here. This Chinese
proverb has the following meaning: It does not matter in which
direction the wind blows, the grass always bends in the same
direction98. The underlying concept can be described as: Wherever a
peer-group pressure emerges, the correct match will help to avoid it.

7.6 Structural Elements of Proverb Concepts

7.6.1 Linguistically Concise Form

We recognize proverbs as proverbs due to their linguistically concise
form (gestalt). This term derives from the eld of gestalt psychology.
Lako “introduces [it] as a profound and universal explanation model
into the linguistic discussion” (Liebert, 1992: 24). A form in the sense of
the gestalt psychology is characterized by two features, known as
structural qualities: transposability and supra-summativity.99
We will now expand on the rst feature transposability.
Transposability means independence of the material. If we sing or
whistle a melody, change the tune or play it with this or that
instrument up or down one octave, we will always recognize the same
melody, even if the stimulation pattern is electro-acoustically di erent
(Liebert, 1992: 16).100
In a transferred sense, it means: recognizing a melody is similar to
recognizing a linguistic stimulation pattern as a proverb (or rather
proverb-alike formula) if you are able to transpose the information of
the proverb form onto a speci c sense. In other words, proverbs are
perceived as proverbs independently of their material, e.g. their
individual language or particular variations. The same holds true for
the proverb concept which has to remain discernible despite its
speci c phrasing.

7.6.2 Syntactic-semantic Structure

In the eld of paremiology, it is o en pointed out that proverbs have
particular syntactic and semantic structural features. Typical syntactic
features are summarized under the term construction forms:
Construction forms of a proverb distinguish between two-word [phrases] (ger. ‘
Eigenlob stinkt’ (eng. equivalent He that praises himself spatters himself), lat.
‘varietas delectat’ (eng. Variety delights.), ger. ‘Bargeld lacht’ (eng. equivalent
Cash is king.)) and three-word phrases (ger. ‘Rost frisst Eisen.’ (eng. Rust
penetrates steel.), ger. ‘Arbeit macht frei’ (eng. Work brings freedom.). Imperative
forms o en meet the moral demand of the proverb (e.g. ger. ‘Hilf dir selbst, so hil
dir Gott’ (eng. Heaven helps those who help themselves), ger. ‘Verliebe dich o ,
verlobe dich selten, heirate nie!’ (eng. O en fall in love, seldom get engaged, never
marry!)) as do formulas like should, must and must not (e.g. ger. ‘Man soll den
Tag nicht vor dem Abend loben’ (eng. equivalent Do not count your chickens before
they are hatched.), ger. ‘Alte soll man ehren, Junge soll man lehren’ (eng. Honour
the old and teach the young.) (Röhrich & Mieder, 1977: 60).101
These construction forms are also called structural models102. Here are
two German examples:
Lieber den Spatz in der Hand, als die Taube auf dem Dach . [ee: A bird
in the hand is worth two in the bush.]
Lieber ein lebender Feigling als ein toter Held. [ee: Better a living dog
than a dead lion.]
The underlying structural model can be outlined in the following way:

LIEBER (BESSER) A ALS B103

This model is also productive in other languages:
Spanish: Más vale soltero andar que mal casar. [ee: Rather remain
single than marry badly.]
Dutch: Liever brood in de zak, dan een pluim op de hoed. [ww: A piece
of bread in the bag is better than a feather on your hat]
English: Rather get an upset stomach than let anything go back to the
innkeeper.
Italian: Meglio l’uovo oggi che la gallina domani. [ee: The egg today is
better than the chicken tomorrow.]
For the Spanish, Dutch, English and Italian examples the underlying
structural models are listed below:
Spanish: MÁS VALE A QUE B
Dutch: LIEVER A DAN B
English: RATHER (BETTER) A THAN B
Italian: MEGLIO A CHE B
In German, other proverbial structure models and variations include
the following:
A IST A (tautology): Dienst ist Dienst, Schnaps ist Schnapseng. [ww:
Duty is duty, liquor is liquor.]
A BLEIBT A: Doof bleibt doof, da helfen keine Pillen. [ww: Stupid
remains stupid, there is no cure.]
A IST B (identity phrase): Zeit ist Geld [ee: Time is money]
WIE MAN A, so auch B: Wie man sich bettet, so liegt man. [ee: As you
make your bed so you must lie in it]
A SCHÜTZT NICHT VOR B: Alter schützt vor Torheit nicht. [ee: There is no
fool like an old fool]
Again most of these models can be found in a variety of other
languages. Here are the corresponding examples:
A IS A: English: A friend in need is a friend indeed.
A IS B: English: Time is money.
A ER B: Icelandic: Hefndin er sæt. [ee: Vengeance is sweet]
TAL A, TAL B: Portuguese: Tal pai, tal lho. [ee: Like father, like son]
QUALE A, TALE B: Italian: Quale uccello, tale nido. [ww: Like the bird, so
is his nest]
A A NÃO EVITA B: Portuguese: A idade não evita estupidez. [ee: There is
no fool like an old fool]
Syntactic-semantically, these structural models are similar to the
cognitive concepts which have been hypothesized by Lako and
Johnson for their conceptual metaphors. The three di erent types of
conceptual metaphors are listed below:
Structural metaphor: ARGUMENT IS WAR
Orientational metaphor: HAPPY IS UP; SAD IS DOWN
Ontological metaphor: INFLATION IS AN ENTITY104
Last but not least, from the cognitive perspective transposability is a
key element to create PCs.

7.6.3 Holism
What is holism? Most de nitions emphasize two aspects: 1. We follow
the general principle: The whole is more than the sum of its parts! 2.
With only a few (culturally speci c) meaningful characteristics it is
possible to create a complete image or a certain meaning entirely, e.g.
smileys. The feature of transposability (see 6.1) is also based on this
kind of holism. In the following, we add a feature which is known as
supra-summativity in the sense of the gestalt psychology: “The whole
melody can sound mournful or merry, but not its individual sounds,
i.e. the characteristics of the whole form (here: the melody) are not the
characteristics of its parts (here: the individual sounds) and vice versa”
(Liebert, 1992: 17).105
Supra-summativity as a form of holism is known as idiomaticity
within the eld of phraseology. In paremiology, it is discussed in
connection with imagery. In so far, it is correct as metaphors can act as
images when seen as a whole. But: Not every single proverb must be
based on imagery, but on holism however! Johnson discusses supra-
summativity as image schemas: “Image schemas are neither speci c
pictures nor abstract propositions, but rather holistic forms with
simple internal structures and can be ‘applied’ to a good deal of
perceptions and events” (Drewer, 2003: 13).106
Holism that rests on supra-summativity: What is the consequence
for explaining proverb concepts? Let us look at an example by
Permjakov who attributes the variety of proverbs worldwide to
relatively few deep-structured image schemas (Permjakov 2000: 70).
He summarizes the following proverbs from di erent cultures into
group 20:

20 The sun warms the ower and the dunghill likewise (Tamil)
KA
20 You would not tell the same to the blacksmith as to your wife
KB (Rwanda)
20 The sun shines the same way for everybody (Tadjik)
LA
20 Even the sun does not shine the same way for everybody
LB (Karelian)

These four proverbs are summarized under one construction type only.
In his reasoned notation Permjakov (2000: 70) describes it the
following way: “If a certain thing has a relation to other things which
are connected in a certain way, the relation to one of them concurs
with the relation to the other one of them or not.107
 Immediately, it becomes clear that this abstract kind of
construction type is hardly memorable for speakers, not least because
Permjakov’s expressions cannot create mental images. Proverb
concepts, however, are constructed as models for new situations and
o er the agent not only isolated, but also supra-summatively
connected information. Plus: Cognitivist explanations of this kind have
the advantage that these four proverbs can be assigned to two
opposing PCs:
PC 1: EVERYBODY PROFITS FROM A GOOD THING
PC 2: SOMETHING GOOD DOES NOT STRIKE EVERYBODY

7.6.4 Structural Simplicity

Proverb concepts need to be simple in structure. By this means, they
can be used as models for new situations of use. Therefore, structural
simplicity is the basis for their downright proverbial ability to be used
in completely di erent (and also new) situations. Structural simplicity
comprises the following aspects:
Basic Level Concepts: Humans create their cognitive concepts on
an intermediate abstraction level: Hinting at results from Cognitive
Sciences, Lako 108 and Johnson point out that there are basic level
concepts “which do not automatically meet a logical categorization:As
an example, neither do we use the superior concept ANIMAL nor the
subordinate concept DACHSHUND, but the holistic basic level concept
Dog.”109 These basic level concepts on an intermediate abstraction
level are well-suited candidates for the creation of proverb concepts.
Perspectivation: Lako and Johnson point out that “the
metaphorical structuring of concepts is […] partial”110. That is to say in
creating a meaning metaphorical concepts, on the one hand, highlight
something, on the other hand, hide other aspects of the same reality111.
This results from the fact that we can only perceive the world from one
speci c perspective.
 Idealized Cognitive Models (ICM): Categorizing a situation, Proverb
concepts idealize inevitably. In other words, they not only have to
block out many aspects, but they add up, as well: “We do not nd
circles, rectangles or triangles in nature, not in the mathematical
sense. Still an idealized cognitive model of a circle makes sense to
orientate oneself within reality or for the construction of objects […]”
(Liebert, 1992: 52). Due to their nature, idealized PCs reduce and
simplify reality to a certain degree, but they rather construct it within
their function as thinking models (Liebert, 1992: 52).112

7.6.5 Cultural Frame

To fully understand proverb concepts it is necessary to consider the
cultural frame of proverbs (at a certain point of time). As an example, a
new proverb emerged in the Germany of the 1970s: Eine Frau ohne
Mann ist wie ein Fisch ohne Fahrrad. [A woman without a man is like a
sh without a bicycle.]
Non-German-speakers might ask themselves: Is it maybe about the
relationship between sh, women, bicycles and men? Only if you
consider the cultural and timetypical knowledge of the emancipation
movement of women, it is clear that the key word thematizes the
relationship of emancipated women and men; and the meaning of the
proverb becomes obvious. The appeal in this proverb lies in the
exempli cation of this relationship with the slightly absurd use of a
non-existing relationship between sh and bicycles; but only if you
know the correct cultural frame or have become accessible to it.113
When the knowledge of a cultural frame fades away, proverbs remain
identi able as proverbs, but they lose their signi cance as a proverb.
Let us explain a drastic example of an old proverb114:
Frauen und Teppiche wollen geklop werden. [ww: Women and carpets
want to be beaten]
In this fortunately no longer used proverb women are ranged with
tments quite naturally, not even taking the obvious gender
discrimination into account. What is highlighted gaudily with the word
want in the then men-ruled society, is the assumption that it belongs to
the functionality of these objects to be beaten. Behind this, we nd the
perspectivation of an assumed implicitness: In order that carpets and
women remain in tidy or good condition you have to treat them
accordingly. The seemingly stringent logic of the proverb lies behind
this analogization which must have been adopted in the PC at that
time. In this example, the as good and rightfully depicted male
violence is completely hidden.

7.6.6 Ability to Project

Like metaphors, proverbs function as mappings. Owing to this feature,
both similar proverbs in one language and proverbs from di erent
cultures can be grouped into a joint PC. Let us compare the following
proverbs:
English: Rome wasn’t built in a day115
Polish: Nie od razu Kraków zbudowano [ww: Cracow was not built
instantly]
German: Lübeck ist in einem Tage gesti et, aber nicht in einem Tage
gebaut116 [ww: Lübeck
is donated in one day, but not built in one]
German: Gut Ding will Weile haben [ww: Good things require time.; ee:
Rome wasn’t built in a day.]
Apparently, these proverbs express something similar or the same.
Therefore, we assume that all four proverbs are based on the same
concept: Success requires time.
PC
SUCCESS REQUIRES TIME
Proverbs
Rome wasn’t built in a day.
Nie od razu Kraków zbudowano.
Lübeck ist in einem Tage gesti et, aber nicht in einem Tage gebaut.
Gut Ding will Weile haben.
If we have a closer look, we notice distinct shades of meaning. Let us
start with the rst two examples. Nobody would claim seriously that
either Rome or Cracow have been built instantly. The implicature which
results from the contravention of maxims aims at the justi cation for a
long actionIn the last example the focus is on something di erent: As a
con rming statement it expresses that many sophisticated actions are
planned quickly indeed, but cannot be realized as quickly. The quality
of the long lasting action is highlighted here (a good job will take a
while). These di erences can be registered as follows:
The realization of a complex action takes a considerable time
SOPHISTICATED ACTIONS ARE QUICKLY DECIDED ABOUT, BUT TAKE TIME UNTIL
THEIR COMPLETION
SUCCESS REQUIRES TIME
What can we conclude for the mapping? In formulating Success needs
time, the PC has the strongest ability to project. Against this backdrop,
we understand why Lako and Johnson chose easy structures for their
metaphorical concepts.117 Proverb concepts create a joint cognitive
basis for the intercultural comprehension of proverbs in di erent
languages because of their ability to project. As a rule: the easier a PC
is in structure, the stronger is its projection-ability for the
(intercultural) comprehension of proverbs.

7.6.7 Ability to Implicate

Proverb concepts are complex cognitive concepts. Therefore, we have to
postulate an implicature-ability118 for them. It is necessary in order to
explain why we are able to instantly understand so-called anti-
proverbs” (Mieder, 1982). Let us look at the following example119: In an
advertisement the German proverb Andere Länder, andere Sitten120
[ww: Other countries, other customs] has been converted into Andere
Länder, gleiche Auskun [ww: Other countries, the same information].
Why can a client understand that despite the change? The key to this
new understanding of the anti-proverb (AP) is based on our ability to
implicate. We can reconstruct this ability to some extent in the
following way:

In the process of creating a meaning of proverb variations we make

reference to:
– common linguistic features with the proverb original
– the concept which might underlie the proverb original
– formulations which di er from the proverb original
– the meaning of the proverb original.
We have to draw conclusions which are very much alike Grice’s
implicatures. If you try to phrase these implicatures for the example
above the result could be as follows:
An expression is obviously used as slogan in an advertisement:
Andere Länder, gleiche Auskun .
– The slogan displays a similarity in its rst part (Andere Länder”),
but di ers considerably from the original in its second part (gleiche
Auskun ).
– This deviation shares the same dyadic structure like the original
proverb and does not seem to be a misquoted proverb, but a
 planned variation!
– As would seem natural, the starting point for the new concept of
the proverb variation is the proverb concept of the original PLAN ON
MEETING OTHER CUSTOMS IN FOREIGN TERRITORIES.
– The PC contradicts the wording of the slogan Andere Länder,
gleiche Auskun notably, even if only partially.
– As a consequence, there is an opposition between the meaning of
the original PC and the new meaning of the anti-proverb. Both are
in concessive proportion to each other: Although foreign countries
are ‘otherwise’ indeed, in this case you do not need to plan on
di erent customs.
Thereby, the new concept of the proverb variation arises: DESPITE THE
OTHERNESS OF OTHER COUNTRIES, EVERYTHING WILL REMAIN UNAFFECTED.
This kind of interlinked implicature is not only a model to extrapolate
from the proverb surface (what was said) to what was meant, but it
also shows that PCs do not necessarily have to be cognitively rmly
established. Instead they can be deduced or rather have to be deduced.
In this respect, the ability to implicate illustrates the dynamic aspect of
PCs.

7.7 The Relation of MCs to PCs

Comparing Lako and Johnson’s metaphorical concepts (MCs) with the
now speci ed proverb concepts (PCs), the question arises: what is the
relation between these two types of concepts? It seems acceptable to say
that metaphors and (metaphorical) proverbs are functionally
equivalent because both are based on the same type of (complex)
concepts. That is why the reception of Lako and Johnson’s
Conceptual Metaphor Theory plays an important role here.
Critically judged, it could be that not all proverbs are based on
metaphors. While “‘ gurative’ (actual) proverbs are visually motivated,
the motivation of ‘literal’ proverbs is direct”.121 Here language alone
has to carry out what a metaphor does in gurative (metaphorical)
proverbs. To be more precise: the concepts of literal (nonmetaphorical)
proverbs are produced through statements of propositions. Let us look
again at the above mentioned example. Stating that Rome, Lübeck and
Cracow have not been built in one day does not mean that we refer to a
(simple) picture like in, for instance: No rose without a thorn. The
proverb about Rome/Lübeck/Cracow makes reference to the metaphor
of building, but it is based on a wisdom which could be paraphrased in
the following way: The one who builds a house of a city, needs a lot of
time. Therefore, the statement that cities are not built in one day
cannot be viewed visually (i.e. pre-linguistically coined). On the
contrary, the cited proverb and a proposition form a frame together
which refers to an individual and cultural life experience. This kind of
propositionally coined proverb will indeed be able to illustrate a
circumstance or situation.122
Here, the direction of the foundation is decisive: It is a di erence if
a metaphor (e.g. the rose-metaphor) is the foundation of the proverb
concept or if the proverb illustrates a circumstance itself (e.g. Build a
city as the image for a time-consuming action). That is to say, literal
proverbs are able to visualize circumstances by all means. You could
also say these proverbs are able to paint a picture; but only with
language and not with the help of a pre-linguistic imagery.
Our last example will show that the sophisticated concept of a non-
metaphorical proverb can be based on language instead of an image:
Gut Ding will Weile haben [ww: Good things require time.] In contrast
to the proverbs about city planning, it is obvious that in this last
example nothing is painted any more, it does not even illustrate an
experience. Therefore, propositionally coined proverbs can express
something, independently of imagery.
Hence, we have to record against Lako and Johnson: The world
can be understood without any metaphors, solely through our
language! It does not, however, invalidate the signi cance of Lako
and Johnson’s use of metaphors. Many abstract things can indeed be
understood through metaphors. Taking this knowledge into account,
we receive a di erentiated view of the constitution of complex
concepts. For second-class non-metaphorical (or non- gurative)
proverbs it means that metaphorical concepts and proverb concepts of
literal proverbs di er according to their cognitive foundation!
 Interim conclusion: On the one hand, we have PCs which are
functionally equivalent to MCs, and on the other hand, we have to
postulate PCs which have circumstances and language as foundations.
We nd this not surprising. Theoretically speaking, the strict
separation above proves unsatisfying. This holds true not least
because traditional paremiology already points at the gradual nature
of the transition from abstract (literal) to metaphorical proverbs.123
Lüger (1992: 72 .) seizes on this di erentiation and extends it by
pointing out various levels of imagery. He emphasizes: “Imagery is no
feature which a priori belongs to the respective idioms in any case.”
The combination of verbal and non-verbal has to be considered as well
as valuations or contexts:
Imagery in sentential idioms has something […] to do with the e ectivity of texts,
the intended reaction of the audience or reader. It makes utterances ashier, or
even more attractive and helps to make them graspable and remembered more
easily, conditions permitting. (Lüger, 1999: 71).124

Nevertheless, imagery supports the attractive grasp of complex

circumstances, but it is no precondition for the linguistically founded
comprehension (like Lako and Johnson suggest with their Conceptual
Metaphor Theory).
This has theoretical consequences. Let us recall: In their approach,
Lako and Johnson assume that the cognitive is priorized over
language. The creation of meaning goes one-way from the pre-
linguistic experience, from images and corporeality towards their
manifestation in language. Liebert adds that basic ideas and all
consequently deriving ideas are determinated by pre-conceptual
structures and that the direction from language to experienceable
structures is irreversible (1992: 79).
Hence, according to Lako and Johnson there is no “determining
direction from language past cognition to perception” (Liebert, 1992:
77). As we have seen with nonmetaphorical proverbs they rest upon the
power of language instead of metaphors. Here, the determining
direction is reversed. Lako and Johnson’s exclusiveness of the
determining direction is therefore critized by Liebert (1992: 79) with
good reason: “We have to assume a correlation in which terms (as
cognitive basic models) are understood as linguistically xed in their
pre-linguistic experience. These terms form this experience due to
their linguistic xation.”125
Now we assume a two-way determination of cognition and language
in rather simple concepts, especially in proverbs which practically
cannot be understood without their cultural background. In the
following German examples, the required interplay between cognition,
language and culture are demonstrated:
Wer A sagt, muss auch B sagen. [ee: In for a penny, in for a pound]
Mitgefangen, mitgehangen [ee: Cling together, swing together]
In cognitive linguistics, the comprehension of both proverbs can be
ascribed to a pre-linguistic causality experience and express a cause-
e ect relationship. They also illustrate how this relationship is
expressed and di erentiated in language. In the rst example, a
(probably unpleasant) consequence of an action is pointed out
referring to the order of the alphabet as if painting them. This
illustration only works for people who are familiar with the European
alphabet. If you have not been socialised in our culture, it will prove
di cult to understand the second example as well. Here, in
connection with history (The prototypic punishment for felony is going
to the gallows!) a cause The one who follows… is linked to a bitter
consequence …will go to the gallows as well.
The bottom line is that: Both proverbs make reference to certain
pre-linguistic experiences, which is to say to the link between causes
and e ects. But how these experiences are expressed in the proverbs
depends on the cultural or historic conditions and their resulting
knowledge frames. We deal with a very typical mix ratio of pre-
linguistic and cultural-linguistic conception. What is the consequence
for the relationship between metaphorical concepts and proverb
concepts? Without negating the signi cance of Lako and Johnson’s
Conceptual Metaphor Theory, it has to be complemented in the
following way:
Not only can proverb concepts be created through imagery, but through language
as well! In contrast to Lako and Johnson, when we create proverb concepts the
determining direction has to be two-way: On the one hand, metaphors are
fundamental for our comprehension of proverbs. On the other hand, we create
PCs on the basis of the (propositionally coined) language. O en, these two
directions will correlate as well. If we pursue this path, the cognitivist approach
will have to be embedded in an overall theory which allows the creation of
concepts through “cognition” and “language”126.
References
Aristoteles v384 – v322 (1993). Rhetorik. München: Fink.
Auer, P. (1999). Sprachliche Interaktion. Eine Einführung anhand von 22 Klassikern.
Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Baldauf, C. (1997). Metapher und Kognition. Grundlagen einer neuen Theorie der
Alltagsmetapher. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Drewer, P. (2003). Die kognitive Metapher als Werkzeug des Denkens. Zur Rolle der
Analogie bei der Gewinnung und Vermittlung wissenscha licher Erkenntnisse.
Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Duden (2002a). Redewendungen. Wörterbuch der deutschen Idiomatik (Vol. 11).
Mannheim: Dudenverlag.
Duden (2002b). Zitate und Aussprüche (Vol. 12). Mannheim: Dudenverlag.
Feilke, H. (1994). Common sense – Kompetenz. Überlegungen zu einer Theorie des
“sympathischen” und „natürlichen“ Meinens und Verstehens. Frankfurt am Main:
Suhrkamp.
Feilke, H. (1996). Sprache als soziale Gestalt, Ausdruck, Prägung und die Ordnung
der sprachlichen Typik. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Grzybek, P. (1984). Überlegungen zur semiotischen Sprichwortforschung. In P.
Grzybek (Ed.), Semiotische Studien zum Sprichwort. Simple Forms Reconsidered I
(215-249). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Grzybek, Peter (1998). Prolegomena zur Bildha igkeit von Sprichwörtern. In A.
Hartmann & C. Veldhues (Eds.), Im Zeichen-Raum: Festschri für Karl
Eimermacher (133-152). Dortmund: Projekt Verlag.
Lako , G. & Johnson, M. (1992). Metaphors We Live By. Edition 9. Chicago: Univ. of
Chicago Press.
Lewandowska, A. & Antos, G. (2001). Sprichwörter, metaphorische Konzepte und
Alltagsrhetorik: Versuch einer kognitivistischen Begründung der
Sprichwortforschung. Proverbium. Yearbook of international Proverb Scholarship
18, 167-183.
Liebert, W.-A. (1992). Metaphernbereiche der deutschen Alltagssprache. Kognitive
Linguistik und die Perspektiven einer Kognitiven Lexikographie. Frankfurt am
Main: Peter Lang.
Lüger, H.-H. (1992). Sprachliche Routinen und Rituale. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Lüger, H.-H. (1999). Satzwertige Phraseologismen. Eine pragmalinguistische
Untersuchung. Wien: Edition Praesens.
Mieder, W. (1982). Antisprichwörter (Vol. 1). Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer.
Permjakov, G. L. (2000). Die Grammatik der sprichwörtlichen Weisheit.: Mit einer
Analyse allgemein bekannter deutscher Sprichwörter (Vol. 4). Baltmannsweiler:
Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.
Röhrich, L. & Mieder, W. (1977). Sprichwort. Stuttgart: Metzler.
Röhrich, L. (1994). Lexikon der sprichwörtlichen Redensarten (Band 1-5). Fourth
Edition. Freiburg/Basel/Wien: Herder.
Simrock, K. (Ed.) (1988). Die deutschen Sprichwörter gesammelt von Karl Simrock.
Einleitung von Wolfgang Mieder. Stuttgart: Reclam.

81 We would like to thank Dana Gläßer for her conscientious translation and
Wolfgang Mieder (Burlington, Vermont) for his critical review and suggestions.
82 Lako and Johnson’s Conceptual Metaphor Theory is revolutionary and non-
revolutionary at the same time, Liebert (1992: 12 ): On the one hand, the idea that
metaphors are primarily no longer seen as linguistical-rhetorical patterns, but rather
as cognitive concepts, has a ected the present discussion fundamentally. On the
other hand, the in uence of the American theory of cognition has been blinded out
(see the bibliography of Metaphors We Live By which contains merely 20 entries, out
of which three are by Lako himself!) as well as its widely ignored European
precursors.
83 Ger. original: “In der Kognitiven Linguistik lässt die Metapher ihre Vergangenheit
als bloßes Schmuckstück endgültig hinter sich. Sie ist nicht länger ein Stilmittel, um
einen Sachverhalt bildha zu veranschaulichen, sondern sie ist Teil des Wissens über
diesen Sachverhalt sowie Teil seiner perspektivischen Bewertung. Gleichzeitig ist sie
auf sprachlicher Ebene bei der Kommunikation neuer Gedanken bzw. neuer
semantischer Gehalte unersetzlich. Sie schlägt eine Brücke zwischen dem Bekannten
und dem Unbekannten, dem Konkreten und dem Abstrakten. Und sie schlägt eine
Brücke zwischen Sprache und Kognition.”
84 See the following example Time is Money: money is the easily comprehensible
source domain whereas time is the elusive target domain of this metaphor.
85 With this model it is possible to explain the opposite, i.e. the decrease of the
graphic quality: some metaphors fade because their corresponding actions no longer
exist, e.g. in German Ich fühle mich wie gerädert. [ee: I feel absolutely whacked.].The
German expression goes back to one of the most horrible kinds of execution: in the
past, a criminal was sentenced to have his bones or limbs broken by a wheel in order
to weave him onto the wheel’ – Röhrich, Lutz (1994). Lexikon der sprichwörtlichen
Redensarten (Band 4). Also see the items: sich wie gerädert fühlen which means to
feel exhausted through big e orts as well as wie zerschlagen fühlen [to feel knocked
up] (Röhrich, Lutz,1994: 1220).
86 Mark Johnson’s The body in the mind (1987) deserves a particular mention here;
Liebert (1992) and Baldauf (1997: 60).
87 Ger. original: “Denken wird (…) nicht als eine Spiegelung der Realität verstanden.
Im Vordergrund steht vielmehr der Aspekt des Zu Recht ndens des Menschen in der
Welt, die bestmögliche Funktion des Menschen in seinem Umfeld. Sowohl die
Bescha enheit des Menschen als auch die Art seiner Interaktion mit der Welt prägen
das Denken, welches folglich als körpergebunden (embodied) verstanden wird.“
88 Ger. original: “(… W)enn die Grundbegri e direkt aus nichtbegri ichen,
bildschematischen und Basisebenen-Strukturen emergieren, sind sie und damit
abgeleiteten Begri e von diesen beiden vorbegri ichen Strukturen determiniert. Es
gibt keinen Weg von der Sprache oder den Begri en zu Erfahrungsstrukturen
zurück.”
89 Röhrich & Mieder (1977: 70). In the polemic about Die Deutschen und Franzosen
nach dem Geist ihrer Sprachen und Spüchwörter [The Germans and the French in the
spirit of their languages and proverbs] by J. Venedey (1842) it says: “In language and
proverb does the German substance live…”. According to Venedey, we can draw
conclusions on the values rooted in a society from the rmly established sentences of
a language. German expressions like Freundes Stimme ist Gottes Stimme [The voice of
a friend is God’s voice] or Gleichgesinnt macht gute Freunde [Like-minded makes good
friends] point to the fact that friendship is something higher for the German and
displays his non-material need whereas in French a material interest clearly
dominates” (Lüger, 1999: 60).
90 Permjakov considers the pictorially motivated overall meaning as a necessary
criterion for actual proverbs, see also Grzybek (1984) or Lüger (1999: 68 .) for general
phraseology.
91 Ger. original: “(...) explizit als Beispiele von Metaphern bezeichnet; wenn auch
nicht explizit gesagt wird, ob Metaphorizität als obligatorisches oder lediglich
fakultatives (wenn auch häu ges) Charakteristikum von Sprichwörtern anzusehen
ist.”
92 Figurative proverbs are based on pictures and therefore are seen as true
(metaphorical) concepts. Example: No rose without a thorn. Non- gurative proverbs
are literal (non-metaphorical) proverbs which are generally understood word for
word. Example: To err is human. Taylor (1932) di erentiates between metaphorical
proverb and proverbial apothem, Barley separates proverb proper from maxim and
Permjakov distinguishes actual proverbs from popular aphorisms (Grzybek, 1998:
134).
93 Lüger (1999).
94 Duden 11: Redewendungen, 624.
95 Liebert (1992: 14). For more details – see 6.1 and 6.3.
96 Schlee (1991: 166), cited in Lüger (1999: 20).
97 Günthner (1994: 266), cited in Lüger (1999: 20).
98 The two proverb meanings are cited in Lüger (1999: 20). Interestingly, Lüger
additionally presents the German equivalent for further comprehension: sein
Mäntelchen nach dem Wind hängen [to turn one’s coat] or sein Fähnchen nach dem
Wind drehen [to jump on bandwagons].
99 The term supra-summativity will be further investigated in connection with the
issue of holism. See the section a er next.
100 Ger. original: “Transponierbarkeit bedeutet Unabhängigkeit vom Material. Ob
wir eine Melodie singen oder pfeifen, sie in verschiedenen Tonarten, eine Oktave
höher oder tiefer mit diesem oder jenem Instrument spielen – stets erkennen wir die
gleiche Melodie, obwohl elektroakustisch völlig verschiedene Reizmuster vorliegen.“
101 Ger. original: „Bei den Bauformen des Sprichworts kann man zunächst Zweiwort-
Figuren (‚Eigenlob stinkt‘, ‚Varietas delectat‘, ‚Bargeld lacht‘) und Dreiwort-Figuren
unterscheiden (‚Rost frisst Eisen‘, ‚Arbeit macht frei‘). Dem moralischen Anspruch
des Sprichworts entsprechen häu g imperativische Formen (‚Hilf dir selbst, so hil
dir Gott‘, ‚Verliebe dich o , verlobe dich selten, heirate nie!‘) und insbesondere die
Formeln man soll, man muß, man darf (nicht) (…) (z.B. ‚Man soll den Tag nicht vor
dem Abend loben‘, ‚Alte soll man ehren, Junge soll man lehren‘).“
102 Röhrich & Mieder (1977: 60) also call them thinking-stencils.
103 All German examples here and herea er are taken from Röhrich & Mieder (1977).
104 All examples are taken from Lako & Johnson’s Metaphors We Live By (1992).
105 Ger. original: “So kann zwar eine Melodie traurig oder fröhlich klingen, nicht
aber die einzelnen Töne, d.h. Eigenscha en der ganzen Gestalt (hier: der Melodie)
sind nicht Eigenscha en der Teile (hier der Einzeltöne) und umgekehrt.“
106 Ger. original: “Bildschemata sind weder konkrete Bilder noch abstrakte
Propositionen, sondern vielmehr holistische Gestalten mit einfachen internen
Strukturen, die sich auf unendlich viele Wahrnehmungen und Ereignisse ‚anwenden‘
lassen“
107 Ger. original: “Wenn eine bestimmte Sache eine Beziehung zu anderen Sachen
aufweist, die auf bestimmte Art und Weise miteinander in Verbindung stehen, so fällt
ihre Beziehung zu der einen von diesen mit ihrer Beziehung zu der anderen von
ihnen zusammen oder nicht.“
108 “Lako ’s key assumption for the basic level quotes: It holds true for both people
and objects: Within a hierarchic classi cation a certain level, the socalled level of
genus, excels in universally being the psychological basis of cognition for each
speech community” (Liebert, 1992: 60).
109 Drewer (2003: 18). Ib.: “‘Basic level concepts’, or fundamental experiences of an
intermediate abstraction level, are well-suited “candidates“ for a metaphorical
projection. Already toddlers acquire these concepts which are easy to remember and
enable a holistic perception of form.”
110 You nd more in Lako & Johnson (1992). They give the following example:
Theories are buildings. This metaphor is plausible if you, for instance, consider the
foundation of a theory. The concept becomes implausible if you say, for example: His
theory is covered with gargoyles. Hence, metaphorical concepts have used and unused
parts.
111 Further information on this in Lako & Johnson (1992). Ib.: “The very
systematicity that allows us to comprehend one aspect of a concept in terms of
another […] will necessarily hide other aspects of the concept. In allowing us to focus
on one aspect of a concept […] a metaphorical concept can keep us from focusing on
other aspects of the concept that are inconsistent with that metaphor”.
112 “In order to throw certain aspects into sharp relief (operating on the principle of
highlighting) it is possible to project the ICM (‘Idealized Cognitive Models’) of
di erent experiences on a target. Hereby, the abstract eld of politics […] can be
structured metaphorically by the ICM of games, sports, theatre, trade and war […]
which each foreground other aspects” (Baldauf, 1997: 80).
113 This proverb has already been recorded lexicographically and therefore
acknowledged as a new proverb obviously; (Duden 12: Zitate und Aussprüche, 178).
Meanwhile the German proverb seems to have been taken up by the Polish language
in the word-for-word translation: Kobieta bez mężczyzny jest jak ryba bez roweru;
Pani Vol.. 2(2003, 30), in the text titled Natychmiast kogoś mieć by Agnieszka Gra ,
who is the author of the very controversial book Świat bez Kobiet [The world without
women]. If this proverb is understood by the Polish indeed, is doubtful according to a
small private survey among Polish women or colleagues. In the newest phraseology
and proverb dictionaries of my knowledge the new proverb is not listed.
114 Lüger (1999: 59).
115 Röhrich, Vol. 4 (1994: 1252). You use this proverb if “you (want to) explain
yourself why something takes longer than expected […]”.
116 Simrock (1988: 338).
117 In the appendix of her dissertation Baldauf (1997: 305-338) lists a plethora of
metaphorical concepts with a thoroughly easy structure (it goes as far as dissolving
syntax), e.g. Emotionality is warmth, Costs are heavy, Much is height/Size, Intimacy
is physical closeness.
118 See the explanation by Auer (1999: 94): “Grice uses this coinage (implicature –
A.L.) as a kind of ending which is necessary to get from what was said […] onto what
was meant […].”
119 The example dates from an advertisement in the Spiegel magazine Vol. 39 (1999:
119). You nd the full script of the analysed advertisement in Lewandowska & Antos
(2001).
120 [ee: When in Rome, do as the Romans do].
121 According to Grzybek (1998: 146) with reference to Permjakov’s theory of proverb
motivation.
122 You nd a similar distinction in Grzybek (1998: 148): “Against the backdrop of
what was said, [German] proverbs like Der Apfel fällt nicht weit vom Stamm [ee: The
apple doesn’t fall far from the tree (stem)]; Auf Regen folgt Sonnenschein [ee: Every
cloud has a silver lining]; Viele Köche verderben den Brei [ee: Too many cooks spoil
the broth], and others can be assigned to gurative proverbs easily, while not only
‘nonpictorial’ proverbs like Wer wagt, gewinnt [ee: Who dares, wins]; Aller Anfang ist
schwer [Every beginning is di cult];or Ausnahmen bestätigen die Regel [ee:
Exceptions prove the rule] belong to the group of literal proverbs, but also others like
Reden ist Silber, Schweigen ist Gold [ee: Speech is silver, silence is golden] or Lügen
haben kurze Beine [ee: A lie has no feet] despite their incorporated images.”
123 Grzybek (1998: 135) explains that Seiler (1922) already highlighted the
„impossibility to separate strictly“. “Further the di erence between proverbs where
the imagery takes possession of the whole proverb on the one hand, and others
where the imagery only covers a part of the saying, on the other hand.”
124 Ger. original: “Bildha igkeit in Satzphraseologismen hat also (…) auch etwas mit
der Wirksamkeit von Texten, mit den angestrebten Reaktionen beim Hörer oder Leser
zu tun: Sie macht sprachliche Äußerungen au älliger, vielleicht auch attraktiver,
und sorgt unter Umständen dafür, daß diese leichter erfaßt und besser behalten
werden.“
125 Ger. original: “Es muß eine Wechselbeziehung angenommen werden, in der
Begri e (als Kognitive Rundmodelle) zwar als sprachlich instantiierte Fixierung
vorbegri icher Erfahrung verstanden werden, diese Begri e aber die Erfahrung
durch eben ihre sprachlich instantiierte Fixierung auf bestimmte Art formen.”
126 Further reading: Feilke’s (1994, 1996) socio-cognitive approach.
Peter Ďurčo
8 Empirical Research and Paremiological
Minimum

8.1 What a Paremiological Minimum Ought to Be?

Paremiology is researching the origin, development and the existence
of paremies, i. e. proverbs, folk and weather sayings and
riddles.Attempts to establish a paremiological minimum have still
been oriented on the concept of the set of proverbs that all members of
society know or an average adult is expected to know. So the concept
of paremiological minimum has been in fact reduced to proverbs,
which an average adult is expected to be familiar with. Thus, the
proper term used should be the proverbial minimum. The traditional
methods used to elicit answers from informants are based on the lists
of proverbs or proverb beginnings and informants are asked to state
their active or passive knowledge or add the missing part. Another
method used is to list all the proverbs which could informants think of
during a certain period.
One of the rst scholars who used demographic methods with
proverbs was the American sociologist William Albig (1931). 68
university students were asked to list all the proverbs they could think
of during a thirty minute period. A total of 1443 proverbs were written
down, out of which 442 were di erent proverbs (Albig, 1931: 532).
The concept of paremiological minimum was rst developed by
Grigorij Permjakov (1973, 1982). The spontaneous question “And what
is then a paremiological maximum?” couldn´t be answered reliably at
least due to following reasons. Firstly, there are di erent opinions
what a proverb is, what the boundaries of it in comparison to other
types of multiword units and other xed sentences are, secondly there
are no comprehensive collections or exhaustive demographic
investigation of all proverbs in a language. The biggest proverb
collections include as a rule a mixture of all types of xed phrases from
di erent historical periods. The author of the biggest collection of
German proverbs Karl Friedrich Wilhelm Wander included in his work
Das Deutsche Sprichwörter-Lexikon (1867)127 more than 250 000 items.
Valerij Mokijenko estimates the number of proverbs in Russian at more
than 150 000 items (Mokijenko, 2012: 81).
The demographic attempts have still been limited to small samples
of items examined by small numbers of informants, not representative
regarding age, sex, regional and educational dispersion of the
population. Gregorij Permjakov128 conducted in 1970s paremiological
experiments to nd out the minimum set of Russian proverbs that all
people know. A group of informants living in and near Moscow were
supposed to mark unknown proverbs from the list of 1491 items. The
other group of 100 informants had to complete the rest of the rst part
of a proverb. The base for the minimum consisted of 538 proverbs with
the average knowledge more than 90%. Permjakov set the rst 500
proverb as the paremiological minimum, which have been later
reduced at 300 items for smaller bilingual paremiological dictionaries,
e. g. Russian-German (Permjakov, 1985) and Russian-Bulgarian
(Permjakov & Vlachov, 1986).
Paremiological minima have been done for some other languages
as well. The Czech paremiological minimum by Schindler (Schindler,
1993) is based on a list of proverb beginnings to which informants were
asked to add the missing part. F. Čermák, the author of another
paremiological minimum of Czech, criticizes this approach of
Schindler naming following problems: “The problem is, where does
this list come from and on what basis is it based and selected, since,
obviously, one cannot go out asking people to answer several
thousand questions, i.e. the full list based on a large proverb
dictionary. The second problem is more subtle. Due to linear character
of our speech, it is obvious that it is the beginning of one’s speech,
rather than its end, which should be used in the elicitation method
and suggested to in such a research” (Čermák, 2003: 15). A third point
named by Čermák is that “the enquete method strives to arrive at what
is usually termed as knowledge of proverbs. However, it is not quite
clear, unless this is explicitly and carefully investigated by the
questionnaire, what this boils down to. Does this mean an active or a
passive knowledge, to what degree in the latter case and how reliable
are the answers obtained” (Čermák, 2003: 16)?
An alternative approach to get a paremiological minimum of Czech
by Čermák is based on examination of very large corpora. F. Čermák
sees the enormous advantage in researching the proverb use in actual
contexts, what makes it possible to see, document and study full
variability of proverbs, which has not been possible before (Čermák,
2003: 16f). His research has been based on a large paremiological data-
base, assembled for over 15 years. 243 frequent proverbs have been
tested against the 100 million words of the Czech National Corpus129.
This paremiological minimum contains the rst 100 most frequent
proverbs of the Corpus (see Čermák, 2003: 26-30).
The research on the familiarity of English proverbs is discussed by
Wolfgang Mieder in his study Paremiological Minimum and Cultural
Literacy (1994). Regarding the Anglo-American scene he states a
meager stage of establishing the paremiological minimum; “it will
require much work before this scholarly dream becomes reality”
(Mieder, 1994: 307). The same conclusion is made by Heather Haas in
her study about familiarity of proverbs in the United States (Haas,
2008: 319)130. She also summarizes the previous works on proverb
familiarity and the paremiological minimum in the United States
(Haas, 2008: 323-328).
An attempt to establish a kind of minimum of cultural knowledge
of Anglo-American proverbs for the average educated person was
using the list of 265 proverb published in Dictionary of Cultural
Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know (Hirsch & Kett & Tre l,
1988) based on previous Hirsch´s analysis of national periodicals
(Hirsch, 1987). He reasoned that if a major daily newspaper refers to an
event, person or thing without de ning it, he assumes that the
majority of the readers will know what that item is. As Mieder notes,
that Hirsch does not state how he came up with his list and he doubts
that Hirsch got all of these texts out of newspapers or magazines. It
says nothing about the general frequency of appearance of any item
(Mieder, 1994: 309).
 Mieder´s set of high frequent proverbs is based on his previous
archive sample of 1200 proverbs of the historical English and Anglo-
American proverb collections which was compared with the large
collection from Barlett J. Whiting Modern Proverbs and Proverbial
Sayings (1989) containing more than 5500 entries based on materials
from over 6000 books, and countless magazines and newspapers. This
small list contains 33 proverbs with more than 13 references in
observed texts (Mieder, 1994: 311-312).
In the research of proverb familiarity and cross-regional
comparisons of the paremiological minimum in the United States
made by Haas, college students from four regions of the United States
completed the so called proverb generation task and a proverb
familiarity rating task to determine “which texts from former
generations are still current today” and “how familiar” people are
“with proverbs today” (Haas, 2008: 329). In the generation task,
students listed as many proverbs as they could think of “o the top of
their heads” during a twenty-minute or twenty- ve-minute recall
period. Only 20 proverbs were generated by more than 10% of 156
respondents. In the proverb familiarity task, 193 students indicated
their familiarity with 315 proverbs included because previous
researchers had identi ed them as being relatively familiar or
common. The proverbs were rated on a 4-point scale, in which the
rating categories were de ned as: 1. Not at all familiar: “I have never
heard this phrase in this form before.”, 2. Slightly familiar: “I believe I
have encountered this phrase in this form before, although not o en.”,
3. Moderately familiar: “I encounter this phrase occasionally. I’m sure
I’ve heard it several times before.”, 4. Very familiar: “I encounter this
phrase quite frequently; I’ve heard it on numerous occasions.” (Haas,
2008: 330). The optimistic conclusion of this study is that a truly
national paremiological minimum may well be achievable because of
clear evidence that proverbs familiar in one region can generally be
expected to be familiar in other regions as well (Haas, 2008: 319). We
fully agree with the statement of Haas that there is no right research
method any more than there is a right informant or research sample
(Haas, 2008: 335).
There are also di erent attempts to establish paremiological
minima for German language. The paremiological minimum from
Grzybek (1991) contains 77 and in Chlosta & Grzybek & Roos (1994) 65
items, and was based on achievement testing method of completing
the missing parts of 275 proverbs through 125 respondents.
Our research of German proverbs is based on the competence test
correlated with corpus based examination of the text frequency of
proverbs from standard lexicographic sources (Ďurčo, 2001, 2002,
2003, 2005a, 2006). The familiarity of 385 proverbs is based on
questionnaire data by 220 informants from Germany, Austria a
Switzerland131, which were tested for their frequency in DeReKo132. We
have discovered that the proverbs most frequently used in everyday
speech do not have necessarily the same status as the proverbs most
used in published writing. In contrast to the concept of paremiological
minimum we prefer the concept of a paremiological optimum133. Our
paremiological optimum of 150 proverbs is than a correlation of the
most familiar proverbs with the highly frequented proverbs in corpus.
A paremiological minimum is then a set of proverbs based on
empirical demoscopic research that only a speci c group of informants
knows or is familiar with.
A set of highly frequented proverbs by Steyer (2012a) is also based
on the corpus analysis. There were 1000 traditionally lexicographic
registered proverbs tested in DeReKo. The outcome of this corpus
analysis was a list of 300 most frequent proverbs. This set of proverbs
was used as a base for the elaboration on principles of digital
multilingual paremiography (Ďurčo & Steyer, 2010; Steyer & Ďurčo,
2013; Steyer & Hein, 2010) in the EU-project SprichWort-Plattform134.
The results of the project were published in Steyer (2012b).
Paremiological experiments to paremiological minima exist also for
Hungarian (Tothné Litovkina, 1996; Vargha & Litovkina, 2007) and
Croatian (Grzybek & Škara & Heyken, 1993).

8.2 Why Do We Need a Paremiological Minimum or

Optimum?
The long history of the existence and lexicographic registration of
proverbs lead scholars to considerations of their development,
presence and occurrence in everyday use in the current language. The
visionary program and methodological approach for such a research
has been de ned by Matti Kuusi, one of the leading scholars in the
eld of paremiology: “What is now needed is for a team of scholars
from such disciplines as folklore, linguistics, sociology, psychology,
anthropology, paremiology, and demography to work out an even more
elaborated questionnaire to be used with several thousands [...]
citizens. The result of such an integrated study would in true give us a
precise idea of how proverbs are used and viewed today and which
proverbs belong to the [...] paremiological minimum. Once national
paremiological minima are established we will also be able to
determine the most frequently used international proverb types
through comparative proverb collections. Such work will eventually
lead to an international paremiological minimum for the world´s
proverbial wisdom” (Kuusi, 1985: 22-28).
A skeptical position to establish an ideal common paremiological
minimum is held by Mokijenko. He states that the concept of a
common paremiological minimum is not realistic. There exists a
certain zone of familiar proverbs only, which comprise a core of
national paremiology. But this core is very variable and di erentiated
among people. It depends on the particular social factors like age,
education, origin, but also on the individual preferences of speakers,
what discourages the determination of a general valid common
paremiological core (Mokijenko, 2012: 83f).
Despite this skeptical and pessimistic opinion the fact is that
proverbs are e ective verbal devices and we must have a certain
paremiological optimum at our disposal in order to participate in
meaningful communication. Such an optimum has its obvious bene ts
for mono- and bilingual paremiography and paremiodidactics as well.
The most frequently used proverbs of the modern age in spoken and
written communication should be included in various dictionaries and
textbooks. It means that we need not only one paremiological
minimum, but various speci c minima for teaching mother tongue and
foreign languages on di erent levels. We also need a common set of
proverbs for culturally literate and e ective communication of the
average educated person as well, which could be considered as a
paremiological optimum.

8.3 How to Get a Paremiological Optimum? An

Empirical Approach
The scholars’ common opinion is that the study of a today’s
paremiological minimum of any group of people must be based on
scienti c demographic research. The problem is how to get a core set
of proverbs for such demographic research?
The ways how to get such a sample are:
– Excerption from texts (from ction, non- ctional and journalistic
texts)
– Excerption from dictionaries and proverb collections (from
historical and contemporary periods)
– Analysis of corpora (through the examination of the frequency of
proverbs in very large or huge corpora)
– Direct observation (through a long-term observation and archiving
the proverbs from everyday spontaneous and spoken-media
communication).
Each method has its advantages and limits and brings heterogeneous
or even antagonistic results. It means that we need di erent
methodological approaches which will meet all methodological
requirements and cover all aspects and characteristics of proverbs. The
methods have to be seen not as contradictory but complementary
attempts how to get real and objective data about the observed
material.
Empirical research should give answers at least to the following
questions:
1. Which proverbs from former generations are still in use today?
2. How familiar are people with proverbs today?
3. Which proverbs traditionally registered in contemporary
dictionaries belong to the active and passive vocabulary of
persons?
4. Which of them are not used by people nowadays?
5. Are there di erences in the familiarity of proverbs regarding age,
sex, regional and educational background?
6. What is an individual’s score of paremiological competence
compared with the overall paremiological competence of all
informants?
7. In which form do traditional proverbs exist today?
8. Which are the truly new proverbs of the modern age? (Mieder, 1994:
299).
This sociologically and linguistically oriented catalogue of questions
ought to be extended with no less important psychological aspects, i.e.
how people acquire, use and interpret proverbs, idioms and gurative
language in general in everyday communication (e. g. Buhofer, 1980;
Häcki Buhofer, 1989, 1997, 1999; Häcki Buhofer & Burger, 1992, 1994;
Ďurčo, 1990, 1992, 1998; Everaert et al, 1995; Cacciari & Glucksberg,
1991; Cacciari & Tabossi, 1993; Gibbs, 1985; Gibbs & Nayak, 1989; Gibbs
& O´Brien, 1990).
The attempts to testing knowledge or familiarity of proverbs may be
prescriptive (the informants judge the prepared lists of proverbs, which
they should know) or descriptive (free observation of spontaneous
elicitation of proverbs, which people are really familiar with). There
are six types of testing methods used as a rule to examine the
paremiological competence of informants.
1. Competence tests. Informants should mark known and unknown
proverbs from a list.
2. Achievement tests. Informants should complete the missing part of
a proverb.
3. Introspection tests. By these self-reporting tests informants should
write down spontaneously within a certain period of time all the
proverbs which they use or know.
4. Attitude tests. This tests uses attitude scales to determine
individual and group preferences for proverbs. Informants should
grade on a scale their knowledge or familiarity of a proverb.
5. Cognitive tests. In this free response tests informants should
interpret the meaning of proverbs to prove their active knowledge
of it.
6. Experience tests. Informants should comment, if, when and how
do they and/or other people use proverbs.
The paremiological experiments still used, however, do not meet the
substantial methodological principles of testing, such as
standardization, objectivity, comparability, reliability and validity
because of low sociolinguistic representativeness accompanied with
arbitrary compiled lists of examined proverbs without su ciently
de ned selection criteria135.
The measurability of the knowledge or familiarity of proverbs
shouldn´t be in principle questioned, however the critique concerns
the creation of the experimental set of proverbs in due to subjective
and intuitive estimations of paremiologists and paremiographers
creating their experimental lists (Grzybek & Chlosta, 1993: 113). As
problematic also appear the justi cation and drawing up of the limits
for what is a general or common knowledge (see Chlosta & Grzybek,
1997: 244). Permjakov sees the limit for the common knowledge by 97%,
Grzybek by 95% and Schindler by 90%. But we may also set the limit
for the average knowledge by 50%, if we would obtain the data from a
sociolinguistically reliable and representative demoscopic research of
the population.
Critique concerns also the weak procedure of the presentation of
the prescribed form of proverbs in experiments due to lack of
information what the standard variant of a proverb really is (Chlosta &
Grzybek, 1997: 257). Grzybek sees in the checking of prede ned
answers also the danger of defective intuitive assessment of informant
supposing he knows the proverb (Grzybek, 1998: 114).
We obtain also very di erent results by using active (to elicit the
spontaneous reaction) or passive (to check prescribed answers) testing
procedures. L. Cox (1997) has discovered in his experiments that the
overall paremiological thesaurus of students is very low, i.e. the
number of identic elicited proverbs is not very high, but the individual
paremiological thesaurus, i. e. the whole number of all individually
elicited proverbs from all informants, is very high.136 This can be an
evidence that the active and passive paremiological competence is not
only much higher as an experiment can nd out but also it is the
evidence that the acquisition, usage and understanding of proverbs in
semantic memory by an individual person proceed very di erently and
the information is coded and stored unevenly (Cox, 1997: 45). In
contrast to passive experiments, where the knowledge of 100% was
very o en registered, the active experiments deliver as a rule only an
overall knowledge of 30%.
Despite all this problems the empirical experiments may deliver
relevant sociolinguistic information not only about the territorial, age
speci c and culturally bound status of proverbs but also data to their
actual status and changes in current habitual language use. The
paremiological experiments help us to examine the paremiological
competence, which is the active and the passive knowledge of proverbs
by an individual elicited through a paremiological experiment and also
the paremiological performance which is the active and the passive
overall knowledge of proverbs by all informants in a paremiological
experiment.
The way out in order to overcome the dilemma between
methodological requirements and feasibility of paremiological
experiments consists in testing nationwide groups of persons, and in
the frequency analysis of huge written and spoken corpora (Grzybek,
1992: 211; Grzybek & Chlosta, 1993: 96). The open problems are still the
reduction of large lists of proverbs and the demoscopic representative
sample of respondents. It is not possible and also not reasonable to
distribute big paremiological samples among respondents.

8.4 The Concept of a Paremiological Optimum. A

Complex Approach
De ning research objective is the most exacting step in designing a
research plan. One of the ways how to get a more accurate picture
re ecting the reality is to use a combination of multiple research
methods. Paremiological research may also bene t from such a
combination of introspective (induction, deduction, synthesis) and
empirical methods (demographic research, psycholinguistic
experiment, an extensive analysis of corpora, statistics), in particular
where answers are required to the questions as follows:
– Which paremiological elements included in collections as a
standard set are part of an active or a passive vocabulary of
language users?
– What is the degree of matching between the presented standards
and the individual or common usage, to what extent the users
accept these standards when speaking, and to what extent the
current linguistic or lexicographic description matches the reality?
– What are the di erences in awareness of linguistic phenomena and
their usage when taking account of the age of language users, their
educational background and the region where they live?
Such combined analysis was employed in our research into the Slovak
paremiology (Ďurčo, 2004, 2005b, 2005c, 2007). It was undertaken to
ascertain the level of awareness of traditional paremiological units
currently registered in lexicographic collections. Our goal was to nd
out which paremiological units registered in lexicographic collections
are currently really familiar to Slovak language users and actively used
by them.
It is not possible to investigate all proverbs with their numerous
variants so it is reasonable to desist from the extensive empirical
research. A compromise solution is the reduction of the material for
the experimental corpus in the following ve steps.
1. Analysis of the lexicographic registration of proverbs in older and
current dictionaries.
2. Determination of the core set of proverbs and their basic forms
through the reduction of the paremiological material by the expert
´s knowledge of linguists, lexicographers, paremiologists and
ethnologists.
3. Analysis of the knowledge and familiarity of the selected proverbs
and their variants by respondents through an on-line
questionnaire.
4. Analysis of the occurrence of the preferred proverbs from
questionnaires and their variants in huge corpora.
5. The comparison and correlation of the most familiar proverbs with
the most frequent proverbs in corpora.
The same method has been used as well for the Slovene language
(Meterc, in press), what has enabled to compare formal, semantic and
suprasemantic (diasystemic) equivalency of Slovak and Slovene
proverbs on the identical empirical and methodological basis (Ďurčo &
Meterc, in press). The empirical and corpus based research allows a
fully new approach to comparison and typology of equivalence of in
paremiology (Ďurčo, 2012, 2013) and to the typology of variability of
proverbs (Ďurčo, 2008).

8.5 An Example: Paremiological Optimum of Slovak

Language

8.5.1 Method
The research consisted of ve phases: 1. Selection of a data set and
design of a questionnaire, 2. Reduction of the core set of proverbs
through experts, 3. Questionnaire survey to determine commonly
known proverbs, 4. Frequency analysis of the best known proverbs in
the Slovak National Corpus, 5. Creation of a paremiological optimum.
To make a survey more e ective, an electronic version of the
questionnaire was elaborated, as an online Access application. The
questionnaire is available at www.re ectangulo.net/index.php?
loc=fraz and enables the users to upload it. This website also provides
all the information on how to install the programme, ll in the
questionnaire and how to send it via Internet.
An initial form necessary to be lled in to start the corpus includes
the following metadata concerning a respondent: age, gender,
education, dialect regions where the respondent was grown up and
where he currently lives. A er lling in the initial form and submitting
a password chosen by the respondent, the questionnaire will start.
Formulating the questions and a way to elicit responses are crucial
questionnaire design issues. Due to an extensive nature of examined
data, the formulation of o ered responses should have been as simple
as possible to elicit spontaneous responses. The programme o ers,
inter alia, an option of interrupting the questionnaire at any time. The
screen always shows one item only – a particular proverb, and a
respondent is required to assign one of the o ered responses to it:
1. I know and I use the proverb.
2. I know, but I do not use it.
3. I do not know the proverb, but I understand it.
4. I do not know the proverb and I do not understand it.
Respondents have also the h option, namely giving their own
wording of the proverb which is at variance to that given in the
questionnaire. In addition, the programme enables the change of
response to any previously listed proverb. At the end, the respondent
may give any other proverbs he knows and uses although not listed in
the questionnaire.

8.5.2 Questionnaire
The questionnaire consists of 2834 items. The data set used in this
questionnaire survey was created on the basis of following sources:
The Selection of Proverbs and Sayings from the Collection of A. P.
Záturecký (it includes 13000 units) made by prominent Slovak experts
in phraseology and paremiology, a linguist J. Mlacek and an
ethnologist Z. Profantová (1996). The authors selected approximately
3000 units from the Záturecký´s collection that, in their opinion, are of
certain relevance for current language users; proverbs entered in a
phraseological dictionary by E. Smiešková (1977); proverbs included in
a current normative dictionary Krátky slovník slovenského jazyka
(Kačala & Pisárčiková, 2003), and also proverbs quoted in the
publication Miko et. al. (1989). This particular publication includes all
the idioms and proverbs that occurred in the textbooks for elementary
and secondary schools in Slovakia in the seventies through nineties,
thus the children had heard, read or used them. Our experimental
questionnaire was drawn up using all the above sources. Numerous
variants of the same proverbs di ering only in an initial pronoun,
word order or lexicon were uni ed. However, the respondents were
given the opportunity to write the variant of a proverb familiar to them.
The steps described above resulted in the creation of the questionnaire
corpus that re ects the topical Slovak paremiology included in current
handbooks.

8.5.3 Empirical Survey Findings

There were 42 respondents (24 women and 18 men) originated from all
the regions of Slovakia. The respondents’ average age was 43 years of
age (men 45, women 42). Due to a relatively small number of
respondents, we were unable to get relevant results in respect of
familiarity of proverbs by age groups. However, an expected tendency
to higher knowledge and familiarity has been registered by older
informants.
The generally known and actively used common paremiological
core set is relatively small. The respondents indicated just around 16%
of proverbs (including di erent variants) as part of their active
vocabulary. A chart below shows the overall frequency for each
response category:

Based on the responses, ve sets of proverbs have been formed. The

rst set consists of proverbs that the respondents indicated as part of
their active vocabulary. The set of actively used ones includes
approximately 250 proverbs (= active usage stated by more than 50%
of the respondents), the set of familiar but not used by the respondents
includes only 50 proverbs (in compliance with a criterion more than
50% of respondents). The biggest set (approx. 1900) consists of
proverbs that the informants indicated as unknown, although they
supposed to understand their background motivation and also their
meaning. More than 50% of the respondents placed only approx. 100
proverbs, out of the total number 2834 unit, into the set of unknown
and not understandable. The respondents rarely gave variants of
proverbs and they accepted submitted forms without commenting on
them. In our opinion, the variance issue should be more adequately
and e ectively examined in language corpora using the methods of
corpus linguistics.

8.5.4 Corpus Analysis Findings

Comparisons in the area of idiomatics show huge di erences in
frequency between spoken and written language. The proverbs that
had been placed by the respondents into active spoken usage were
therefore confronted with their occurrence in the Slovak National
Corpus.137
The chart below shows a relation between the level of active usage
of proverbs by the respondents (60-100% level of knowledge or
familiarity) and their absolute occurrence in the Corpus (1-195
occurrences):
Great di erences in the corpus frequency of proverbs suggest at rst
sight an evident disproportion among examined parameters. In order
to determine the paremiological optimum, it is necessary to correlate
both parameters, namely to nd the top intersection of familiarity level
given by speakers and the frequency of occurrence in the Corpus.
The proverbs Kto sa hanbí, má prázdne gamby. [ww: Who is
ashamed, his mouth remains empty. ee: Fortune favours the brave.] My
o vlku a vlk za humnami/dverami/humny. [ww: Speak of the wolf, and
the wolf is behind the barns/doors. ee: Talk of the Devil, and he is
bound to appear.] Aká diera, taká záplata. [ww: Like hole, like patch.
ee: Pay somebody back in his own coin.] Múdry sa nik nenarodil. [ee:
No one is born a master.] have had no occurrence in the Corpus.
Maximum disproportions between the spoken language and the
text frequency were ascertained in respect of the following proverbs.
The proverbs listed below had above-average familiarity among the
respondents, but below-average frequency in the Corpus:
1. Aká práca, taká pláca. [ww: You get paid as much as you deserve for
your work. ee: No pain, no gain].
2. Aká otázka, taká odpoveď. [ww: Like question, like answer. ee: Ask a
silly question and you get a silly answer.]
3. Kto neskoro chodí, sám sebe škodí. [ww: He who is late causes harm
to himself. ee: Time and tide wait for no man.]
4. Aj zajtra je deň. [ee: Tomorrow is another day.]
5. Aj steny majú uši. [ee: Walls have ears.]
6. Ako sa do hory volá, tak sa z hory ozýva. [ww: The way you call into a
forest, the way it echoes back. ee: You get as much as you give. What
goes around, comes around.]
7. Nemá všetkých pohromade. [ww: He has not all (his ve senses)
together. ee: He hasn’t got all his marbles. He’s not right in the head.
He is as mad as a March hire.]
8. Samochvála smrdí. [ww: Self-applause stinks. ee: Stop blowing your
own trumpet!]
9. Babka k babce, budú kapce. [ww: Bob to bob, there will be felt boots.
ee: A penny gained is a penny saved.]
10. Vie, odkiaľ vietor fúka. [ee: He knows which way the wind is
blowing.]
11. Učený nikto z neba nespadol. [ww: No man has fallen from the sky
learned. ee: No one is born a master.]
This list gives the most frequent occurrences in the Corpus (more than
50 occurrences):
1. Nie je všetko zlato, čo sa blyští. [ee: All that glitters is not gold.] 50
2. Dobrá rada nad zlato. [ee: A piece of good advice is better than gold.]
51
3. Nijaká kaša sa neje taká horúca, ako sa uvarí.[ww: No porridge is
eaten hot when just cooked. ee: Things never are as bad as they seem.]
52
4. Škoda plakať nad rozliatym mliekom. [ee: It is no good/use crying
over the spilt milk.] 60
5. Hop alebo trop. [ee: Sink or swim. Make or break.] 62
6. Padla, tra la kosa na kameň. [ww: The scythe has hit a stone.ee: He
met his match.] 66
7. Už je ruka v rukáve. [ww: Arm is already in the sleeve. ee: To be hand
in glove with sb.] 67
8. Nič netrvá večne. [ee: Nothing can last forever.] 69
9. Jablko nepadá ďaleko od stromu. [ww: The apple never falls far from
the tree. ee: Like father like son. He/she is a chip o the old block.] 70
10 Oko za oko, zub za zub.[ee: An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.] 72
11. Stará láska nehrdzavie. [ww: Old love never gets rusty. ee: Old love
never dies. Old love never goes cold.] 78
12. O tom už aj vrabce na streche čivirikajú. [ww: Sparrows tweet about
it on the roof. ee: A little bird told me. It’s an open secret.] 80
13. S jedlom rastie chuť. [ee: The appetite grows with what it feeds on.
The more one has, the more one wants.] 81
14. Božie mlyny melú pomaly, ale isto. [ww: The mills of God grind
slowly, but surely. ee: The mills of God grind slowly.] 93
15. Účel svätí prostriedky. [ww: The purpose consecrates the means. ee:
The end justi es the means.] 110
16. Prišlo na lámanie chleba. [ww: It came to breaking the bread
(cutting the bread).ee: When it comes to the crunch.] 142
17. Zakázané ovocie najlepšie (najviac) chutí. [ww: Forbidden fruit
tastes best. ee: Forbidden fruit is the sweetest.] 195

8.6 Paremiological Optimum of Slovak Language –

correlation of the knowledge/familiarity and the
corpus frequency
1. Zakázané ovocie najlepšie (najviac ee: chutí.) [ww: Forbidden fruit
tastes best ee: Forbidden fruit is the sweetest.]
2. Prišlo na lámanie chleba. [ww: It came to breaking of bread (cutting
the bread) ee: When it comes to crunch.]
3. Božie mlyny melú pomaly, ale isto. [ww: The mills of God grind
slowly, but surely. ee: The mills of God grind slowly.]
4. Účel svätí prostriedky. [ww: The purpose consecrates the means. ee:
The end justi es the means.]
5. S jedlom rastie chuť. [ee: The appetite grows with what it feeds on.
The more one has, the more one wants.]
6. Stará láska nehrdzavie. [ww: Old love never gets rusty. ee: Old love
never dies. Old love never goes cold.]
7. O tom už aj vrabce na streche čivirikajú. [ww: Sparrows tweet about it
on the roof. ee: A little bird told me. It’s an open secret.]
8. Jablko nepadá ďaleko od stromu. [ww: The apple never falls far from
the tree. ee: Like father like son. He/she is a chip o the old block.]
9. Už je ruka v rukáve. [ww: Arm is already in the sleeve. ee: To be hand
in glove with sb.]
10. Nič netrvá večne. [ee: Nothing last forever.]
11. Oko za oko, zub za zub. [ee: An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.]
12. Bez vetra sa ani lístok (list) (na strome) nepohne. [ww: No leaf /on
the tree/ will move without wind. ee: There’s no smoke without re.]
13. Hop alebo trop.[ee: Sink or swim. Make or break.]
14. Výnimka potvrdzuje pravidlo. [ee: The exception proves the rule.]
15. Škoda plakať nad rozliatym mliekom. [ee: It is no good/use crying
over the spilt milk.]
16. Padla, tra la kosa na kameň. [ww: The scythe has hit a stone / has
fallen onto the stone. ee: He met his match.]
17. Nie je všetko zlato, čo sa blyští. [ee: All that glitters is not gold.]
18. Iný kraj iný mrav. [ww: Di erent countries, di erent manners. ee:
When in Rome do as the Romans do.]
19. Bližšia košeľa ako kabát. [ww: The shirt is nearer to the body than
the coat. ee: Charity begins at home.]
20. Trpezlivosť ruže prináša. [ww: Patience brings roses. ee: Patience is
the best remedy for every trouble. Everything comes to him who waits.]
21. Každý začiatok býva ťažký. [ww: Every beginning is always hard. ee:
The rst step is always the hardest.]
22. Nijaká kaša sa neje taká horúca, ako sa uvarí. [ww: No porridge is
eaten hot when just cooked. ee: Things never are as bad as they seem.]
23. Bez práce nie sú koláče. [ww: There are no pies without work. ee:
Success never comes easily. No gain without pain.]
24. Risk je zisk. [ww: Risk is the pro t. ee: Nothing ventured nothing
gained.]
25. Vodu káže a víno pije. [ee: He preaches water and drinks wine.]
Č
26. Čert nikdy nespí. [ee: The devil never sleeps.]
27. Palica má dva konce. [ww: A stick has two ends. ee: There are two
sides to everything.]
28. Nekrič hop, kým si nepreskočil. [ww: Do not say “hop” before you
jump over. ee: There is many a slip twixt cup and lip.]
29. Čo je veľa, to je veľa. [ee: Enough is enough.]
30. Dobrá rada nad zlato. [ee: A piece of good advice is better than
gold.]
31. Kto hľadá, nájde. [ww: He who seeks, will nd. ee: Seek and ye
shall nd.]
32. Koniec dobrý, všetko dobré. [ee: All’s well that ends well.]
33. Odvážnemu šťastie praje. [ee: Fortune favours the brave.]
34. Čo sa stalo, už sa neodstane. [ww: You cannot change what has
already happened. ee: What’s done cannot be undone.]
35. Všade dobre, doma najlepšie. [ww: Everywhere is well, at home it’s
best. ee: East, west, home’s best.]
36. Lepší vrabec v hrsti ako holub na streche. [ww: A sparrow in one
hand is worth a pigeon on the roof. ee: A bird in one hand is worth two
in the bush.]
37. Kto prv [ww: skôr ee: príde, ten prv [ww: skôr ee: melie. [ww: He
who comes sooner shall mill sooner. ee: First come rst served.]
38. Remeslo má zlaté dno. [ww: A trade has a gold bottom. ee: If you
know a trade you will never starve.]
39. Múderejší ustúpi. [ww: He who retreats is wiser. ee: Better to bend
the neck than bruise the forehead.]
40. Človek mieni, Pán Boh mení. [ee: Man proposes, God disposes.]
41. Aká práca, taká pláca. [ww: You get paid as much as you deserve
for your work. ee: No pain, no gain.]
42. Aj zajtra je deň. [ee: Tomorrov is another day.]
43. Ešte nikdy nebolo tak zle, že by nemohlo byť ešte horšie. [ww: Never
was so bad, that it couldn’t be worse. ee: Bad is called good when
worse happens. The evil can be every time worse.]
44. Trafená hus zagága. [ww: A shot goose will make gaggle. ee: If the
cap ts wear it.]
45. Ja nič, ja muzikant. [ww: I am nothing, I am a musician. ee: I have
nothing to do with it.]
46. Podľa seba súdim teba. [ww: I judge you by myself. ee: Don’t judge
others by yourself.]
47. Reči sa hovoria a chlieb sa je. [ww: Speech is spoken and bread is
eaten. ee: It’s just so much hot air.]
48. Jedna lastovička leto nerobí.[ee: One swallow doesn’t make a
summer.]
49. Ako sa do hory volá, tak sa z hory ozýva. [ww: The way you call into
a forest is the way it echoes back. ee: You get as much as you give.
What goes around, comes around.]
50. Vrana k vrane sadá. [ww: A crow sits next to a crow. ee: Birds of
feather ock together.]
51. Kto sa smeje naposledy, ten sa smeje najlepšie. [ww: He who laughs,
last laughs the best. ee: He who laughs last laughs longest.]
52. Čas sú peniaze. [ee: Time is money.]
53. Láska hory prenáša. [ee: Love can move mountains. ]
54. Kto druhému jamu kope, sám do nej (s)padne. [ww: He who digs a
pit for another falls into it himself. ee: People are o en caught in their
own trap.]
55. Čo sa za mladi naučíš, na starosť akoby si našiel. [ww: What you
have learnt young, you will nd useful when old. ee: What’s learnt in
the cradle lasts till the tomb. In youth we learn, in age we understand.]
56. Nehas, čo ťa nepáli. [ww: Do not extinguish what is not burning
you. ee: Don’t mend what ain’t broken.]
57. Ani z voza, ani na voz. [ww: Not from carriage, no on carriage. = In
no way.]
58. Čo na srdci, to na jazyku. [ww: What is in the heart that is on the
tongue. ee: Have one’s heart in one’s mouth.]
59. Nemá to ani hlavy, ani päty. [ww: It has neither head nor heel. ee: It
has neither rhyme nor reason.]
60. Lož má krátke nohy. [ww: A lie has short legs. ee: A lie has no legs.]
61. Kto neskoro chodí, sám sebe škodí. [ww: He who is late causes harm
to himself. ee: Time and tide wait for no man.]
62. Aký požičaj, taký vráť. [ww: Like borrow, like repay. ee: Tit for tat.]
63. Komu niet rady, tomu niet pomoci. [ww: You cannot help the one
who does not listen to advice. ee: There’s no helping those that won’t
help themselves.]
64. Zvyk je železná košeľa. [ww: Habit is an iron shirt. ee: Habit is
second nature.]
65. Istota je istota. [ww: Safe is safe. ee: Better to be safe than sorry.]
66. Aká otázka, taká odpoveď. [ww: Like question, like answer. ee: Ask
a silly question and you get a silly answer.]
67. Babka k babce, budú kapce. [ww: Bob to bob, there will be felt
boots. ee: A penny gained is a penny saved.]
68. Každý chvíľku ťahá pílku. [ww: Everybody pulls the saw just for a
while. = Everybody’s dominance/power is limited. ee:
69. Keď neprší, aspoň kvapká. [ww: Even if it does not rain, at least it
drips. ee: Every little bit helps.]
70. Kto chce psa biť, palicu nájde. [ww: He who wants to beat a dog
nds a stick. ee: Give a dog a bad name.]
71. Strach má veľké oči. [ww: Fear has big eyes. ee: Fear has magnifying
eyes
72. Aj steny majú uši. [ee: Walls have ears.]
73. Učený nikto z neba nespadol. [ww: No man has fallen from the sky
learned. ee: No one is born a master.]
74. Vie, odkiaľ vietor fúka. [ee: He knows which way the wind is
blowing.]
75. Nešťastie nechodí po horách, ale po ľuďoch. [ww: Misfortunes never
walk in the forest, but they happen to people. ee: Accidents will
happen.]
76. Vrana vrane oko nevykole. [ww: A crow will never peck out a crow’s
eyes. ee: Dog does not eat dog.]
77. Samochvála smrdí. [ww: Self-applause stinks. ee: Stop blowing your
own trumpet!]
78. Príde na psa mráz! [= There will be a bad outcome for him/her.]
79. Čo si kto navaril, nech si aj zje (to nech si zje). [ww: As you cooked
the meal, so must you eat it. ee: As you make your bed, so you must lie
on it.]
80. Dva razy meraj, raz strihaj! [ee: Measure twice, cut once! Look
before you leap.]
81. Komu sa nelení, tomu sa zelení. [ww: He who is not lazy will get
green. ee: The early bird catches the worm. No pain, no gain.]
82. Čo oči nevidia, to srdce nebolí. [ee: What the eye doesn’t see, the
heart doesn’t grieve over.]
83. Nemá všetkých (päť) pohromade. [ww: He has not all [ww: his ve
senses ee: together. ee: He hasn’t got all his marbles.]
84. Aj malé ryby sú ryby.[ee: Even small sh are sh.]
85. Sľuby sa sľubujú, blázni sa radujú. [ww: Promises are promised,
fools enjoy it. ee:
Promises, promises!, Fine words butter no parsnips.]
86. Pomaly ďalej zájdeš. [ww: You get farther at slow pace. ee: The
more haste, the less speed.]
87. Čas je najlepší lekár. [ww: Time is a best doctor. ee: Time heals all
wounds.]
88. Kto mlčí, ten svedčí. [ww: He who remains silent gives his consent.
ee: Silence is consent.
89. Čas všetko zahojí/vylieči. [ww: Time heals everything. ee: Time is a
great healer.]
90. Hlavou múr neprebiješ (neprerazíš). [ww: Your head won’t break a
brick wall. ee: You’re/ It’s banging your head against a brick wall.]
91. Hovoriť striebro, mlčať zlato. [ee: Speech is silver but silence is
gold.]
92. V núdzi poznáš priateľa. [ww: In the need you know/recognise a
friend. ee: A friend in need is a friend indeed.]
93. Svetská sláva – poľná tráva. [ww: Wordly fame – eld grass. ee: It’s
just a ash in the pan. Fame is short-lived.]
94. Príležitosť robí zlodeja. [ee: Opportunity makes the thief.]
95. Ako prišlo, tak odišlo. [ee: Easy come, easy go.]
96. Kôň má štyri nohy, a predsa sa potkne. [ww: The horse has four legs,
but it stumbles. ee: It’s a good horse that never stumbles.]
97. Vyčkaj času ako hus klasu. [ww: Wait for time like a goose for spike.
ee: All in good time. Everything comes to him who waits.]
98. Darovanému koňovi nepozeraj (nehľaď) na zuby. [ww: Don’t look a
gi horse at the teeth. ee: Don’t look a gi horse in the mouth.]
99. Čo môžeš urobiť dnes, neodkladaj na zajtra! [ee: What you can do
today, never put o till tomorrow.]
100. Keby nebolo keby, boli by sme všetci v nebi. [ww: If there wasn’t for
the if, we would all be in heaven. ee: If it wasn’t for the “ifs”, you
would be rich.]

8.7 Conclusions
The survey like this did not o er the opportunity to ascertain whether
the respondents also correctly understand the proverb. However, this
fact is irrelevant for the purposes of sociolinguistics as the
respondents’ intuitive evaluation is signi cant. Future research will
also have to take into account the real linguistic competence, the
linguistic correctness, and also to examine the accuracy of the
understanding of proverbs through cognitive tests.
Further research should focus on examining the linguistic
competence by using smaller sets of selected proverbs. These tests
should be based on the so-called active paremiological core set. The
focus should be also given to testing the set of proverbs from the third
group where the respondents were supposed to understand the
proverb, due to the motivation of the units and to the respondents’
intuition. When conducting this survey, di erent paremiological
experiments should be applied, e.g. the modi ed Permjakov’s method.
For instance, in order to increase the objectiveness when examining
the intuitive evaluation by a respondent, it is more advisable to present
the second part of a proverb requesting him to ll in its beginning.
Such research has to involve a signi cantly higher number of
respondents. A questionnaire should be userfriendly and eligible for
lling out in a comfortable manner. Our on-line application has proved
to be very successful. Extensive sets of proverbs may be tested by using
it and moreover, an on-line questionnaire enables to address much
more speakers and to select and qualify a su ciently representative
sample of prospective respondents. That reduces the greatest problem
of paremiological experiments, namely that a small group of
informants does not accurately represent the population in terms of
demography and sociolinguistics.
Findings from such a questionnaire would give an insight into the
current paremiology. They may serve as a basis both for wider
sociolinguistic research and for their lexicographic description.
Ascertaining the awareness of proverbs and their occurrence in huge
corpora o ers a coherent insight into the formal aspects of existing
proverbs. The use of formal language may, within the framework of
corpus linguistic, lead to improved analysis of the form of the set
phrases and the idiomatics as well. The corpus analysis may also give
answer to the question of paremiological neology. With respect to
paremiology, it may bring about a new way of the description of
paremiological models. The gathered information on outdated and
unknown proverbs would serve as a source material for historical
paremiological research.
Paremiodidactics is another eld that may bene t from such
research. Based on the data, there may be a paremiological optimum
and various paremiological minima created, usable in teaching of
mother tongue and foreign languages. The results would also
contribute to international paremiological research as an empirically
proven basis for the purposes of contrastive paremiology. The
empirical and corpus based research will allow a fully new approach
to the comparison and typology of equivalence in contrastive
paremiology.
References
Albig, W. (1931). Proverbs and Social Control. Sociology and Social Research 15, 527-
535.
Buhofer, A. (1980). Der Spracherwerb von phraseologischen Wortverbindungen. Eine
psycholinguistische Untersuchung an schweizerdeutschem Material. Frauenfeld:
Verlag Hueber.
Cacciari, Ch. & Glucksberg, S. (1991). Understanding Idiomatic Expressions: The
Contribution of Word Meanings. In G. B. Simpson (Ed.), Understanding Word and
Sentence (pp. 217-240). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Cacciari, Ch. & Tabossi, P. (1993). Idioms: Processing Structure, and Interpretation.
Hilsdale & New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Čermák F. (2003). Paremiological Minimum of Czech: The Corpus Evidence. In H.
Burger, A. Häcki Bufofer & G. Greciano (Eds.), Flut von Texten – Vielfalt der
Kulturen. Ascona 2001 zur Methodologie und Kulturspezi k der Phraseologie (pp.
15-31). Hohengehren: Schneider Verlag.
Chlosta, Ch. & Grzybek, P. (1997). Sprichwortkenntnis in Deutschland und Österreich.
Empirische Ergebnisse zu einigen mehr oder weniger gewagten Hypothesen. In R.
Muhr & R. Schrodt (Eds.), Österreichisches Deutsch und andere nationale
Varietäten plurizentrischer Sprachen in Europa. Empirische Analysen (pp. 243-
261). Wien: Verlag Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky.
Chlosta, Ch. & Grzybek, P. (2004). Was heißt eigentlich „Bekanntheit“ von
Sprichwörtern? In Cs. Földes (Ed.), Res humanae proverbiorum et sententiarum.
Ad honorem Wolfgangi Mieder (pp. 37-57), Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Chlosta, Ch., Grzybek, P. & Roos, U. (1994). Wer kennt denn heute noch den Simrock?
Ergebisse einer emprischen Untersuchung zur Bekanntheit deutscher
Sprichwörter in traditionellen Sammlungen. In Ch. Chlosta, P. Grzybek & E.
Piirainen (Eds.), Sprachbilder zwischen Theorie und Praxis (pp. 31-60). Bochum,
Universitätsverlag Brockmeyer.
Cox, L. H. (1997). Beobachtungen zur standardsprachlichen Sprichwortkompetenz
deutscher Universitätsstudent(inn)en. In R.-E. Mohrmann, V. Rodekamp & D.
Sauermann (Eds.), Volkskunde im Spannungsfeld zwischen Universität und
Museum – Festschri zum 65. Geburtstag von Hinrich Siuts, Band 95 (pp. 43-65).
Münster/New York/München/Berlin: Waxmann.
Ďurčo, P. (1990). Die Interpretation der Idiome aus psycholinguistischer Sicht. Folia
Linguistica. Acta Societatis Linguisticae Europae 24 /1-2, 1-22.
Ďurčo, P. (1992). Das Sprachwissen und gurative Bedeutung. In E. Krošláková (Ed.),
Die Phraseologie als Intensivierungsfaktor der Kommunikation. Výskumné
materiály 34 (pp. 69-85). Nitra: Pedagogická fakulta.
Ďurčo, P. (1998). Experimentelle Untersuchung der individuellen Bedeutung von
Phraseologismen. In W. Eismann (Ed.), EUROPHRAS‘95 – Europäische
Phraseologie im Vergleich. Gemeinsames Erbe und kulturelle Vielfalt (pp. 165-
174). Bochum: Universitätsverlag Brockmeyer.

Ď
Ďurčo, P. (2001). Bekanntheit, Häu gkeit und lexikographische Erfassung von
Sprichwörtern. Zu parömiologischen Minima für DaF. In A. Häcki Buhofer, H.
Burger & L. Gautier (Eds.): Phraseologiae Amor. Aspekte europäischer
Phraseologie (pp. 99-106). Hohengehren: Schneider Verlag.
Ďurčo, P. (2002). Unterschiede in der (Un)kenntnis von Sprichwörtern in
verschiedenen Lebensaltern. In A. Häcki Buhofer (Ed.): Spracherwerb und
Lebensalter (pp. 293-304). Tübingen/Basel: A. Francke Verlag.
Ďurčo, P. (2003). Empirische Daten zur Sprichwörtervariabilität. In H. Burger, A. Häcki
Buhofer & G. Gréciano (Eds.), Flut von Texten – Vielfalt der Kulturen. Ascona 2001
zur Methodologie und Kulturspezi k für Phraseologie (pp. 83-95). Hohengehren:
Schneider Verlag.
Ďurčo, P. (2004). Slovak Proverbial Minimum: The Empirical Evidence. In Cs. Földes
(Ed.), Res humanae proverbiorum et sententiarum. Ad honorem Wolfgangi Mieder
(pp. 59-69). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Ďurčo, P. (2005a). Sprichwörter in der Gegenwartssprache. Trnava: Univerzita sv.
Cyrila a Metoda v Trnave.
Ďurčo, P. (2005b). Paremiologické minimum slovenčiny. Výsledky a porovnania. In R.
Blatná & V. Petkevič (Eds.), Jazyky a jazykověda. Sborník k 65. narozeninám prof.
PhDr. Františka Čermáka, DrSc. (pp. 45-61). Praha: Ústav Českého národního
korpusu.
Ďurčo, P. (2005c): Empirisch- und korpusbasierte Untersuchungen der Sprichwörter.
Zeitschri für germanistische Sprach- und Literaturwissenscha in der Slowakei
3, 47-57.
Ďurčo, P. (2006): Methoden der Sprichwortanalysen oder Auf dem Weg zum
Sprichwörteroptimum. In A. Häcki Buhofer & H. Burger (Eds.), Phraseology in
Motion. Methoden und Kritik. Akten der Internationalen Tagung zur Phraseologie
Basel, 2004. Hohengehren: Schneider Verlag.
Ďurčo, P. (2007). Paremiologické optimum slovenčiny. In W. Chlebda (Ed.),
Frazeologia a językowe obrazy świata przełomu wieków (pp. 171-177). Opole:
Uniwersytet Opolski.
Ďurčo, P. (2008). Variabilität der festen Wortkomplexe in Wörterbüchern und Texten.
Zur Typologie der textuellen Variabilität von propositionalen Idiomen. In V.
Jesenšek & A. Lipavic Oštir (Eds.), Wörterbuch und Übersetzung. 4.
Internationales Kolloquium zur Lexikographie und Wörterbuchforschung.
Universität Maribor. 20. bis 22. Oktober 2006 (pp. 131-143).
Hildesheim/Zürich/New York: Georg Olms Verlag.
Ďurčo, P. (2012). Diasystematische Di erenzen von Sprichwörtern aus der Sicht der
kontrastiven Parömiologie. In K. Steyer (Ed.), Sprichwörter multilingual.
Theoretische, empirische und angewandte Aspekte der modernen Parömiologie
(pp. 357-377). Tübingen: Narr Verlag.
Ďurčo, P. (2013). Extensionale und intensionale Äquivalenz in der Phraseologie Am
Beispiel von deutschen und slowakischen Sprichwörtern. In N. Kübler, J.-M.
Benayoun & J.-P. Zougbo (Eds.): Tous les chemins mènent à Paris Diderot. Actes
du Colloque international de Parémiologie, Université Paris Diderot 29 juin-2
juillet 2011 (in press). Hohengehren: Schneider Verlag.
Ď
Ďurčo, P. & Meterc, M. Empirične paremiološke raziskave tipov ekvivalentnosti in
suprasemantičnih razlik v slovenščini in slovaščini. Slavia centralis (in press).
Ďurčo, P. & Steyer, K. (2010): Vorwort zur Sprichwortdatenbank. In: Datenbank des
EU-Projekts SprichWort. www.sprichwort-plattform.org/sp/Vorwort
Everaert, M., van der Linden, E. J., Schenk, A. & Schreuder, R. (Eds.) (1995). Idioms:
Structural and Psychological Perspectives. Hillsdale/New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Gibbs, R. W. (1985). On the Process of Understanding Idioms. Journal of
Psycholinguistic Research 14/5, 465-472.
Gibbs, R. W. & Nayak, N. P. (1989). Psycholinguistic Studies on the Syntactic Behavior
of idioms. Cognitive Psychology 21/1, 100-138.
Gibbs, R. W. & O´Brien, J. E. (1990). Idioms and Mental Imagery: The Metaphorical
Motivation for Idiomatic Meaning. Cognition 36, 35-68.
Grzybek. P. (1984). Bibliographie der Arbeiten Permjakovs. Ars Semiotica 7/3-4.
Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 203-214.
Grzybek, P. (1991). Sinkendes Kulturgut. Eine empirische Pilotstudie zur Bekanntheit
deutscher Sprichwörter. Wirkendes Wort 2, 239-264.
Grzybek, P. (1992). Probleme der Sprichwort-Lexikographie (Parömiographie):
De nition, Klassi kation, Slektion. In G. Meder & A. Dörner (Eds.), Worte, Wörter,
Wörterbücher. Lexikographische Beiträge zum Essener Linguistischen Kolloquium
(pp. 195-223). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Grzybek, P. (1998). Komparative und interkulturelle Parömiologie. Methodologische
Bemerkungen und empirische Befunde. In W. Eismann (Ed.), EUROPHRAS 95:
Europäische Phraseologie. Gemeinsames Erbe und kulturelle Vielfalt (pp. 263-
282). Bochum: Universitätsverlag Brockmeyer.
Grzybek, P. (2012). Facetten des parömiologischen Rubik-Würfels. In K. Steyer (Ed.),
Sprichwörter multilingual. Theoretische, empirische und angewandte Aspekte der
modernen Parömiologie (pp. 99-138). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Grzybek, P. & Chlosta, Ch. (1993). Grundlagen der empirischen Parömiologie.
Proverbium. Yearbook of International Proverb Scholarship 10, 89-128.
Grzybek, P., Chlosta, Ch. & Roos, U. (1994). Ein Vorschlag zur Klassi kation von
Sprichwortvarianten in der empirischen Sprichwortforschung. In B. Sandig (Ed.),
Europhras 1992. Tendenzen der Phraseologieforschung (pp. 221-256). Bochum:
Universitätsverlag.
Grzybek, P., Škara, D. & Heyken, Z. (1993). Der Weisheit der Gasse auf der Spur. Eine
empirische Pilotstudie zur Bekanntheit kroatischer Sprichwörter. Zeitschri für
Balkanologie 29/2, 85-98.
Haas, H. A. (2008). “Proverb Familiarity in the United Sates: Cross-Regional
Comparisons of the Paremiological Minimum.” Journal of American Folklore
121/481, 319-347.
Häcki Buhofer, A. (1989). Psycholinguistische Aspekte in der Bildha igkeit von
Phraseologismen. In G. Gréciano (Ed.), Europhras 88. Phraséologie Contrastive.
Actes du Colloque International Klingenthal – Strasbourg, 12-16 mai 1988 (pp.
165-175). Strasbourg: Université des Sciences Humaines.
Häcki Buhofer, A. (1997). Phraseologismen im Spracherwerb. In R. Wimmer & F. J.
Berens (Eds.), Wortbildung und Phraseologie (pp. 209-232). Tübingen: Gunter
Narr.
Häcki Buhofer, A. (1999). Psycholinguistik der Phraseologie. In N. F. Bravo, I. Behr &
C. Rozier (Eds.), Phraseme und typisierte Rede (pp. 63-75). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Häcki Buhofer, A. & Burger, H. (1992). Gehören Redewendungen zum heutigen
Deutsch? Fremdsprachen Lehren und Lernen 21, 11-32.
Häcki Buhofer, A. & Burger, H. (1994). Phraseologismen im Urteil von Sprecherinnen
und Sprechern. In B. Sandig (Ed.): Europhras 92: Tendenzen der
Phraseologieforschung (pp. 1-33. Bochum: Universitätsverlag Brockmeyer.
Hirsch, E. D. (1987). Cultural Literacy. What Every American Needs to Know. With an
Appendix, What Literate Americans Know, by E. D. Hirsch, J. Kett and j. Tre l.
Boston: Houghton Mi lin Company.
Hirsch, E. D., Kett, J. & Tre l, J. (1988). The Dictionary of Cultural Literacy: What Every
American Needs to Know. Boston: Houghton Mi lin Company.
Kačala, J. & Pisárčiková, M. (Eds.) (1997). Krátky slovník slovenského jazyka. 3rd
edition, Bratislava: Veda.
Kuusi, M. (1985). Proverbia septentrionalia. 900 Balto-Finnic Proverb Types with
Russian, Baltic, German and Scandinavian Parallels. Helsinki: Suomalainen
Tiedeakatemia.
Meterc, M. (in press). Online questionnaire providing information on most well-
known and well-understood proverbs in Slovene language. In V. Jesenšek et all
(Eds.), EUROPHRAS 2012 Maribor. Phraseologie und Kultur, Maribor 27.–31. 8.
2012.
Mieder, W. (1994). Paremiological Minimum and Cultural Literacy. In W. Mieder (Ed.),
Wise Words. Essays on the Proverb (pp. 297-316). New York/London: Garland
Publishing, Inc.
Miko, F. a kol. (1989). Frazeológia v škole. Bratislava: Slovenské pedagogické
nakladateľstvo.
Mlacek, J. & Profantová, Z. (1996). Slovenské príslovia a porekadlá. Výber zo zbierky
A. P. Zátureckého. Bratislava: Nestor.
Mokijenko, V. M. (2012). Russissches parömiologisches Minimum: Theorie oder
Praxis? In: K. Steyer (Ed.), Sprichwörter multilingual. Theoretische, empirische
und angewandte Aspekte der modernen Parömiologie (pp. 79-98). Tübingen:
Gunter Narr.
Permjakov, G. L. (1973). On the paremiological level and premiological minimum of
language. Proverbium 22, 862-863.
Permjakov, G. L. (1982). K voprosu o paremiologičeskom minimume. In E. M.
Vereščagin (Ed.), Slovari i lingvostranovedenije (pp. 131-137). Moskva: Russkij
jazyk.
Permjakov, G. L. (1985). 300 allgemeingebräuchliche Sprichwörter und
sprichwörtliche Redensarten. Ein illustriertes Nachschlagewerk für
Deutschsprechende. Moskau/Leipzig: Russkij jazyk & VEB Verlag Enzyklopädie.
Permjakov, G. L. (1989). On the Question of a Russian Paremiological Minimum. In:
Proverbium 6, 91-102.
Permjakov, G. L. & Vlachov, S. I. (1986). 300 obščeupotrebiteľnych poslovic i
pogovorok (dľa govorjaščich na bolgarskom jazyke). Moskva: Russkij jazyk.
Schindler, F. (1993). Das Sprichwort im heutigen Tschechischen. Empirische
Untersuchung und semantische Beschreibung. München: Otto Sagner.
Smiešková, E. (1977). Malý frazeologický slovník. Bratislava: Slovenské pedagogické
nakladateľstvo.
Steyer, K. (2012a): Sprichwortstatus, Frequenz, Musterbildung. Parömiologische
Fragen im Lichte korpusmethodischer Empirie. In Steyer 2012b.
Steyer, K. (Ed.) (2012b): Sprichwörter multilingual. Theoretische, empirische und
angewandte Aspekte der modernen Parömiologie. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Steyer, K. & Hein, K. (2010): Deutsche Sprichwortartikel. In: Datenbank des EU-
Projekts SprichWort. www.sprichwort-plattform.org/sp/Sprichwort
Steyer, K. & Ďurčo, P. (2013): Ein korpusbasiertes Beschreibungsmodell für die
elektronische Sprichwortlexikogra e. In: N. Kübler, J.-M. Benayoun & J.-P. Zougbo
(Eds.): Tous les chemins mènent à Paris Diderot. Actes du Colloque international
de Parémiologie, Université Paris Diderot 29 juin-2 juillet 2011. (in press)
Hohengehren: Schneider Verlag. (preprint:
http://www.owid.de/extras/sprw/SW_Modell_steyer_durco.pdf).
Tóthné Litovkina, A. (1996). Conducting a Paremiological Experiment in Hungary.
Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb Scholarship 13, 161-183.
Vargha, K. & Litovkina, A. T. (2007). Proverbs is as Proverb Does: A Preliminary
Analysis of a Survey on the Use of Hungarian Proverbs and Anti-Proverbs. Acta
Ethnographica Hungarica 52, 135-155.
Záturecký, A. P. (1974). Slovenské príslovia, porekadlá a úslovia. 3. vydanie. Ed. M.
Kosová. Bratislava: Tatran.

127 http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wanders_Deutsches_Sprichw%C3%B6rter-Lexikon
128 See the detailed bibliography of G. L. Permjakov´s work in Grzybek, 1984.
129 http://korpus.cz/
130 http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/20487611?
uid=3739024&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4 &sid=21102 694102223
131 In this attitude test the informants should grade on a four-level scale (1. Known
and used, 2. Known but not used, 3. Unkown, but understandable, 4. Unknown und
not understandable) their knowledge or familiarity of a proverb.
132 http://www1.ids-mannheim.de/kl/projekte/korpora/
133 The concept of a paremiological optimum is based on the correlation between the
best known proverbs by users and thier high frenquency in text corpora, see the Part
4.
134 EU-Projekt SprichWort. Eine Internetplattform für das Sprachenlernen (2008-
2010, 143376-LLP1-2008-1-SI-KA2-KA2MP).
135 See the detailed discussion and critique of empirical paremiology,
paremiological experiments and testing methods in Grzybek & Chlosta (1993),
Chlosta & Grzybek (2004); Grzybek (2012).
136 In the experiment by Cox 229 informants have elicited spontaneously 232
proverbs, in the next experiment were the students asked to register during a week
all proverbs which come to mind. 42 informants registered 1250 di erent proverbs.
137 prim0.1, prim0.1-public. Slovenský národný korpus. Bratislava: Jazykovedný
ústav Ľ. Štúra SAV 2003. WWW: http://korpus.juls.savba.sk.
Kathrin Steyer
9 Proverbs from a Corpus Linguistic Point
of View

9.1 Introduction138
This chapter is not a general introduction to corpus linguistics.
Instead, I will focus on some aspects which are particularly relevant
for the empirical study of proverbs in written language.139 My
examples will be based on German written language corpora,
speci cally the Deutsches Referenzkorpus [German Reference Corpus]
(DeReKo) which is located at the Institute for the German Language in
Mannheim. The corpus analysis tool used for accessing the corpus
data is COSMAS II (CII). However, the questions, search strategies and
examples presented in this chapter should be transferable to other
corpora and languages. I will discuss how a user who is interested in
proverbs can exploit the corpus and which kind of knowledge he can
gain in this way. It will become clear that no computer makes thinking
obsolete – in the end it is always the human who needs to interpret the
results. However, automatic methods can be very useful as they allow
high quality pre-structuring of mass data. The most important skill is
asking the computer questions as intelligently as possible. Mastering
this skill and the methods associated with it is something everyone
must learn for themselves by practical experience. As the proverbs say:
Grau is alle Theorie [ww: Grey is all theory; ee: An ounce of experience
is worth a ton of theory] and Übung macht den Meister [ww: Practice
makes the master; ee: Practice makes perfect].140

9.2 Why Corpora?

The other day, my children said to me: Das Leben ist kein Ponyhof [ww:
Life is not a pony farm; ee: Life isn’t always a bowl of cherries]. This
sentence meant nothing to me. I only know, for example, Das Leben ist
kein Wunschkonzert [ww: Live is not a request show]. However, they
insisted that the pony-farm sentence is a common German proverb, as
they used it frequently in their social circle. Checking the internet and
the corpora con rmed their claim and my ignorance. Test yourself and
your friends: which proverbs spontaneously come to your mind?
Which do you think are outdated and which modern? You will see that
there are big di erences between speakers. Of course there is
something like a proverb memory of a language community, but your
ability to recognize proverbs and your habits of proverb use depend
heavily on your speci c language biography. No speaker has mastery
of all sociolects and dialects. Each speaker has a very limited, very
subjective subset of knowledge about proverbs. Even proverb
collections and dictionaries only help in a limited way. Without doubt
they are a precious and essential part of cultural heritage. But these
collections do not contain undisputable facts about the real use of a
proverb in contemporary language or its constant changes and
adaptations. Many proverbs will be passed on from collection to
collection, from dictionary to dictionary and a collective example
memory will be formed. This is unsatisfactory for second language
learners who will be confronted with material that does not adequately
re ect the current state of the language.
Long-standing empirical solutions for this problem have been
surveys (asking for level of recognition and familiarity) or completion
and association tests. With these methods you can gain valuable
insight about the distribution of proverbs and their role in a language
community.141
During the last decades, new possibilities for recognizing and
describing language use have been opened up by the compilation of
large electronic text databases (corpora). Corpora are collections of
written or spoken texts. Typically the corpus data is digitalized i.e.
machine readable and saved on a computer. In addition to the text
data itself, corpora can also contain metadata, which describe the
data, and linguistic annotations (Lemnitzer & Zinsmeister, 2010: 8).
 Many corpora are collections of electronic texts which have been
compiled to address a speci c research question and are selected for
parameters such as author, source, topic, text type, time period or
medium. In our context these are special proverb corpora, e.g.
searchable collections of texts or text excerpts from data bases which
contain proverbs.
But there is also another type of corpora. These are not built with a
speci c research goal in mind but try to incorporate a representative
subset of a language and therefore strive for a broad coverage in regard
to time, text type, regional variants etc. They are called general
language corpora or reference corpora. However, it must be
emphasized that there will never be a corpus that can truly represent a
language in its entirety, though a huge corpus certainly gets closer to
this goal than a small one.
One of the earliest reference corpora is the British National Corpus
(BNC) which was built in the 1960s. The largest general language
corpora for German which are publicly available free of charge (with
registration, no download) are:
– The corpus of the Digitales Wörterbuch des 20. Jahrhunderts [Digital
dictionary of the 20th century] (DWDS corpus)
– The Deutsches Referenzkorpus [German Reference corpus] (DeReKo)
of the Institute for the German language in Mannheim (DeReKo
2013).
Under development is currently the C4 corpus, a combination of the
DWDS corpus, the Schweizer Text Korpus [corpus of Switzerland], the
Austrian Academic corpus and the Korpus Südtirol [corpus of South
Tyrol] (Korpus C4).
An additional large resource for language studies these days is the
World Wide Web. Internet searches gain importance in phraseology
and paremiology as well (Umurova, 2005; Colson, 2007; Ptashnyk &
Hallsteinsdóttir & Bubenhofer, 2010), though evidence from this
empirical source should not be used without close checking and
careful interpretation (Steyer, 2013).
I would like to close this introduction with a caveat – hopefully not
too disheartening: Proverb use in the corpus is only a snapshot in time,
one of the many facets of communication. All conclusions that you can
draw are therefore only representative for this language snapshot. As
many corpora are dominated by newspaper and journal texts you learn
a lot about how journalists and professional writers use proverbs. This
does not mean that the saleslady in the shop round the corner speaks
the same way. So you can never say: I did not nd this proverb in the
corpus therefore it does not exist. Or: This proverb appears this many
times, therefore it is one of the most frequent proverbs in my language.
This would not be good scienti c practice. What you can say is: This
proverb appears frequently in my modern language corpus, therefore it
cannot be outdated (as long as your examples are real uses of the
proverb). If a proverb has variants which are not from a single source,
but from di erent sources and di erent times, you can also claim that
these are typical and not singular variations. So if nothing else, the
typical examples of proverb use that can be found in modern corpora
are de nitely a good reference to decide which proverbs are most
useful to learn and to use for second language learners.

9.3 Corpus Linguistic Approaches to Proverb Study

The corpus-empirical approach has only recently started to impact on
paremiology. Pioneering work has been done by Ďurčo, among others
2005), Čermák, among ogy. Pioneering work has been done by Ďurčo,
among others 2005), Čermák, among others 2006 and by the EU-
Project SprichWort (2008-2010, 143376-LLP-1-2008-1-SI-KA2KA2MP )
(Steyer, 2012 a and b; SWP).142
Generally, two corpus linguistic approaches to the study of current
proverb use can be distinguished:
– Knowing a proverb, because it is codi ed in a dictionary or as an
entry in the mental lexicon of speakers and then searching this
proverb in the corpus (corpus based) (3.1).
– Detecting a proverb in a corpus (corpus driven). One prominent
approach for this is the statistical collocation analysis of
paremiological keywords (e.g. cultural symbols like numbers,
colors, animals or body parts) or introductory formulas like
proverb, saying, slogan or says an old wisdom (3.2).143
Regardless of the methodological approach, all contemporaray corpus
analysis tools provide multiple ways of visualizing the search results.
Apart from a list of sources which can be sorted in di erent ways, two
presentation formats are standard today:
– concordance lines (keyword in context: KWIC)
– full text results.
The KWIC format is helpful for recognizing base forms of proverbs,
xedness and variance and pragmatic markers (3.1.1 – 3.1.3). Full text
results give information about the meaning of the proverb and its
usage context (3.1.4).

9.3.1 Corpus-based Questions About Proverbs

9.3.1.1 Proverb – Yes or No?

According to the proverb de nition of Röhrich & Mieder, 1977 the
following criteria (amongst others) must be considered when
identi ng a proverb:
1) Do the components appear in the form of a sentence or a non- nite
clause – like Ohne Fleiß kein Preis [ee: No pain, no gain] – that is
equivalent to a sentence?
2) Are they not – or at least not only – used as quotations with a cited
source but have become part of everyday language as an expression of
wordly wisdom?
3) Do they express generalized experiences or value judgements?
While 3) can only be determined by a qualitative interpretation,
corpus analysis gives valuable indications in regard to 1) and 2).
Searching for proverbs in a general language corpus is no trivial
matter. There are few or no assumptions about the occurrence and
behaviour of a proverb that can be made in advance. Therefore each
proverb candidate must be examined individually in an iterative
alternation of automatic analysis and the formulation of
hypotheses.144 During this process, it is crucial to have as few
preconceived notions about the form of the proverb as possible
because again and again corpus evidence proves our intuition wrong.
If I search for a xed sentence in the corpus, I will only nd this
sentence. All possible variations, extensions and reductions will not be
covered by this search. Therefore it is a good strategy to start with a
wide search which is then gradually restricted.
The rst step is to check whether the lexical components of the
proverb candidate appear in the same sentence at all. Consider the
proverb candidate Alte Ochsen machen gerade Furchen [ww: Old oxes
make straight furrows]. In this case Ochse [ox], Furche [furrow] and alt
[old] never appear together in the corpus. This is evidence that this
proverb is probably outdated.
If the search for the lexical components in the same sentence was
successful, this can indicate a proverb. KWIC concordance lines help to
quickly check an important proverb criterion (Lüger, 1999): whether
the form is that of a sentence or a non- nite clause equivalent to a
sentence. For example searching for Speck [bacon] and Maus [mouse]
in the same sentence already gives a clear picture of the proverb Mit
Speck fängt man Mäuse [ww: With bacon one catches mice; ee: Good
bait catches ne sh].
(1)
K00 Mit Speck fängt man die Mäuse – und mit Dollars
Leichtathleten.
RHZ06 Mit Speck fängt man Mäuse, aber keine Stimmen.
RHZ00 Mit Speck fängt man Mäuse, weiß der Volksmund.
RHZ06 Mit Speck fängt man Mäuse und mit Käse die Narren
DPA09 Mit Speck fängt man Mäuse, aber keine Wähler.
Z06 Mit Speck fängt man Mäuse – und macht man auch Mäuse
NUN91 Mit Speck fängt man Mäuse, mit Kultur gewinnt man
Kunden.

For the proverb candidate Niemand ist ohne Fehl und Tadel [ww:
Nobody is without faults and blames; ee: Nobody is perfect] however,
searching for the components Fehl [fault] and Tadel [blame] together
gives a high number of results, but the complete proverb sentence was
rarely found. In this case, only the propositional phrase ohne Fehl und
Tadel [ww: without fault and blame] is xed but the contexts vary:
(2)
F95 Wer ohne Fehl und Tadel ist, der werfe den ersten
Stein.
N92 löste diese Aufgabe ohne Fehl und Tadel. Mehr noch:
O94 die Musik ist ohne Fehl und Tadel;
M98 selbst Heilige sind nicht frei von Fehl und Tadel.

For other proverb candidates the wide search must be restricted

gradually to capture the real instances of proverb use. An example is
the proverb Zeit ist Geld [ee: Time is money]. Even if you allow only
one word between the components Zeit [time] and Geld [money], you
get a lot of hits that have nothing to do with the proverb, but capture
the binomial pair Zeit und Geld [time and money] – the same happens,
by the way, when searching for time and money in the English corpus
BNC. Only when integrating the verb form ist [is] into the search, you
will nd the proverb. The following KWIC examples are from the BNC:
(3)
A3C 74 Time is money and, after money, time is what the
masses crave most.
ABK 149 TIME is money.
ANY 1167 That costs time, and time is money.
ASF 1442 It was soon realized by many of the middle class
that ‘time is money’ and consequently must be carefully
regulated and used economically.

For the proverb candidate Viel Lärm um nichts [ww: Much noise about
nothing, ee: Much ado about nothing] the search must be heavily
restricted, with many components and a close focus. Searching for
Lärm [noise] and nichts [nothing] in the same sentence in DeReKo
gives more than 3000 results, however these include many instances
that have nothing to do with the proverb, e.g. Die Fahrer hören nichts
vom Lärm [The drivers hear nothing of the noise]. A er including viel
[much] and um [about] into the search, about 77% of the hits capture
the sentence Viel Lärm um nichts. However, these results must be
further examined, as many of them are citations, referring to the
comedy of William Shakespeare. We are interested in how the sentence
is used as proverb therefore we try to exclude as many words as
possible that indicate a Shakespeare context in any form. The nal,
very complex search query is: Search for viel and Lärm and nichts in
the same sentence, but the sentence must not include Shakespeare or
Komödie [comedy] or Uhr [clock]145 or Kino [movie theatre] or Film
[movie] or Regie [stage direction] or Branagh146or Branaghs or
Schauspieler [actor] or Hollywood or Hollywoods or any compound
words with Theater [theatre]. This search yields still over 1500 hits for
Viel Lärm um nichts and you can now assume that these re ect its
usage as a real proverb.
This double life as a quotation and as a proverb is very frequent
phenomenon in the corpus, as you can see from the fact that
references to the real or supposed origin of a proverb are very common.
For example, the biblical or Latin roots of the proverb are mentioned or
the person who is credited with its creation. These markers should not
be treated as true or false statements about authorship, but as
indicators for origin contexts which are still present in the minds of the
speakers. For example, in the context of the proverb candidate Zeit ist
Geld [ee: Time is money] you o en nd references to Benjamin
Franklin:
(4)
Handel und Wandel nahmen neue Formen an, sodass der
amerikanische Staatsmann Benjamin Franklin den stehenden
Begriff «Zeit ist Geld» prägte. Ein Geist der Unrast
begann um sich zu greifen. (St. Galler Tagblatt,
28.10.1999)

There is a transition zone for proverb candidates which are already

frequent in the corpus, but cannot (yet) ful l the proverb criterion that
they are applicable in many contexts of communication. For example,
the proverb candidate Es gibt kein schlechtes Wetter, nur schlechte
Kleidung [ww: There’s no bad weather, but only bad clothes] is only
used in weather contexts and only with the meaning that any weather
can be endured wearing the right clothes and that you should
therefore not cancel your outdoor activities because of the weather.
(5)
 Frei nach dem schlauen Spruch „Es gibt kein schlechtes
Wetter, nur schlechte Kleidung“ halten sich die Jungen und
Mädchen in der Betreuungszeit ausschließlich im Wald auf,
auch bei Regen und Schnee. Da leistet die mitwachsende
Kinderlederhose gute Dienste (Rhein-Zeitung, 29.10.2008)

However, it is easy to imagine this proverb in a sense: “If you prepare

appropriately, you can master or enjoy any situation”. The following
usage example from the corpus already hints at an evolution towards
such a status as a saying of worldly wisdom:
(6)
Wenn man glaubt, das Glück geschenkt zu bekommen, liegt
man falsch. Wenn mich einer fragt: Wie war im Urlaub das
Wetter?, antworte ich stets: Es gibt kein schlechtes
Wetter, nur schlechte Kleidung. So ist es nämlich auch mit
dem Glücklichsein. (die tageszeitung, 01.07.1997, S. 22)

An important feature – e.g. in CII – is the possibility to sort the search

results chronologically. Such lists give indications whether a proverb is
more likely archaic or newly coined. You can also examine aspects like
the earliest occurrence or a decrease in use frequency. For some
proverbs, corpus analysis even allows the reconstruction of the
evolution from an original quotation to a proverb, for example for the
German proverb Wer zu spät kommt, den bestra das Leben [ww: He
who comes late is punished by life]. This proverb is as transformation
of the original sentence from Mikhail Gorbachev Gefahren warten nur
auf jene, die nicht auf das Leben reagieren [ww: Dangers await only
those who do not respond to life] during a state visit to the former East
Germany in October 1989, shortly before the fall of the Berlin Wall.
(Mieder, 2004; Mieder, 2010; Steyer, in print). Figure 9.1 shows the
chronological list of hits (899)147.
You can see, that this proverb is documented for the rst time in
DeReKo indeed in 1989. More than 30 years later, you nd many
examples for the use as a true proverb in the corpus, like the following:
„Limburgerhof als Stadtteil von Ludwigshafen? Die Stadt
hätte sicherlich nichts dagegen. Die Frage ist nur: Ist
dies das strategische Interesse von Limburgerhof? Ein
Sprichwort sagt: Wer zu spät kommt, den bestraft das
 Leben. Für Limburgerhof heißt das: Entweder jetzt die
Chance mit Neuhofen zu ergreifen oder aber später zum
Spielball fremder Interessen zu werden“ (Die Rheinpfalz,
20.08.2012, S. 23).

And many young people do not know the context anymore, as a small
survey amongst students showed me. The sentence is truly established
as a proverb.

Figure 9.1: Chronological list of Wer zu spät kommt, den bestra das Leben

9.3.1.2 Fixedness and Variance

One of the central questions in proverb studies and proverb
lexicography is about xedness and variance of proverbs. On the one
hand there are variations which happen at the syntactic and
morphological level, as in this example of the proverb Der Fisch stinkt
vom Kopf [ee: The sh always stinks from the head downwards]:
(7)
T05 Der Fisch stinkt vom Kopf her, sagt der Volksmund.
NUZ09 Chinesen haben ein unappetitliches, aber wahres
Sprichwort: Der Fisch stinkt vom Kopfe her.
NUN05 »Am Kopf fängt der Fisch das Stinken an« ist eine
alte Weisheit.

On the other hand, there is the substitution of certain components

with other lexical elements. These variations can be found by using
restrictive search queries as explained above. For example to nd
variations of the proverb Übung macht den Meister [ww: Practice
makes the master] you can search for Übung macht den/die/das
[Practice makes the] WITHOUT Meister [master] or macht den Meister
[makes the master] WITHOUT Übung [practice]:
(8)
Übung macht den X-Meister [ww: Practice makes the X-master]
M99 Übung macht den Handball-Meister
M99 Übung macht auch hier den Zaubermeister

These are variants which use compounds with Meister, e.g.: Practice
makes the master of handball/magic.
(9)
Übung macht den X [ww: Practice makes the X]
A97 Übung macht den Radioprediger
A00 Übung macht den Schützen
A09 Übung macht den Feuerwehrmann
F99 Übung macht den Gourmet

In these variants Meister is substituted, e.g.; Practice makes the radio

preacher/marksman/ re ghter/gourmet.
(10)
X macht den Meister [ww: X makes the master]
B06 Technik macht den Meister
B07 Energie macht den Meister
B07 Vorsicht macht den Meister
E99 Doch erst Playoff macht den Meister

Here, Übung [practice] is substituted, e.g.;

Technique/Energy/Caution/Playo makes the master.
It is also possible to nd variations with more abstract search
queries,148 e.g. Wer A sagt, muss auch B sagen [ee: Who says A must
say B]:149
(11)
R99 Wer „Puppe” [doll] sagt, muss auch „Barbie” sagen
RHZ06 Wer Argentinien [Argentina]sagt, muss auch Tango
sagen
T10 Wer Beatles sagt, muss aber auch Rolling Stones sagen

In this case, the proverb variants play with the abstract meaning ‘one
thing necessarily calls for another’ of the pattern Who says X must say
Y, e.g.: doll –> Barbie; Argentina –> Tango; Beatles –>Rolling Stones.

9.3.1.3 Proverb Frequency

Calculating proverb frequency is a complex problem which has no
standard solution. There will be di erent results depending on the
corpus and the search query that was used. Consider the proverb Not
macht er nderisch [ww: Necessity makes ingenious; ee: Necessity is
the mother of invention]. If you use a restrictive search query like “Not
[necessity] directly followed by macht [makes] directly followed by
er nderisch [ingenious]” you get more than 900 hits for the proverb in
exactly this form. If you widen the search and allow all morphological
forms of the verb machen [make], the number of hits already increases
by approx 40. If in addition to that you allow wider gaps between the
components so that you also capture occurrences with an introductory
formula (Not macht bekanntlich/sagt man [ww: as is generally
known/as they say] er nderisch) or minimal lexical additions (e.g.
particles like Not macht eben immer/nun mal/schließlich [ww:
always/a er all/as you know] er nderisch) the number of hits for this
example increases by approx. 600!
As you can see, there can be no absolute proverb frequencies (this
is also true for multi-word expressions in general). Statements about
frequency are only meaningful if you make transparent on which
corpus basis and with which search queries the numbers have been
obtained (Appendix 2). It is also recommended to refer to proportional
frequencies or frequency trends rather than absolute numbers.

9.3.1.4 Meaning and Usage150

Corpus analysis gives us an empirically sound way to nd out what
aspects are always parts of the meaning of a proverb and what aspects
are typically connected to the use of the proverb and form its wider
context. Pragmatic aspects of meaning in particular are o en
perceived from a very subjective perspective. Corpus analysis helps to
get a more objective view as it identi es usage properties which repeat
themselves and are therefore typical. Thus, meaning can o en be
captured in a more accurate and nuanced way than by pure
introspection. For example, the proverb Die Ratten verlassen das
sinkende Schi [ww: The rats are leaving the sinking ship] on rst
glance refers to someone who notices a danger in time and ees.151
However, corpus evidence clearly points to the following meaning-in-
usage (cited from the article on the SprichWort platform, Steyer &
Hein, 2010):
(12)
Bedeutung / Besonderheiten im Gebrauch [meanig / current usage]
„Sagt man, wenn sich Verantwortliche bei von ihnen mit
verschuldeten negativen Entwicklungen oder Schwierigkeiten
zurückziehen und sich damit aus der Verantwortung stehlen“
(Steyer & Hein, 2010)
[English translation of this paraphrase: “Is used when someone draws back from
negative consequences or problems he has caused and by doing so shirks
 responsibility.”]
Korpusbeleg [corpus citation]:
Die Ratten haben das sinkende Schiff verlassen. Der
irakische Oppositionspolitiker Hassan Halboos ist fest
davon überzeugt, dass Tausende von Helfern Saddam Husseins
ihre Uniformen ausgezogen und sich unters Volk gemischt
haben. (RHZ03/APR.09770 Rhein-Zeitung, 12.04.2003;
“Saddams Helfer tarnen sich”)

Sometimes corpus evidence shows that there is a pragmatic aspect

that is always tied to the use of a proverb, such as a negative
connotation Die dümmsten Bauern haben die dicksten Karto eln [ww:
The dumbest peasants have the biggest potatoes; ee: Fortune favors
fools]. In most cases pragmatic aspects like ‘devaluation’ are not
present for all, but still for many of the usage instances from the
corpus. The following usage aspects can typically be found with the
help of corpus analysis:
– Context of usage; e.g. typically in sport reports: Man ist so alt, wie
man sich fühlt [ww: You are as old as you feel]; Rache ist süß [ww:
Vengeance is sweet]; Knapp daneben ist auch vorbei [ww: Narrowly
missed is still missed];
– Function in communication, e.g. typically as ‘admonition’: Erst
denken, dann handeln [ww: First thinking, then acting]; Hochmut
kommt vor dem Fall [ee: Pride goes before a fall]; Die Konkurrenz
schlä nicht [ww: The competition does not sleep];
– Text type, e.g. typically in horoscopes: Der Klügere gibt nach [ee:
The cleverer give in]; Eile mit Weile [ee: Haste makes waste]; Wer
rastet, der rostet [ee: You snooze, you loose].
Examining corpus evidence also gives a good idea of the textual
integration of proverbs. For example, by doing an alphabetical sort of
the KWIC lines, you can easily see frequent elements in front of the
proverb. In the case of the proverb Der Schein trügt these are
conjunctions like aber, denn or doch [ww: But/Because/However
appearances are deceitful; ee: But/Because/However you can’t tell a
book by its cover]:
(13)
WPD11 Aber der Schein trügt: In einer Bar wandern
RHZ11 Aber der Schein trügt. Auch diese Felder
HMP09 Aber der Schein trügt: Während der 27-Jährige
sorglos seine PIN eingibt,
F01 Denn der Schein trügt nie in Maastricht:
F95 Denn der Schein trügt, lernen wir,
BRZ10 Denn der Schein trügt: Trotz der Minusgrade
T87 Doch der Schein trügt: Unser Backwerk entsteht aus dem
Mehl nur weniger
T86 Doch der Schein trügt

Other typical textual context elements can be: frequent modi cation
with adverbs or particles like Der Ton macht eben/halt/nun mal die
Musik [ww: The sound makes PARTICLE the music (the particles mean
roughly ‘a er all’); ee: It’s not what you say, but how you say it];
frequent sentence mode, e.g. question: Ende gut, alles gut? [ee: All’s
well that ends well?], frequent negation: Die Zeit heilt nicht alle
Wunden [ww: Time does not heal all wounds]; frequent use as an
opening phrase for a topic: Der Schein trügt: [ww: Appearances are
deceitful: ee: But You can’t tell a book by its cover:] frequent use as a
parenthesis: Aber andererseits, sicher ist sicher, lud er zum Empfang
[...] ein [ww: But on the other hand, sure is sure; ee: just to be sure, he
invited to the reception]; frequent reduction to only a part of the
proverb: Reden ist Silber [ONLY: Speech is silver] or Schweigen ist Gold
[ONLY: Silence is golden], frequent syntactical transformation: süße
Rache [sweet revenge from Revenge is sweet].

9.3.2 Proverbs – Corpus Driven

The second corpus analytical approach is the automatic extraction of
multi-word units – including proverbs – from the corpus. A useful
method that is available in many corpus analysis tools is collocation
analysis which calculates the signi cant partner words of a target
word. A sophisticated implementation of this method can be used via
COSMAS II (Belica, 1995).152 Collocation analysis allows us to nd
common multiword units that cluster around proverb key words like
Geld [money]; Welt [world]; Liebe [love] or Mensch [human], but also
around introductury formulas.153 Figure 2 shows a clipping from the
collocation pro le of the introductory formula bekanntlich [as is
generally known]:154

Figure 9.2: Clipping from the collocation pro le of bekanntlich

You can see that the partner words point towards several common
proverbs.
In addition to that, collocaton analysis gives valuable hints in
regard to typical usage situations as attested by many context-based
approaches (Sinclair, 2004; Stubbs, 2001 and many other). The
clippings in Figure 9.3 are from the collocation pro le of Die Ratten
verlassen das sinkende Schi [ww: The rats are leaving the sinking
ship], (section 3.1.4).
Figure 9.3: Clippings from the collocation pro le of Ratten–verlassen–Schi

Signi cant partner words in the wider context of this proverb indicate
1) that this sentence is commonly used as a saying of worldly wisdom
(e.g. proverb/maxim/as is generally known/saying/motto),
2) that the nautical origin metaphor is o en referenced, (e.g.
Titanic/sinking/panic/captain/escape/to disembark etc.),
3) that the behaviour described by the proverb is typically attributed to
persons or social groups that hold leadership positions, (e.g.
dictator/governments/manager/Milosevic etc.).
Finally, collocation analysis can help to analyse proverb patterns
and schemas. Figure 9.4 shows a clipping from the collocation pro le
of the proverb pattern Wer X, der Y [ww: He who X Y], an even more
abstract pattern of Who says X must say Y (discussed in section 3.1.2).
Figure 9.4: Clipping from the collocation pro le of the pattern Wer GAP OF ONE
WORD, der

Typically realisations of the pattern Wer X, der Y are: Wer rastet, der
rostet [ww: Who rests rusts; ee: You snooze, you lose]; Wer wagt,
gewinnt [ee: Who dares wins].
Collocation analysis not only generates lists of signi cant partner
words and syntagmatic patterns as shown in the clippings above, but
also sorts KWIC concordance lines and full text results according to
their context patterns. These should always be included in the
interpretation. Below you can study some KWIC lines (12) and full text
results (13) for the proverb Wer austeilt, der muss auch einstecken
können [ww: He who dishes it out, must also be able to take it].
(14)
K97 Nein, mich kann man nicht beleidigen. Wer austeilt,
der muß auch einstecken können.
PNI haben wir uns schöne Auseinandersetzungen, auch
verbal, geliefert. Wer austeilt, der muss auch einstecken
können, okay.
PRP Man muß auch nicht zimperlich sein. Wer austeilt, der
muß auch einstecken können. Herr Kollege Dr. Mertes,

(15)
Nein, mich kann man nicht beleidigen. Wer austeilt, der
muß auch einstecken können.
 Was hätte Matthias Schuh werden sollen, wenn es nach
seinen Eltern gegangen wäre? (Kleine Zeitung, 17.05.1997,
Ressort: Menschen; „Mich kann doch niemand beleidigen!“)
In dem Bereich, den ich früher hier vertreten durfte,
haben wir uns schöne Auseinandersetzungen, auch verbal,
geliefert.
Wer austeilt, der muss auch einstecken können, okay. Aber
Sie werden bei allen Auseinandersetzungen verbaler Art mit
der früheren niedersächsischen Umweltministerin oder auch
mit dem jetzigen Umweltminister von mir nie Ausdrücke wie
„mangelnder Sachverstand“, „keine Ahnung“ oder so etwas
gehört haben. (Protokoll der Sitzung des Parlaments
Landtag Niedersachsen am 30.07.1999. 30. Sitzung der 14.
Wahlperiode 1998-2003. Plenarprotokoll, Hannover, 1999 [S.
2734])
Man muß auch nicht zimperlich sein. Wer austeilt, der muß
auch einstecken können.
Herr Kollege Dr. Mertes, eines geht nicht. (PRP/W13.00035
Protokoll der Sitzung des Parlaments Landtag Rheinland-
Pfalz am 17.07.1997. 35. Sitzung der 13. Wahlperiode 1996-
2001. Plenarprotokoll, Mainz am Rhein, 1997)

It must again be stressed that collocation analysis only gives pointers

and can never replaces human interpretation.

9.4 Summary and Outlook

This chapter gave a rst overview of how proverb research can bene t
from corpus linguistic approaches. My main goal was to illustrate the
general principles. Corpus linguistics revolutionizes especially
application-related areas like proverb lexicography and didactics which
are already focussed on languge usage. An example for a strictly
corpus-based approach is the above-mentioned EU-project SprichWort.
Future research should aim towards comparing the results of corpus
linguistic methods with those of proverb surveys and of the traditional
historical paremiology. A vision would be the creation of new proverb
collections or modern proverb information systems which combine all
this knowledge in a meaningful way.
 However, corpus linguistic proverb research also opens new
perspectives in regard to linguistic theory, e.g. a connection with
construction grammar and with a new, pattern-based phraseology. As
paremiologists who use corpus linguistic methods generally work with
a large data basis, they view regularities in many similar cases of
usage. A new quality of research is not only achieved by using more
data, but also by discovering structures which have been hidden from
human perception before. There is a chance to nd unusual cross-
connections and unexpected relations. Because of this, you can now
study proverbs as part of the larger picture of language and
vocabulary.
Empirical corpus research once again raises the general issue of the
special status of proverbs on the one hand and their role in the
network of multi-word units on the other hand: Corpus empirical
evidence shows that speakers consciously recall xed phrases and use
them for their special communicative function of condensing complex
messages. At the same time, the limitless number and variance of
introductury formulas in the corpus is evidence that speakers do not
make a ne distinction between proverb, saying, slogan or motto, but
that only the concept sentence as message is important.
The corpus linguistic perspective also shows that proverbs
themselves can be realisations of more general patterns and schemas
(example Wer X der Y) and share attributes and characteristics with
non-proverb multi-word units. Pilot studies suggest that proverbs o en
represent the prototypical realisations of those schemas and, as
lexically xed expressions, are more salient in the mind of the
speakers, while nonproverb units of the same schema tend to be
subject to creative ad-hoc variations. This raises the question why
some proverbs have hardly any variants while others have many. As
you can see, strictly corpus-based proverb studies can create a fresh
impetus for a pattern-based theory of the lexicon.
References
Aurich, C. (2009). Proverb Structure in the History of English: Stability and Change: A
Corpus-Based Study. (Phraseologie und Parömiologie 26). Baltmannsweiler:
Schneider Hohengehren.
Belica, C. (1995). Statistische Kollokationsanalyse und Clustering.
Korpuslinguistische Analysemethode. Mannheim: Institut für Deutsche Sprache.
http://www1.ids-mannheim.de/kl/projekte/methoden/ur.html (accessed
November 12, 2013).
BNC: British National Corpus. http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/ (accessed November 12,
2013).
Bubenhofer, N. (2006-2013). Einführung in die Korpuslinguistik: Praktische
Grundlagen und Werkzeuge. Elektronische Ressource.
http://www.bubenhofer.com/korpuslinguistik/. (accessed November 12, 2013).
Burger, H. (2010). Phraseologie: Eine Einführung am Beispiel des Deutschen. 4., neu
bearb. Aufl. Berlin: Schmidt.
Bürki, A. (2012). Korpusgeleitete Extraktion von Mehrwortsequenzen aus
(diachronen) Korpora: Vorgehenswege für deutschsprachige Daten. In N.
Filatkina, A. Kleine-Engel, M. Dräger & H. Burger (Eds.), Aspekte der historischen
Phraseologie und Phraseographie (pp. 263-292). Heidelberg: Winter.
Čermák, F. (2004). Text Introducers of Proverbs and Other Idioms. In C. Földes & J.
Wirrer (Eds.), Phraseologismen als Gegenstand sprach- und
kulturwissenscha licher Forschung (Phraseologie und Parömiologie 15) (pp. 27-
46). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Hohengehren.
Čermák, F. (2006). Statistical Methods for Searching Idioms in Text Corpora. In: A.
Häcki Buhofer, & H. Burger (Eds.), Phraseology in Motion I. Methoden und Kritik
(Phraseologie und Parömiologie 19) (pp. 33-42). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider
Hohengehren.
Charteris-Black, J. (1999). The Survival of English Proverbs: A Corpus Based Account.
DeProverbio, 5(2). http://www.deproverbio.com/display.php?a=3&r=96
(accessed November 11, 2013).
CII: COSMAS II: Korpusrecherche- und analysesystem. Internet: http://www.ids-
mannheim.de/cosmas2/ (accessed November 12, 2013).
Colson, J. P. (2007). The World Wide Web as a corpus for set phrases. In H. Burger, D.
Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn & N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseologie. Ein internationales
Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung (HSK 28.2) (pp. 1071-1077).
Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Cowie, A. P. (1998). Phraseology: Theory, Analysis, and Applications. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
DEREKO (2013). Deutsches Referenzkorpus / Archiv der Korpora geschriebener
Gegenwartssprache 2013-I (Release vom 19.03.2013). Mannheim: Institut für
Deutsche Sprache. http://www1.ids-mannheim.de/kl/projekte/korpora.html
(accessed November 12, 2013).
Dict.cc: Dict.cc. Deutsch-Englisches Wörterbuch. http://www.dict.cc/ (accessed
November 12, 2013).
Duden 11 (2013). Duden Redewendungen. Wörterbuch der deutschen Idiomatik. 4.,
neu bearb. und aktualisierte Aufl. Herausgegeben von der Dudenredaktion. Red.
Bearb. W. Scholze-Stubenrecht & A. Haller-Wolf. Berlin/Mannheim/Zürich:
Dudenverlag.
Ďurčo, P. (2005). Sprichwörter in der Gegenwartssprache. Trnava: Univerzita Sv.
Cyrila a Metoda. Filozo cká fakulta.
Ďurčo, P. (2006). Methoden der Sprichwortanalysen oder Auf dem Weg zum
Sprichwörter-Optimum. In A. Häcki Buhofer & H. Burger (Eds.), Phraseology in
Motion I. Methoden und Kritik. Akten der Internationalen Tagung zur Phraseologie
(Basel, 2004). (Phraseologie und Parömiologie 19) (pp. 3-20). Baltmannsweiler:
Schneider Hohengehren.
Ďurčo, P. (2010). Einsatz von Sketch Engine im Korpus –Vorteile und Mängel. In S.
Ptashnyk, E. Hallsteinsdóttir, & N. Bubenhofer (Eds.) (2010). Korpora, Web und
Datenbanken. Computergestützte Methoden in der modernen Phraseologie und
Lexikographie (Phraseologie und Parömiologie 25) (pp. 119-131).
Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Hohengehren.
DWDS-Corpus: Korpora des Digitalen Wörterbuchs der deutschen Sprache.
http://www.dwds.de/ressourcen/korpora/ (accessed November 12, 2013).
EPHRAS: EPHRAS. Ein mehrsprachiges phraseologisches Lernmaterial auf CD-ROM.
http://www.ephras.org/ (accessed November 12, 2013).
Granger, S. & Meunier, F. (Eds.) (2008). Phraseology: An interdisciplinary
Perspective. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Grzybek, P. (2012). Facetten des parömiologischen Rubik-Würfels. Kenntnis≡
Bekanntheit [⇔ Verwendung ≈ Frequenz] ?!?. In K. Steyer (Ed.), Sprichwörter
multilingual. Theoretische, empirische und angewandte Aspekte der modernen
Parömiologie (Studien zur Deutschen Sprache 60) (pp. 99-138). Tübingen: Narr.
Heid, U. (2007). Computational linguistic aspects of phraseology II. In H. Burger, D.
Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn & N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseologie. Ein internationales
Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung (HSK 28.2) (pp. 1036-1044).
Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Hein, K. (2012). Zugang zu Sprichwortbedeutung und –gebrauch mit Hilfe von
Korpora. In K. Steyer (Ed.), Sprichwörter multilingual. Theoretische, empirische
und angewandte Aspekte der modernen Parömiologie (Studien zur Deutschen
Sprache 60) (pp. 315-340). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H. (2010). Vom gedruckten Sprichwörterbuch zur interaktiven
Sprichwortdatenbank: Überlegungen zum linguistischen und lexikographischen
Konzept mehrsprachiger Sprichwortdatenbanken (Sprichwörterforschung 26).
Bern: Peter Lang.
Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H. & Gotthardt, Z. (2012). Sprichwörter im bulgarischen
nationalen Korpus . Proverbium 29, 25-36.
Juska-Bacher, B. (2012). Empirische Methoden in der kontrastiven
Sprichwortforschung: Möglichkeiten der Informantenbefragung. In K. Steyer
(Ed.), Sprichwörter multilingual. Theoretische, empirische und angewandte
 Aspekte der modernen Parömiologie (Studien zur Deutschen Sprache 60) (pp.
139-164). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Korpus C4: Gemeinscha skorpus des DWDS, des AAC, des Korpus Südtirol und des
CHTK. http://www.korpus-c4.org/ (accessed November 12, 2013).
Lemnitzer, L. & Zinsmeister, H. (2010). Korpuslinguistik: Eine Einführung. 2.
durchges. und aktualisierte Aufl. (Narr Studienbücher). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Lüdeling, A. & Kytö, M. (2008). Corpus linguistics: An International Handbook (Vol 1).
(HSK 29.1). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Lüger, H. H. (1999). Satzwertige Phraseologismen: Eine pragmalinguistische
Untersuchung. Wien: Praesens.
McEnery, T. & Hardie, A. (2012). Corpus linguistics: Method, theory and practice.
(Cambridge textbooks in linguistics). Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University
Press.
McEnery, T. & Wilson, A. (2001). Corpus linguistics. (2nd edition). (Edinburgh
Textbooks in Empirical Linguistics) Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Mieder, W. (2004). „Andere Zeiten, andere Lehren” – Sprach- und
kulturgeschichtliche Betrachtungen zum Sprichwort. In K. Steyer (Ed.),
Wortverbindungen – mehr oder weniger fest (Jahrbuch des Instituts für Deutsche
Sprache 2003) (pp. 415-438). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Mieder, W. (2009). International Bibliography of Paremiology and Phraseology (2
Volumes). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Mieder, W. (2010). „Spruchschlösser (ab)bauen”: Sprichwörter, Antisprichwörter und
Lehnsprichwörter in Literatur und Medien. Wien: Praesens.
Moon, R. (1998). Fixed Expressions and Idioms in English: A Corpus-Based Approach.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Moon, R. (2007). Corpus linguistic approaches with English Corpora. In H. Burger, D.
Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn & N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseologie. Ein internationales
Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung (HSK 28.2) (pp. 1045-1059).
Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Mukherjee, J. (2009). Anglistische Korpuslinguistik: Eine Einführung. (Grundlagen
der Anglistik und Amerikanistik 33). Berlin: Schmidt.
Perkuhn, R. & Belica, C. (2004). Eine kurze Einführung in die Kookkurrenzanalyse und
syntagmatische Muster. Mannheim: Institut für Deutsche Sprache.
http://www.ids-mannheim.de/kl/misc/tutorial.html (accessed November 12,
2013).
Perkuhn, R., Keibel, H. & Kupietz, M. (2012). Korpuslinguistik. (UTB 3433).
Paderborn: Fink.
Ptashnyk, S., Hallsteinsdóttir, E. & Bubenhofer, N. (Eds.) (2010). Korpora, Web und
Datenbanken: Computergestützte Methoden in der modernen Phraseologie und
Lexikographie (Phraseologie und Parömiologie 25). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider
Hohengehren.
Röhrich, L. & Mieder, W. (1977). Sprichwort. Stuttgart: Metzler.
Rothkegel, A. (2007). Computerlinguistische Aspekte der Phraseme I. In H. Burger, D.
Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn & N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseologie. Ein internationales
 Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung (28.2) (pp. 1027-1035). Berlin/New
York: de Gruyter.
Sailer, M. (2007). Corpus linguistic approaches with German corpora. In H. Burger, D.
Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn & N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseologie. Ein internationales
Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung (HSK 28.2) (pp. 1060-1071).
Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sinclair, J. (2004). Trust the text: Language, corpus and discourse. London:
Routledge.
SkE: Sektch Engine: Corpus Query System. http://www.sketchengine.co.uk/
(accessed November 12, 2013).
Speake, Jennifer (Ed.) (2008). OXFORD Dictionary of Proverbs. Fi h Edition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Steyer, K. & Ďurčo, P. (2013). Ein korpusbasiertes Beschreibungsmodell für die
elektronische Sprichwortlexikogra e. In J.-M. Benayoun, N. Kübler & J.-P.
Zouogbo (Eds.), Parémiologie. Proverbes et formes voisines. Volume 3 (pp. 219-
250). Sainte Gemme: Presses Universitaire.
Steyer, K. & Hein, K. (2010): Deutsche Sprichwortartikel. In: Datenbank des EU-
Projekts SprichWort. www.sprichwort-plattform.org/sp/Sprichwort (accessed
November 12, 2013).
Steyer, K. (2003). Korpus, Statistik, Kookkurrenz: Lässt sich Idiomatisches
„berechnen“? In H. Burger, A. Häcki Buhofer & G. Gréciano (Eds.): Flut von Texten
– Vielfalt der Kulturen. Ascona 2001 zur Methodologie und Kulturspezi k der
Phraseologie (Phraseologie und Parömiologie 14) (pp. 33-46). Baltmannsweiler:
Schneider Hohengehren.
Steyer, K. (2004). Kookkurrenz: Korpusmethodik, linguistisches Modell,
lexikogra sche Perspektiven. In K. Steyer (Ed.), Wortverbindungen – mehr oder
weniger fest (Jahrbuch des Instituts für Deutsche Sprache 2003) (pp. 87-116).
Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Steyer, K. (2012b). Sprichwortstatus, Frequenz, Musterbildung: Parömiologische
Fragen im Lichte korpusmethodischer Empirie. In K. Steyer (Ed.), Sprichwörter
multilingual. Theoretische, empirische und angewandte Aspekte der modernen
Parömiologie (Studien zur Deutschen Sprache 60). (pp. 287-314). Tübingen: Narr.
Steyer, K. (2013). Usuelle Wortverbindungen: Zentrale Muster des Sprachgebrauchs
aus korpusanalytischer Sicht (Studien zur Deutschen Sprache 65). Tübingen:
Narr.
Steyer, K. (Ed.) (2012a). Sprichwörter multilingual. Theoretische, empirische und
angewandte Aspekte der modernen Parömiologie (Studien zur Deutschen
Sprache 60). Tübingen: Narr.
Steyer, K. (in print). Zitierkarrieren. Vom Vergehen und Überleben markanter Sätze.
In C. Grandl & K. McKenna (Eds.). „Bis dat, qui cito dat“ – Gegengabe in
Paremiology, Folklore, Language and Literature. Honoring Wolfgang Mieder on
His Seventieth Birthday. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Stubbs, M. (2001). Words and Phrases. Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Oxford:
Blackwell.
SWP: EU-Sprichwortplattform. Internet: http://www.sprichwort-plattform.org
(accessed November 12, 2013).
Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001). Corpus Linguistics at Work (Studies in corpus linguistics
6). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Umurova, G. (2005). Was der Volksmund in einem Sprichwort verpackt ...: Moderne
Aspekte des Sprichwortgebrauchs anhand von Beispielen aus dem Internet
(Sprichwörterforschung 24). Bern: Peter Lang.

Appendix 1
High frequent proverbs of the Sprichwort Platform (SWP) with
Numbers of hits and queries (DeReKo 2013) (17.10.2014):

1. Weniger ist 3.579 $weniger /+w1 ist /+w3 $mehr

mehr.
2. Der Schein 2.738 Schein /+w3 trügt
trügt.
3. Ende gut, 2.638 Ende /+w3 gut /+w3 alles
alles gut.
4. Aller guten 2.511 $aller /+w3 guten /+w3 Dinge /+w5 ($drei ODER
Dinge sind 3)
drei.
5. Die 2.364 Ho nung /+w3 stirbt /+w5 zuletzt
Ho nung
stirbt zuletzt.
6. Was lange 2.216 $was /+w3 lange /+w3 währt /+w5 gut
währt, wird
endlich gut.
7. Aller Anfang 1.894 $aller /+w3 Anfang /+w5 schwer
ist schwer.
8. Der Weg ist 1.833 Weg /+w1 ist /+w3 Ziel
das Ziel.
9. Viel Lärm 1.725 (&viel /s0 &Lärm /s0 nichts) %s2 (Shakespeare
um nichts. ODER Shakespeares ODER Shakespeare’s ODER &Uhr
ODER &Kino ODER &Theater ODER Branagh)
10. Zeit ist 1.605 Zeit /+w1 ist /+w5 Geld
Geld.
11. Totgesagte 1.560 Totgesagte /+w3 leben /+w5 länger
leben länger.
12. 1.540 $aufgeschoben /+w3 „nicht” /+w5 aufgehoben
Aufgeschoben
ist nicht
aufgehoben.
13. Alles hat 1.514 $alles /+w3 hat /+w5 seine /+w5 Zeit
seine Zeit.
14. Not macht 1.366 „Not” /+w3 macht /+w5 er nderisch
er nderisch.
15. Ehre wem 1.330 (Ehre /+w2:2 Ehre) /+w5 gebührt
Ehre gebührt.
16. Die 1.317 Konkurrenz /+w3 schlä /+w5 „nicht”
Konkurrenz
schlä nicht.
17. 1.289 &Ausnahme /+w5 bestätigen /+w5 &Regel
Ausnahmen
bestätigen die
Regel.
18. Kleider 1.270 Kleider /+w3 machen /+w5 Leute
machen
Leute.
19. Vertrauen 1.132 Vertrauen /+w3 gut /+w5 Kontrolle/+w5 besser
ist gut,
Kontrolle ist
besser.
20. Wer rastet, 984 $wer /+w3 rastet /+w5 rostet
der rostet.

138 I thank Annelen Brunner for translating this chapter into English.
139 For more in depth information I recommend: Sinclair, 1991; Sinclair, 2004 who
was a pioneer of corpus linguistics; Tognini-Bonelli, 2001 and her de nitions of the
empirical concepts ‘corpus-based’ and ‘corpus-driven’; McEnery & Wilson, 2001;
Lüdeling & Kytö, 2008; McEnery & Hardie, 2012 (introductions in English);
Mukherjee, 2009; Lemnitzer & Zinsmeister, 2010; Perkuhn & Keibel & Kupietz, 2012
and the website from Bubenhofer, 2006-2013 (introductions in German); for more
about corpusbased phraseology and computer linguistic aspects of phrasemes
Cowie, 1998; Heid, 2007; Moon, 1998; Moon, 2007; Rothkegel, 2007 Granger &
Meunier, 2008; Ptashnyk & Hallsteinsdóttir & Bubenhofer, 2010; Sailer, 2007 and
Steyer i. a. 2003; Steyer 2004; overview in Steyer, 2013. also Mieder, 2009.
140 For nding English proverb equivalents I used the OXFORD Dictionary of
Proverbs (Speake, 2008) as well as dict.cc (Dict.cc).
141 Overviews can be found in Grzybek, 2012 and Juska-Bacher, 2012. One goal of
these studies can be to determine so-called ‘paremiological minima’ or
‘paremiological optima‘ (Ďurčo in this volume).
142 Another corpus-based project was EPHRAS (EPHRAS).
143 I will not elaborate on the method of n-gram analysis for automatically nding
frequent word clusters, as it needs some expert knowledge and special tools and is
also not yet commonly applied in proverb studies. An overview over applications of
this method gives Bürki, 2012.
144 The following strategies for validating proverbs in a corpus were developed from
experiences in the EU project „SprichWort“ (SWP) where for the rst time a
comprehensive corpus validation was conducted for 2000 German proverbs (Steyer,
2012 b). All examples for searches and their result numbers are based on DeReKo.
The exact search queries are documented in Steyer, 2013; Umurova, 2005; Ďurčo,
2006; Hrisztova-Gotthardt, 2010 and Hrisztova-Gotthardt & Gotthardt, 2012 use
specialized search strategies as well. A comprehensive corpus -based study of
English proverbs from a diachronic perspective was conducted by Aurich, 2009. also
Charteris-Black, 1999.
145 The appearance of Uhr indicates a time table, as in (movie) theatre programs.
146 Kenneth Branagh is the director of one of the most successful movie adaptations
of the Shakespeare play from the year 1993 (Much Ado About Nothing).
147 Query: &wer /s0 (&kommen oder &spätkommen) /s0 &Leben /s0 &bestrafen.
148 So-called proverb construction plans or schemas are already mentioned in
Röhrich & Mieder, 1977. See also Burger, 2010.
149 In this case, the exact search query in COSMAS II syntax would be: ($wer /+w2:2
&sagen /+w1:1 &müssen /+w5 &sagen) %s0 ($a und $b).
150 In addition to Steyer, 2013, this section is based mainly on Steyer & Hein, 2010;
Steyer, 2012b; Hein, 2012; Steyer & Ďurčo, in print.
151 The basis for this proverb is an old belief among sailors the rats rather ee
towards the open sea than drown with the ship (Duden, 11, 2013: 593).
152 The following examples have been calculated with the collocation analysis tool
developed by Belica, which is available via COSMAS II. In contrast to other tools, this
tool also outputs common syntagmatic patterns. Other tools for collocation analysis
or collocation resources are e.g. available at DWDS. Another tool for various
languages is Sketch Engine (SkE; Ďurčo, 2010).

Č
153 About the corpus-based analysis of proverb markers or introducers Čermák,
2004; Ďurčo, 2005.
154 The clippings from the collocation pro les are cited without quantitative
information, as they just serve as an illustration of the general principle.
Documenting and explaining the parameters and numbers would be beyond the
scope of this contribution. Further information can be found in the collocation
analysis tutorial (Perkuhn & Belica, 2004).
Tamás Kispál
10 Paremiography: Proverb Collections

10.1 De nition of Proverbs, Proverb Collections and

Proverb Dictionaries

10.1.1 De nition of Proverbs

The repeated reference to the impossibility of de ning a proverb,
according to Taylor (1931: 3), who writes about an “incommunicable
quality [that] tells us this sentence is proverbial and that is not”, does
not help either the laity or the scholars further; rather, it indicates its
problematic character. Proverbs can be de ned, among others, either
according to the classical theory of features or to the prototype theory.
While the classical theory necessitates rigid principles and a rigid
de nition system with necessary and su cient markers and clear
category borders, the prototype theory makes transitions between
categories possible. Issues with markers of proverbiality that can
contain didactic content, metaphoricity and prosody (Norrick, 2007:
381) (e.g. A rolling stone gathers no moss; The apple never falls far from
the tree) are in accordance with the classical theory. However, “the
notion of proverbiality is itself (…) a matter of prototypicality”
(Norrick, 2007: 382), therefore non-metaphorical and non-rhythmic
sentences with didactic content or elliptic structures can belong to the
category of proverbs, too (e.g. The exception proves the rule; It is never
too late to learn; Business before pleasure; Easy come, easy go).

10.1.2 De nition of Proverb Collections and Proverb

Dictionaries
Proverb collections and proverb dictionaries could be seen, more or
less, as representatives of the above-mentioned di erent proverb
de nition types. On the one hand, there are proverb collections where
proverbs can be interpreted within the framework of the prototype
theory, i.e. they interpret proverbs in a broader sense, and with this in
mind, they include better examples of the proverb category (e.g. The
apple doesn’t fall far from the tree) and worse examples too, i.e.
proverbial comparisons (e.g. as busy as a bee), wellerisms (e.g.
“Everyone to his own taste,” as the farmer said when he kissed the cow),
weather proverbs and superstitions (e.g. When it rains and the sun
shines, the devil is beating his grandmother), even idioms (e.g. kick the
bucket). On the other hand, there are proverb dictionaries where
proverbs can be interpreted within the framework of features
(sentence, rhyme, alliteration, ellipsis, moral authority, didactic intent
et al.), i.e. they interpret proverbs in a narrow sense and so they codify
only proverbs that are generally sentential statements (e.g. Still waters
run deep; The shoemaker’s son always goes barefoot; Too many cooks
spoil the broth).
This theory is not in accordance with the reality. Akbarian (2012: 1)
mentions “the inconsistency between what such a dictionary claims to
include and what it actually includes”. He analyzed Bertram (1996)
and states that only 67 per cent of the entries in this dictionary (NTC’s
Dictionary of Proverbs and Clichés) are proverbs. 33 per cent of them
are non-proverb items (e.g. a chip o the old block). As Akbarian states,
there are lots of other idiom and proverb dictionaries mixing several
kinds of phraseological items. Spears (1987) is an example of an idiom
dictionary (NTC’s American Idioms Dictionary) containing many
proverbs too, beside idioms. Similarly, the dictionary of Hungarian
proverbs by T. Litovkina (2005) includes idioms and other
phraseological items. Even the Oxford Dictionary of English Proverbs
(Wilson, 1970) “makes no distinction between ‘proverbs, proverbial
phrases and proverbial similes’” (Benja eld, Frommhold, Keenan et
al., 1993: 27).
The present study concentrates on dictionaries containing only or
mainly proverbs. To simplify the usage of terminology, in the
following, the terms proverb collection and proverb dictionary will be
used interchangeably. There are some reference resources that are
deliberately restricted to proverbs. Mieder, Kingsbury & Harder (1992:
xii) “have included only true proverbs (…) (and) have excluded
proverbial expressions, proverbial comparisons, superstitions,
wellerisms, and idioms”. Similarly, Beyer & Beyer (1984) excluded
German idioms, winged words, aphorisms, and slogans. Paczolay’s
work (1997) is also a collection of pure proverbs.
The main issues with proverb collections relate to their usage. The
following chapter is therefore structured according to the usage of
proverb collections. As printed and electronic proverb collections, like
dictionaries generally, di er on structure and usage, they should be
treated hereina er separately.155

10.2 Usage of Printed Proverb Collections

10.2.1 Which One to Use?

The selection of suitable proverb collections depends on the interest of
the user and the situation. Users interested in the development of
proverbs can prefer historical proverb dictionaries like Whiting (1968)
and Wander (1867-1880). These dictionaries list di erent forms of
proverbs, among other things, their older forms and variants. There are
a few proverb dictionaries that organize their proverb stock according
to the subjects proverbs refer to. If we look, for example, for German
proverbs referring to economy and diligence (Von Sparsamkeit und
Fleiß), we can nd 45 suitable proverbs in Müller-Hegemann & Otto
(1965). Similarly, there are 42 German entries in Beier, Herkt &
Pollmann (2002) referring to diligence.
Bilingual and multilingual proverb dictionaries can be useful for
those interested in proverbs equivalents. In Paczolay (1997) e.g. there
are 106 European proverbs with their equivalents in 55 languages.
Predota (2003: 95) names three main categories of English proverb
collections: “scienti c [Wilson, 1970], popular-scienti c [Simpson,
1985] and those destined for the teaching of foreign languages [Mieder,
2003]”.

10.2.2 How to Find a Proverb in a Proverb Collection?

Proverbs are prevailingly ordered alphabetically by keywords (e.g.
Mieder, Kingsbury & Harder, 1992) in proverb collections, i.e. the
dictionary has an alphabetical outer access structure (Wiegand,
Beißwenger, Gouws et al., 2010: 328). The keyword is generally the rst
noun, if there is not a noun available, the rst adjective, adverb or
verb. Many proverb dictionaries list the same proverb several times,
some of them even under (almost) all words. The multiple listing
facilitates the nding of proverbs to a great extent.
Some proverb collections organize the entries alphabetically, but
according to their rst component. (e.g. Bertram, 1996; Spears, 1987).
This is not a user-friendly approach. If one does not know the standard
form of the proverb, this method cannot help one to nd it in the
dictionary. Generally, there is an index in these types of dictionaries,
like the phrase- nder index in Spears (1987), where all proverb
components are listed. This access structure facilitates the looking-up
process.
In thematically ordered proverb collections (e.g. Müller-Hegemann
& Otto, 1965), the starting point is the theme proverbs are assigned to,
which appear as alphabetically ordered keywords. Regularly, there is a
registry of themes/ keywords in the appendix that helps the user to
nd the searched proverb (or winged word).

10.2.3 What Kind of Information is Contained Under a

Proverb Entry?
As usual, semantic, pragmatic and in some cases etymological
information is assigned to proverb entries, beside their form. The
availability of these issues varies depending on the dictionary. On one
side, Simrock (1988) contains a mere German proverb list without
further information, Couzereau’s dictionary (1997) is just a list of
German proverbs and their English and French equivalents, whereas
on the other side, Wander (1867-1880) and Wilson (1970) provide data
concerning the meaning, usage and etymology of proverbs.

10.2.3.1 Information on Standard Proverb Forms and

Variants
If we take a look at proverb dictionaries, we can see that the least
information they are giving us about the proverb is its standard,
canonical form. Yet, many proverbs have several formal variants,
which are mostly marked with a slash (alternative words) or
parentheses (addition). In Mieder, Kingsbury & Harder (1992), each
variant is listed consistently. For A new broom sweeps clean, nine
variants are listed (Figure 10.1).

Figure 10.1: Variants of the English proverb A new broom sweeps clean in
Mieder, Kingsbury & Harder 1992
Traditionally, there can be variants as regular changes, and
modi cations as occasional changes, di erentiated. This distinction
was made mainly in the German literature concerning phraseology
(Varianten vs. Modi kationen, Burger, Buhofer & Sialm, 1982).
Recently, the term variant is more o en referred to both phenomena.
However, there is a term for occasional formal variants of proverbs,
called antiproverbs, which is the subject of three volumes of the
popular dictionary of German anti-proverbs (Antisprichwörter) by
Mieder (1982, 1985, 1989) and Mieder & Litovkina (1999). Indeed, the
e ects of these intentional alterations are relevant in persuasive texts,
e.g. advertisements, down to present day. Under proverb variants in
Mieder, Kingsbury & Harder (1992) there are also anti-proverbs listed
(Figure 10.1).

10.2.3.2 Information on Meaning of Proverbs

Meaning is the most important information on understanding
proverbs. As for gurativeness, proverbs can be classi ed into the
group of gurative or idiomatic (A bird in the hand is worth two in the
bush) and of non-idiomatic proverbs (Better late than never). Problems
arise, generally, with idiomatic proverbs because the meaning of the
whole cannot be deducted from the meaning of the components.
Although cognitive metaphor theories do not accept this point of view
(Gibbs, 2001), the description of idiomatic, or metaphoric proverbs is
rightly needed in proverb dictionaries.
Semiotic proverbs research played a major role in exploring the
semantics of proverbs, among others their implicative, analogic and
metaphoric character (Kanyó, 1981). Thus, the semantic item giving the
meaning of proverbs in dictionaries can bene t from this issue. The
generalized abstract meaning (or the model situation or the proverb
idea, Grzybek, 2007: 205) is the most important semantic information
to be codi ed. Unfortunately, there are few proverb collections that
consistently codify the meaning of proverbs, it is more frequently done
in dictionaries for non-native speakers.
Figure 10.2: Information on the meaning of the English proverb A rolling stone
gathers no moss in Spears (1987)

10.2.3.3 Information on Usage of Proverbs

Pragmatic information needs to be distinguished from semantic
information on proverbs, insofar as the abstract meaning of the
proverb can have special reference that can also be called a reference
situation (Grzybek, 2007). In other words, proverbs are polysituational
items, i.e. there may be several situations a proverb can be applied to.
Spears (1987: 97) presents two examples for the proverb First come, rst
served: The rst example is about the purchase of tickets (They ran out
of tickets before we got there. It was rst come, rst served, but we didn’t
know that.), the second one can be about any other situation where
one has to line up to get something (Please line up and take your turn.
It’s rst come, rst served.). In proverb dictionaries, the codi cation of
information on the usage of proverbs is even rarer than the
information on their meaning. It is rather context-related or corpus-
based phraseological dictionaries or general monolingual dictionaries
that contain semantic or pragmatic information on proverbs. The rst
edition of Duden-Redewendungen (Scholze-Stubenrecht, 2013) was
the rst prominent phraseological dictionary of the German language
to illustrate the entries, among others proverbs, with up-to-date
citations, i.e. authentic corpus-based examples. The entry for the
proverb Viele Köche verderben den Brei [ee: Too many cooks spoil the
broth] contains a semantic description and two examples from the
internet (Figure 10.3).

Figure 10.3: Entry for the German proverb Viele Köche verderben den Brei in
Scholze-Stubenrecht (2013)

The entries, among them a very small number of proverbs, are

demonstrated merely by examples in the German idiom dictionary by
Schemann (1993), without information on meaning.

Figure 10.4: Entry for the German proverb Den letzten beißen die Hunde in
Schemann (1993)

The latter approach is more user-friendly, contrary to most proverb

dictionaries: Examples in contexts can demonstrate many pragmatic
features of proverbs (varying forms, communicative functions,
metalinguistic comments, position of proverbs in text) (Kispál, 2000).
10.2.3.4 Proverb Exercises
Exercises cannot be found in general proverb collections. Even the
well-known collection of English proverbs (Mieder, 2003), which is a
carefully annotated selection of 1200 proverbs intended for German
learners of English as a foreign language, does not contain exercises.
However, exercises can be a useful addition to the traditional parts of
dictionaries. Unlike general dictionaries written in the rst place for
native speakers, dictionaries for non-native speakers present things
di erently. English dictionaries for non-native speakers generally
contain exercises, just like some German dictionaries for non-native
speakers.
For instance, there is a relatively old German proverb collection
that was compiled for learners of German as a foreign language (Frey,
Herzog, Michel et al, 1973), which has a proverb dictionary part and a
part with proverb exercises. This popular booklet was o en criticized
because of the proverbs listed in it, as according to the results of the
empirical proverb research they do not belong to the best-known
proverbs. Nevertheless, it contains a short and more or less
appropriate explanation as to the meaning of proverbs and ve
di erent exercise types for the usage of the German proverbs it
contains (Kispál, 2007).
Figure 10.5: A matching exercise on German proverbs in Frey, Herzog, Michel et
al. (1973)

10.3 Usage of Electronic Proverb Collections

The term electronic proverb collections can be applied to CD, DVD and
online dictionaries as well. These formats are generally just electronic
versions of the printed dictionaries with the same content. For
instance, Wander (2001) is a CD version of the printed dictionary of
German proverbs by Wander (1867-1880). One can nd various settings
in CD dictionaries, as is shown in Figure 10.6., the entry for the German
proverb Stille Wasser sind tief [ee: Still waters run deep] in Wander
2001 (Figure 10.6).
Figure 10.6: Entry for the German proverb Stille Wasser sind tief in Wander
(2001)

There are several advantages of the electronic format, particularly its

revolutionary contribution to the system of references of proverbs
(Kispál, 2004), but CDs and DVDs are no longer convincing nowadays.
While in the 2000s the demand for these formats rose (Kispál, 2007),
in 2010s it is the online appearance which is gaining popularity and
importance.
Because of the very low number of proper CD and DVD dictionaries,
as well as their decreasing relevance, there will be several aspects of
online proverb dictionaries discussed in the following chapters,
exempli ed by the multilingual online dictionary
Sprichwortplattform.156

10.3.1 How to Find a Proverb in an Electronic Proverb

Collection?
One of the most important advantages of electronic formats is the
increased searching speed. It is much faster to nd a proverb in
electronic proverb collections than in printed ones. For example, in
Sprichwortplattform there are six di erent outer access structures that
enable the quick nd of search items: alphabet, component, lemma,
variant component, variant lemma, and keyword. The keywords are
obtained from the text of the semantic information and enable
searching for the topic of the proverbs (Figure 10.7). With this in mind,
in Sprichwortplattform, most of the demands for di erent proverb
search options suggested by Hrisztova-Gotthardt (2010: 167), are
ful lled.

Figure 10.7: Outer access structure for proverbs in Sprichwortplattform

10.3.2 What Kind of Information Contains a Proverb

Entry?
In electronic dictionaries, however possible, there is a proverb
description justi ed, which is corroborated by the requirements
mentioned in Hrisztova-Gotthardt’s work (2010: 109) regarding the
structure and function of electronic proverb databases. These include
data source, variants, regional, dialectal usage, style, frequency,
communicative functions, connotations, origin, thematic
classi cation, and meaning. An electronic proverb dictionary therefore
ought to contain this cluster of information. Hrisztova-Gotthardt (2010:
105) emphasizes, among other things, the necessity of the codi cation
of modern proverbs. Yet, the provisional characteristic of many of the
above-mentioned anti-proverbs does not justify the inclusion of these
proverb types in general proverb dictionaries, although there are
dictionaries that include antiproverbs as regular proverb variants (e.g.
Mieder, Kingsbury & Harder, 1992, Figure 10.1). Since according to the
perspective of language learning and usage, understanding puns is
considered to be very useful, it is justi ed to list some anti-proverbs in
dicitionaries as examples.

10.3.2.1 Information on Standard Proverb Forms and

Variants
Sprichwortplattform contains actually existing, empirically veri able
proverbs from ve languages: Czech, German, Hungarian, Slovak,
Slovene. For the presentation of proverb form variants, there is an
article position in Sprichwortplattform. The proverb Gebranntes Kind
scheut das Feuer [ee: Once bitten, twice shy] has the variants Das
gebrannte Kind scheut das Feuer and Ein gebranntes Kind scheut das
Feuer, which are listed under Formvarianten (Figure 10.8). Proverb
forms with several occurrences in the corpus are considered as
standard proverb forms, and the others are variants.

Figure 10.8: Variants of the German proverb Gebranntes Kind scheut das Feuer
in Sprichwortplattform

10.3.2.2 Information on the Meaning of Proverbs

The lack of information on the meaning and usage of proverbs is one
of the biggest defects of printed proverb dictionaries. In
Sprichwortplattform the meaning and usage of proverbs have been
extracted from the corpus empirically in a bottom-up process. The
description of this (and all other) information is therefore based on the
excerpt from the corpus. In the following example, there is information
from Sprichwortplattform displayed, based on 18 corpus extracts or
citations (Beleg) for the German proverb Nachts sind alle Katzen grau
[ee: All cats are grey in the dark].

Figure 10.9: Information based on corpus excerpts for the German proverb
Nachts sind alle Katzen grau in Sprichwortplattform

10.3.2.3 Information on Usage of Proverbs

As for the usage of proverbs, there are o en several restrictions that
are expected to be codi ed in an appropriate dictionary. Under the
position Gebrauchsbesonderheiten [special usage features], pragmatic
restrictions on proverbs are recorded in Sprichwortplattform. The
German proverb Lege nicht alle Eier in einen Korb [ww: Don’t put all
your eggs in one basket] occurs strikingly o en, for example, in
horoscopes. However, its content is questioned and o en used in
connection with patience (Figure 10.10).
Figure 10.10: Pragmatic restrictions on the German proverb Lege nicht alle Eier in
einen Korb in Sprichwortplattform

10.3.2.4 Exercises on Proverbs

Exercises should be integrated into electronic dictionaries in a
practical way. There can be a module for exercises as part of the
proverb dictionary. Sprichwortplattform has three modules: database
(dictionary), exercises, and community. The proverbs of the dictionary
are integrated into the exercises. In the dictionary module, there is a
direct link next to each proverb which leads the user to the exercises
grouped into two categories (according to the Common European
Framework of Reference (CEFR), into categories B1-B2 or C1-C2). These
are special exercises, mainly structured on the basis of the markers of
proverbiality, intended for advanced learners (Kispál, 2012).
Figure 10.11: A multiple choice exercise on the proverb feature sentence in
German proverbs in Sprichwortplattform

10.4 Conclusion
In most cases, proverb collections include idioms and other
phraseological items. Collections containing mainly proverbs, except
of few, are o en mere lists without any information on their meaning
and usage. Proverbs are ordered alphabetically mostly by keywords. In
thematically organized proverb collections, the starting points are
alphabetically ordered topics to which proverbs are assigned.
Whereas in the 2000s the demand for CD and DVD dictionary
formats rose, in the 2010s the online appearance is gaining an
immense importance. Nowadays there are user-friendly online proverb
dictionaries and databases needed, like e.g. the multilingual
Sprichwortplattform, with various search options and relatively well
known, empirically veri able proverbs with information on their
meaning and usage. Future empirical proverb lexicographic studies
should provide more printed and especially online proverb collections
that meet the many demands put in front of modern proverb
dictionaries discussed in this study.
References
Akbarian, I. (2012). What Counts as a Proverb? The Case of NTC’s Dictionary of
Proverbs and Clichés. Lexikos 22, 1-19.
Beier, B., Herkt, M. & Pollmann, B. (2002). Harenberg Lexikon der Sprichwörter und
Zitate. Dortmund: Harenberg.
Benja eld, J., Frommhold, K., Keenan, T. et al. (1993). Imagery, concreteness,
goodness, and familiarity ratings for 500 proverbs sampled from the Oxford
Dictionary of English proverbs. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, &
Computers 25, 27-40.
Bertram, A. (1996). NTC’s Dictionary of Proverbs and Clichés. Lincolnwood/Illinois:
NTC Publishing Group.
Beyer, H. & Beyer, A. (1984). Sprichwörterlexikon. Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut.
Burger, H., Buhofer, A. & Sialm, A. (1982). Handbuch der Phraseologie. New York: de
Gruyter.
Couzereau, B. (1997). Auf ein Sprichwort! In a byword! En un proverbe! 333
Sprichwörter in drei Sprachen. Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt.
Frey, Ch., Herzog, A., Michel, A. et al. (1973). Deutsche Sprichwörter für Ausländer.
Leipzig: Enzyklopädie.
Gibbs, R. W. (2001). Proverbial themes we live by. Poetics 29, 167-188.
Grzybek, P. (2007). Semiotik und Phraseologie. In H. Burger, D. Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn
& N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseology. An International Handbook of Contemporary
Research (pp. 188-208). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H. (2010). Vom gedruckten Sprichwörterbuch zur interaktiven
Sprichwortdatenbank. Bern: Peter Lang.
Kanyó, Z. (1981): Sprichwörter. Analyse einer einfachen Form. The Hague: Mouton.
Kispál, T. (2000). Sprichwörter in einem phraseologischen Wörterbuch.
Informationen Deutsch als Fremdsprache 27/4, 367-375.
Kispál, T. (2004). Review of Deutsches Sprichwörterlexikon. Herausgegeben von Karl
Friedrich Wilhelm Wander. CD-ROM. Berlin: Directmedia, 2001 (Digitale
Bibliothek; 62). Studia Germanica Universitatis Vesprimiensis 8/1, 106-111.
Kispál, T. (2007). Sprichwörtersammlungen. In H. Burger, D. Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn &
N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseology. An International Handbook of Contemporary
Research (pp. 414-422). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Kispál, T. (2012). Parömiologische Aufgaben auf der Sprichwortplattform. In K. Steyer
(Ed.), Sprichwörter multilingual (pp. 417-435). Tübingen: Narr.
Mieder, W. (1982). Antisprichwörter. Wiesbaden: Verlag für deutsche Sprache.
Mieder, W. (1985). Antisprichwörter. Wiesbaden: Gesellscha für deutsche Sprache.
Mieder, W. (1989). Antisprichwörter. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer.
Mieder, W. (1984): Geschichte und Probleme der neuhochdeutschen
Sprichwörterlexikographie. In H. E. Wiegand (Ed.), Studien zur neuhochdeutschen
Lexikographie V (pp. 307-358). Hildesheim: Olms.
Mieder, W. (2003). English Proverbs. Stuttgart: Reclam.
Mieder, W. & Litovkina, A.T. (1999): Twisted Wisdom. Modern Anti-proverbs.
Burlington, Vermont: The University of Vermont.
Mieder, W., Kingsbury, S. A. & Harder, K. B. (1992). A Dictionary of American
Proverbs. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Müller-Hegemann, A. & Otto, L. (1965). Das kleine Sprichwörterbuch. Leipzig:
Bibliographisches Institut.
Norrick, N. R. (2007). Proverbs as set phrases. In H. Burger, D. Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn
& N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseology. An International Handbook of Contemporary
Research (pp. 381-393). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Paczolay, Gy. (1997). European Proverbs. Veszprém: Veszprémi Nyomda Rt.
Predota, S. (2003). Dictionaries of proverbs. In P. v. Sterkenburg (Ed.), A Practical
Guide to Lexicography (pp. 94-101). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Schemann, H. (1993): PONS Deutsche Idiomatik. Die deutschen Redewendungen im
Kontext. Stuttgart: Klett.
Scholze-Stubenrecht, W. (Ed.) (2013). Duden – Redewendungen. Wörterbuch der
deutschen Idiomatik. 4th ed. Berlin: Dudenverlag.
Simpson, J. (1985). The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Proverbs. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Simrock, K. (1988). Die deutschen Sprichwörter. Frankfurt: H. L. Brönner [1st ed.
1846].
Spears, R. A. (1987). NTC’s American Idioms Dictionary. Lincolnwood/Illinois: NTC
Publishing Group.
Sprichwortplattform: www.sprichwort-plattform.org (accessed October 27, 2013).
Taylor, A. (1931). The Proverb. Cambridge/Massachusetts.
T. Litovkina, A. (2005). Közmondástár. Közmondások értelmező szótára példákkal
szemléltetve. Budapest: Tinta.
Wander, K. F. W. (1867-80). Deutsches Sprichwörter-Lexikon. Leipzig.
Wander, K. F. W. (2001). Deutsches Sprichwörter-Lexikon. CD-ROM. Berlin:
Direktmedia.
Whiting, B. (1968). Proverbs, sentences and proverbial phrases from English writings
mainly before 1500. Cambridge.
Wiegand, H. E., Beißwenger, M., Gouws, R.H. et al. (Eds.) (2010). Dictionary of
Lexicography and Dictionary Research. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Wilson, F. P. (ed.) (1970). The Oxford dictionary of English proverbs. Oxford.

155 This study focuses on contemporary proverb collections. As to the history of

German proverb collections Mieder 1984.
156 www.sprichwort-plattform.org
Roumyana Petrova
11 Contrastive Study of Proverbs

11.1 Introduction
If we undertake the time-consuming but extremely pleasurable task of
reading two (or more) proverb dictionaries in di erent languages from
beginning to end, when we nish reading, we will be struck by
something very peculiar. We will have seen that on the one hand there
are great areas of sameness between the two proverb corpora, mostly
in terms of the syntactic structures of the individual proverb sentences,
their logical patterns, the themes they address, and especially the
messages, lessons, or kind of advice they put across. On the other
hand, our attention will be drawn to some speci c di erences that
relate to the images used in the proverb texts, especially those of queer
or exotic animals, plants, weather conditions, everyday objects,
kinship terms, social practices, local foods and dishes, etc., as well as
various strange and unique natural and cultural settings. Proverb
scholars have long come up with an explanation to these peculiarities,
pointing out that they naturally occur due to the di erent places of
origin of the individual proverbs and their speci c geographical,
historical, social and cultural environments. Proverbs come from a
great variety of places that may be anywhere on our planet, e.g., the
African savanna, the Australian bush, the Canadian tundra, the
Mediterranean seaside, the little village in the Balkans, the Russian
steppe, or, in the case of some more recent coinages, any of the more or
less uniform urban areas in the a uent world or global village. It
makes sense then, that the greater the distance in time and place, i.e.
the more remote and speci c the languages and the people (nations)
represented in the proverb corpora compared are, the greater these
di erences and peculiarities will be. And vice versa, the closer the
people that have created them in terms of geographical location and
historical period are, the more similar they would be.
 This very peculiar, dual nature of the proverb genre per se as well
as of any given proverb system as such has for centuries been arousing
the curiosity of linguists, folklorists and literary scholars, who have
striven to devise various working methodologies or adapt old ones in
their desire to nd out why exactly proverbs should be so diverse and
yet so very similar. Do the common proverbs in two or more cultures
point to certain fundamental human features that hold good for the
whole species homo sapiens as such? Do the more peculiar ones point
to insurmountable cultural di erences which may make
communication unexpectedly di cult, even completely impossible?
Does the core of common, species-wide proverbs in a given proverb
system prevail, or do the speci c ones account for its larger part?
Scholars have been trying to formulate the right questions about the
extent to which the speci c character of proverbs can become
meaningful, and others about exactly how their dual nature relates to
the commonly shared human traits across all historical periods. The
cross-cultural contrastive research done so far has thus brought about
the emergence of a large variety of methods for comparing and
contrasting proverbs in di erent languages, some painstakingly
rigorous, logically consistent and systematic, others – of a more
intuitive and artistic nature.
By showing and discussing some examples of contrastive proverb
studies, this chapter will attempt to outline a comprehensive picture of
the major approaches that have been suggested, developed and
applied by the proverb scholars who pursue the relatively new eld of
comparative (i.e. cross-cultural) and contrastive paremiology. It will be
seen that most of these scholars have no doubts about the uniqueness
of any one individual proverb system – the more or less entire body of
proverbs in a language. We will also outline some areas where more
research is needed. This chapter will not be dealing with contrastive
phraseology, neither will it discuss at length the problems concerned
with the comprehension, explanation and translation of proverbs,
although these will also be brie y mentioned. In order to match a
proverb in a foreign language correctly to a local equivalent, or to show
how it di ers from a local counterpart, the proverb scholar needs rst
to discover its meaning, which, as practice shows, cannot be done but
by rst translating it literally and then matching it to a projected
situation and interpreting it in the context of its own culture. This
chapter will not be dealing with the problem of comparing proverb
texts diachronically either, although it is common knowledge that
tracing the evolution of the meaning and form of a proverb, or the
convergence and divergence of a group of similar proverbs across time
shows very clearly how the current, present-day text has come into
being.

11.2 Comparative and Contrastive Approach

In linguistics, the terms comparative and contrastive have come to
mean two distinctive approaches: the comparative approach focuses
on the similarities between two (or more) sets of the same class of
items, while the contrastive approach is mostly concerned with
explicating, studying, describing and explaining the di erences
between linguistic items on the synchronic plane. In paremiology and
paremiography however, these terms are o en used as synonyms
(Mieder & Dundes, 1994: viii; Voigt, 2013: 363, 365, 366, 368). Let us
however note, that by comparative, i.e. diachronic research proper,
both in linguistics and in proverb study, we are to understand
diachronic, or historical study which takes into account the evolution
of a text, or the chronological change of some aspects of a proverb text
or group / class of proverbs. An example of this kind of research will
best illustrate the di erence. In her article “Comparative analysis of
[the] binary opposition ‘man-woman’ in Russian-French proverb world
pictures”, V. N. Shoutina (2009, quoting T. P. Nikitina), discusses the
change of style and content in the 12th and 13thcentury proverbs in
France, which re ects very closely the great change of manners in
French society, when the courtly and chivalrous 12th-century values
only about a century later were replaced by the much more pragmatic,
even cynical values of the emerging bourgeois culture of the
townspeople. The two texts below illustrate this di erence. The rst
proverb below is said to have originated in the 12th century, while the
second – in the 13th century:
a) Se assez miauz morir ne vuel / A enor, que a honte vivre [ww: Better to
die an honorable death, than live in shame]
b) Chacun pour soi et Dieu pour tous [ee: Everyone for himself, only
God for all].
In this chapter, the term contrastive will therefore be used in its more
widely accepted, broader meaning in paremiology: it will encompass
the synchronic (and panchronic, i.e. timeless) comparative (cross-
cultural), and contrastive approaches mentioned above, ignoring the
diachronic approach. We will rst dwell on the reasons prompting the
search for common ground and for di erences between proverbs from
di erent cultures. A er that we will look at the ways in which this is
done with certain aspects of proverb texts regarding the criteria, which
are selected or speci cally designed to serve the purposes of cross-
cultural comparison and contrast.

11.3 The Beginnings: Contrastive Paremiography

This question of how the contrastive approach commenced invariably
takes us to the emergence of paremiography – the millennial tradition
of compiling proverb dictionaries and proverb collections in one, two
or more languages. Contrastive paremiology is quite inextricable from
contrastive paremiography, which was prompted by the perennial
need of human beings to share their wisdom with others, to learn more
about each other, to communicate with people from other cultures in
more rewarding and ful lling ways, expanding their intellectual
horizon and knowledge of the world. This process ran parallel with
that of the development of contrastive lexicography – the practice of
compiling dictionaries in two (or more) languages, in which, besides
words and phrases, proverbs and sayings were also o en included.
The history of compiling proverb dictionaries is probably as old as the
rst systems of writing that emerged in ancient Mesopotamia (Sumer,
the Akkadian Empire, Assyria, Babylonia) and ancient Egypt more
than ve millennia ago. Some recent accounts of the history of the
proverb genre ( Brădeanu, 2007: 22-23; Mieder, & Dundes, 1994: Taylor,
1975: 84; vii) provide evidence pointing to some very early proverb
collections and dictionaries, which date back to the dawn of human
civilization. A fascinating example is a small proverb collection
entitled The Precepts of Ptah-hotep written, according to its editor A.
Smythe Palmer, about 3440 B.C. and preserved in the Papyrus Prisse,
which, as the editor claims, is ”the oldest book in the world” (Trench,
2003: 157-158).157 Among its examples (given in English translation)
there are sentences that even today strike the reader with their
exquisite beauty and shrewd, practical wisdom, e.g., A good son is a
gi of God; Keep a cheerful countenance as long as life lasts; A good
listener is a good speaker; Listen with kindness if you would have a clear
explanation, etc.
The European (i.e. Western) paremiography (the latter
incorporating not only the proverbs in the major European languages,
but also the American, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand or any
other European-based proverb tradition), has been very well
documented (Mieder, 2004a: 11-13). We can see from the vast literature
in the eld that the Western, Eastern European and Eurasian proverb
tradition, from which the new branch of contrastive paremiology has
come to form a distinctive part, covers nearly three millennia – from
the Archaic period of the Ancient Greece civilization to the present day
(Taylor, 1975: 84-100). Proverb scholars today are particularly
fortunate, as they are able to avail themselves of the fruits of the
untiring work performed by Wolfgang Mieder, author of an astounding
number of bibliographies on the proverb, which have been appearing
regularly as separate books or in Proverbium: Yearbook of International
Proverb Scholarship in the course of more than forty years and of which
those on proverb collections and cross-cultural and contrastive studies
form a substantial part. Professor Mieder’s classic on the present-day
state of paremiology and paremiography Proverbs: A Handbook
(2004a: 266-275), lists all of the major bilingual and multilingual
proverb dictionaries in the main Western European languages, while
his recent book International Bibliography of Paremiography:
Collections of Proverbs, Proverbial Expressions and Comparisons,
Quotations, Gra ti, Slang, and Wellerisms (Mieder, 2011) contains a
special chapter entitled International Proverb Collections, where as
many as 215 entries of multilingual proverb dictionaries are listed, the
bilingual ones being covered by other sections according to the rst
language of their proverb entries.
Contemporary proverb scholars are well familiar with the major
multilingual proverb dictionaries, among which are the pioneering
work of the world-known Russian paremiologist Grigorii L. Permyakov
(1978) Пословицы и поговорки народов Востока:
систематизированное собрание изречений двухсот народов
[Proverbs and sayings of the peoples in the East: a systematic
collection of proverbial sentences of 200 peoples], the Proverbia
Septentrionalia. 900 Balto-Finnic proverb types with Russian, Baltic,
German and Scandinavian parallels, compiled in the early 1980s by the
famous Finnish paremiologist Matti Kuusi and seven other scholars
(Kuusi, 1985), the three-volume Dictionary of European Proverbs
(Strauss, 1994) authored by Emanuel Strauss, which contains 1804
proverbs in the major European languages based on the Latin
alphabet, European Proverbs in 55 Languages with Equivalents in
Arabic, Persian, Sanskrit, Chinese and Japanese, compiled by the
distinguished Hungarian paremiographer Gyula Paszolay (1997) and
The Multicultural Dictionary of Proverbs, edited by Harold V. Cordry
(1997). Another, perhaps less known but equally valuable collection in
this group is Contrastive Dictionary of Proverbs (Bulgarian, Russian,
English, French, German (and Latin)), compiled by the Bulgarian
lexicographer Sergey Vlahov (1998), which contains more than 6 000
proverb sentences (equivalents and analogues), excerpted from more
than 100 lexicographical sources and arranged in 642 thematic nests
(clusters). This all points to a truly vast body of comparative and
contrastive proverb scholarship today.

11.4 Contrastive Paremiology: What Is It All About?

We shouldn’t have made this digression into paremiography above, if it
did not have so much bearing on the problem discussed, since the
actual process of compiling scholarly bilingual and multilingual
proverb collections invariably involves the solution of a set of
extremely complex theoretical problems that have to do with
comparing the semantics of proverbs. Indeed, a paremiographer will
not be able to match two texts in two di erent languages correctly, if
he or she is not clear about their linguistic, functional (situational and
communicative) and literary sameness. This comes to show that the
scholarly eld of contrastive paremiology arouse from the practical
need and desire for developing a more reliable, scholarly, rigorous
methodology that can show the areas of similarity and di erence in
proverb sentences in di erent languages. Being a comparatively recent
branch of proverb study, contrastive paremiology makes even greater
use of the concepts that have already become common among proverb
scholars, such as proverb meaning (sense), proverb synonyms, semantic
equivalence, semantic variation, semantic analogy, etc. One of its most
recent outstanding practical realizations can be seen in Matti Kuusi
International Type System of Proverbs, developed by Outi
Lauhakangas, a gigantic cross-cultural database where a vast number
of proverbs in diverse languages are arranged, grouped and classi ed
along semantic (thematic) principles. Thousands of examples are
o ered in it, illustrating all possible degrees of semantic equivalence,
analogy and variation (Mieder, 2004a: 16-20). This shows that the
proper understanding of a proverb is of primary importance for the
scholars engaged in contrastive studies.
The semantic equivalence of two or more texts can be easily seen
when matching proverbs from di erent languages that are literally the
same, e.g.:
(1) English: Blood is thicker than water
German: Blut ist dicker als Wasser
(2) English: Ill gotten, ill spent
French: Choses mal acquises sont mal épandues
(3) English: Hurry slowly
German: Eile mit Weile
Latin: Festina lente
(4) English: Man proposes, God disposes,
Latin: Homo proponit, sed Deus disponit
Spanish: El hombre propone, y Dios dispone
German: Der Mensch denkt, Gott lenkt
Russian: Человек предполагает, а Господь разполагает
Bulgarian: Човек предполага, Господ разполага
What is being compared and contrasted in the texts above is the
speci c wording of one and the same direct (literal, overt) meaning
and the syntactic structure of the proverb sentences. But researchers
are well aware of the fact that, on the whole, most proverb texts tend to
belong to the gurative type, i.e. they have less obvious, implicit,
idiomatic, or metaphorical meanings. Widely-known examples of
gurative proverbs across many cultures are Strike the iron while it is
hot, i.e. act quickly when the opportunity arises; One swallow does not
make a summer, i.e. one person is not su cient for accomplishing
something; You can bring a horse to the water, but you cannot make him
drink, i.e. coercion doesn’t work, etc. When pairs of such proverbs are
contrasted (e.g., Strike the iron while it is hot and Дървото се превива,
докато е младо [The tree is bent while it is still young] (Bulgarian),
both meaning one should do things at the right time), the term semantic
equivalence will suggest a kind of sameness that very signi cantly
di ers from the much more obvious type of lexical equivalence of two
or more words, or strings of words, in di erent languages, which have
the same denotational, or dictionary meanings, as was demonstrated
by the rst group of literal examples above. In fact, proverb scholars
have found that proverb semantics and proverbs equivalence are
rather a hard nut to crack. This is, for example, how more than a
century and a half ago the Victorian scholar Richard Chenevix Trench,
mentioned earlier, wrestled with this tricky problem:
Sometimes the proverb does not actually in so many words repeat itself in various
tongues. We have indeed exactly the same thought; but it takes an outward shape
and embodiment, varying according to the various countries and periods in
which it has been current: we have proverbs totally diverse from one another in
their form and appearance, but which yet, when we look a little deeper into them,
prove to be at heart one and the same, all these their di erences being thus only,
so to speak, variations of the same air (i.e. melody, tune – R.P.) (Trench, 2003: 62-
63).
On pages 64-68 of his book Proverbs and Their Lessons Richard Trench
goes on to quote a number of Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, Greek,
Egyptian, Latin, Norwegian, Danish, English and Jewish proverbs, in
their original languages and / or in English translation to illustrate the
diverse linguistic and literary expressions of one and the same
thought: e.g., Call a peasant ‘Brother’, he’ll demand to be called ‘Father’
(Russian) and Reach a peasant your nger, he’ll grasp your st (Italian),
The river passed, God forgotten (English), The river passed, the saint
forgotten (Spanish) and The river passed, the saint mocked (Italian);
two more interesting examples, given on p. 134, are the Turkish
proverb Curses, like chicken, always come home to roost (which, oddly
enough, is widely known today as a regular English proverb) and its
Yoruba semantic equivalent, Ashes always y back in the face of him
that throws them, the thought embodied by this last pair of proverbs
being, according to Trench, the law of divine retaliation.

11.5 New Approaches to Contrastive Paremiology:

Tertium Comparationis
A century ago, most English-speaking paremiologists understood
proverb equivalence as presented in the previous examples. With the
development of structuralism in linguistics in 1960s and 1970s, it was
Grigoriy L. Permyakov, author of Основы структурной
паремиолигии [Foundations of Structural Paremiology, 1988], who
connected it with the study of proverbs. For more than two decades,
structuralism exerted a powerful in uence on scholars like Alexander
K. Zholkovskii, Yuriy I. Levin, Nigel Barley, Alan Dundes, Matti Kuusi,
Arvo Krikmann, who made further valuable contributions to
contrastive paremiology and paremiography by applying ideas and
methods borrowed from structural linguistics and adapting them to
proverbs. This comes to show how a contemporary idea is usually
preceded by the work of individual scholars, who spend years
wrestling with their intuition nding it hard to verbalize due to the
lack of suitable terms and methodology. Proverb scholars generally
agree that in order for some speci c features of a pair or a group of
proverbs to be brought to the surface and made more visible, there
should exist a common stable, invariable frame of reference, a certain
agreed-upon criterion, according to which they can be grouped or
classi ed, and in relation to which they can be compared and
contrasted. In Trench’s examples above, this frame of reference was
the same thought or idea. Thus, in the last pair of proverbs, the image
of the chickens that come home to roost and that of the ashes being
thrown about hint at some peculiar features pertaining to two di erent
cultural environments while expressing the same proverb meaning or
sense. This frame of reference, known in linguistics as tertium
comparationis, may also be a certain logical type (e.g., implication,
comparison, the relation between one and many, or between the whole
and its part / parts), or a syntactic structure (e.g., a question, a
statement, an elliptical sentence or some other sentence pattern), but
it can be a selected topic or theme (e.g. family, neighbours, friends,
death and dying, food, etc.), an image (e.g., the image of the fox, the
horse, or the dog, as in Every dog had his day, Don’t teach an old dog
new tricks), a value (e.g., honesty, temperance, loyalty, courage,
gratitude), an anti-value (wickedness, greed, anger, laziness, folly), a
general concept (time, distance and space, language, man and
woman), some human characteristic, and so forth.
An exemplary study showing how a speci c topic (theme) can be
used as tertium comparationis is Proverbs on Animal Identity:
Typological Memoirs by the notable Estonian proverb scholar Arvo
Krikmann (Krikmann, 2009). It presents the theoretical basis and
selected examples of the author’s typological classi cation of nearly
40 000 animal proverbs and proverbial phrases in about 60 languages.
The proverb texts are distributed among larger groups (e.g., proverbs
of animal identity, etc.), which are further divided into subgroups, the
latter covering the proverbs with the same basic idea or thought
exempli ed in a sentence, which is chosen as the heading of the
subgroup. For example, the idea that an animal, be it a fox, a wolf, a
snake, or some other animal, may change its fur or skin, but not its
identity, is represented in the sample texts below Krikmann, 2009:
226). For the sake of convenience we will omit the abbreviations of the
sources placed next to the proverbs.
(5) Estonian; Livonian; Latvian; German; British; Russian; Mari;
Mordvin; Komi; Turkish; Aserbaidzhan [sic]: A wolf may change its fur,
but never its manners / heart / teeth.
(6) German: Der Fuchs ändert’s Haar und bleibt, was er war [ww: The
fox changes its fur and remains what it was]
British: A fox may change his heyre but not his minde
(7) Armenian; Persian; Aserbaidzhan [sic]; Tajik; Turkmen: A snake
may change its skin, but not its mind / manners
Russian, Georgian: A snake might leave its skin, but its heart remains
the same
German and Latvian: Die Schlange wechselt wohl die Haut, aber nicht
die Gi zähne Russian: Скинула кожу змея, а яд при ней остался
[ww: A snake le its skin, but not its poison].
While animal imagery provides knowledge about the speci c
geographical environment and even type of economy of the people
among whom a particular proverb has become current, when used in
proverbs, fables, or folk tales, the role of such images is not to teach us
biology, economic history, or environmental science (although
proverbs can be extremely informative in this respect as they present a
very detailed picture of the nature and culture of their creation), but to
project typical human relations, characteristics and situations.
This takes us again to the basic objective of contrastive
paremiology as such, which has been predominantly engaged in the
explication of the ethnic aspect of proverbs.

11.6 Contrastive Paremiology and the Ethnic Aspect of

Proverbs
Some folklorists, literary scholars, linguists and proverb scholars
follow a rather traditional, yet very typical view of proverbs. According
to this view, proverbs are the genre that best preserves and depicts the
typical character of a nation. In nineteenthcentury Victorian England,
this idea caught the attention of many scholars, some of them being
Walter Kelly (2002), author of the popular book The Proverbs of all
Nations ( rst published in 1859), and again Richard Chenevix Trench.
The chapter entitled Proverbs of Di erent Nations Compared in Trench’s
book (pp. 46–68) opens with a quotation attesting to the deep
conviction of its author in the existence of a national character stored
in proverbs: “‘The genius, wit, and spirit of a nation are discovered in
its proverbs’―this is Lord Bacon’s well-worn remark; although, indeed,
only wellworn because of its truth.” (Trench, 2003: 46). While this idea
still continues to attract researchers from all over the world today,
especially among scholars who work in the fascinating eld of
linguistic culturology, there are others, who maintain the more modern
view that proverbs tend to transcend the ethnic and national
boundaries. These latter scholars substantiate their stance by quoting
numerous examples of international proverbs, i.e. texts, which have
entered the lexicon of many languages and cultures as loan
translations, or have originated simultaneously in di erent parts of the
planet in inexplicable and most miraculous ways. Richard Trench is
however no less convincing; in his attempt to portray di erent
cultures, he o ers a plethora of examples of Greek, Roman, Latin,
Spanish, Italian, Arabic (of the modern Egyptians), Irish, English,
Cornish, German, French, Rabbinical, Persian, Russian and other
texts, in their original languages and / or in English translation,
speci cally selected to represent certain unique and peculiar features
of the peoples they represent. Such typical proverbs, according to
Trench, are for instance the Latin sentences Conscientia, mille testes
[ee: Conscience is [like] a thousand witnesses] and Vox populi, vox dei
[ee: The voice of the people [is] the voice of God], the Spanish proverbs
Sermon sin Agostino, olla sin tocino [ww: A sermon without St.
Augustine is like a stew without bacon] and Matarás, y matarte han, y
matarán á quien te matará [ww: Kill, and thou shall be killed, and they
shall kill him who kills thee], the Italian proverbs Chi non può fare sua
vendetta è debile, chi non vuole è vile [ww: He who cannot revenge
himself is weak, he who will not is vile] and Aspetta tempo e loco à far
tua vendetta, che la non si fa mai ben in fretta [ww: Wait time and place
to act thy revenge, for it is never well done in a hurry], the French
precept Prends le premier conseil d’une femme, et non le second [ww:
Take the rst advice of a woman, not the second], the Egyptian
warning Do no good and thou shalt nd no evil, or the Persian classics
Speech is silvern, silence is golden ( p. 81) and A stone that is t for the
wall, is not le in the way, which, it must be noted, is also a well-known
Bulgarian proverb – Дялан камък на път се не оставя. It is
noteworthy, however, that towards the end of the chapter, Trench, too,
mentions the special group of cosmopolites (Trench, 2003: 61). These
are the texts that “seem to have travelled from land to land, and to
have made themselves at home equally in all”. The author then
proceeds to explain that “[such texts] have commended themselves to
almost all people, and have become the portion of the common stock of
the world’s wisdom (emphasis added by R. P.), in every land making for
themselves a recognition and a home” (Trench, 2003: 62). Thus,
without using any specialist jargon, the Victorian scholar outlines in a
most revealing fashion the major object of study of the modern eld of
cross-cultural and contrastive paremiology: the comparing and
contrasting of proverb counterparts (equivalents and analogues) in
di erent languages.

11.7 Modern Contrastive Paremiology: A Short

Overview
Interestingly, Wolfgang Mieder has not discussed the latter aspect of
proverb study in his classic Proverbs: A Handbook, although he does
mention two book-length studies in this vein in an earlier, very
detailed and informative chapter, entitled Modern Paremiology in
Retrospect and Prospect, which was rst published in 1997 (Mieder,
2004). These studies are Sprichwörter und Redensarten im
Interkulturellen Vergleich [Crosscultural comparison of proverbs and
other expressions], edited by Annette Sabban and Jan Wirrer (1991),,
and La pratica e la grammatica: Viaggio nella linguistica del proverbio
[Practice and grammar as a way into the linguistics of proverbs], edited
by Christina Vallini (1989). Is this lack of interest due to the supposed
novelty of the eld, or could it have resulted from the linguistic barrier
(let us note that most of the publications in this eld are in the still
largely unknown to the Western scholars Cyrillic alphabet), which
seems to continue separating the West from Eastern Europe and
Eurasia? Indeed, in the same chapter, Mieder pleads for more “articles
dealing on a crosscultural level with misogyny, stereotypes religion,
animals, etc. in proverbs” (Mieder, 2004: 81-82). Yet, the term
contrastive is notably missing. On the other hand, a cursory glance at
the titles in Mieder’s annotated updated bibliographies in Proverbium
from more recent times and at various other sources in languages other
than English shows that, fortunately, there is at present quite a strong
representation of studies in this vein, mostly in Russian, but also in
some other European and Eurasian languages, as well as in other
Slavonic languages such as Ukrainian, Bulgarian, Serbian, etc. For
example, while the theoretical foundations of comparative and
contrastive proverb studies have been discussed by Peter Grzybek
(1998) in his article Komparative und interkulturelle Parömiologie:
Methodologische Bemerkungen und empirische Befunde [Comparative
and intercultural paremiology: methodological remarks and empirical
ndings], a growing number of scholars have been engaged in a wide
range of cross-cultural bilingual and multilingual empirical research,
employing and developing diverse approaches and methods –
semantic, communicative, pragmatic, etc. (Bamisile, 2010; Bernjak,
2012; Brandimonte, 2011; Georgieva, 1998; Grigas, 1997; Funk, 1998;
Firyn, 2012; Hakamies, 1998; Molchanova, 2004; Shayhulin, 2012;
Stefanovich, 2009; Wyzkiewcz, 1998; Zhukov, 2012). We are now going
to take a closer look, however brief, at some of the works in this eld.
A recent research that deserves to be mentioned is Mária
Dóbisová’s study Experimentelle Untersuchung der Sprichwörter vom
und über das Essen in deutschen und slowakischen [Experimental
research of proverbs about eating in German and Slovak] (2003). It
presents a cross-cultural experiment revealing how the speci c ways
in which a thematic set of proverbs in German and Slovak are
interpreted by native speakers relate to their dictionary meanings.
Another innovative cross-cultural work is Punning in Anglo-American,
German, French, Russian and Hungarian Anti-proverbs by Anna T.
Litovkina, Katalin Vargha, Péter Barta and Hrisztalina Hrisztova-
Gotthardt (2008). This extensive study examines punning as one of the
most popular techniques of proverb variation through discussing and
exemplifying two of the most frequent types of puns – paronyms and
homonyms – in anti-proverbs in ve European languages (English,
German, French, Russian and Hungarian. Regarding the arrangement
of lemmas in a bilingual cross-cultural proverb dictionary, we should
also mention Речник с тълкуване на 200 български пословици и
поговорки и еквивалентите им в руски език [Dictionary with
Interpretations of 200 Bulgarian proverbs and Their Equivalents in
Russian] by the Bulgarian paremiologist P. Trenda lova (2006). In her
detailed introduction, the author discusses the theoretical basis for the
comparison of 200 Bulgarian and Russian proverbs in modern use
from a semiotic perspective, relating semantic equivalence and
synonymy to the situational meanings of the proverbs, which have
been explicated and veri ed by means of conducting an enquiry.
Another recent contrastive study is English-Bulgarian Parallels in
Animalistic Paremia (A Contrastive Study). It is authored by the
Bulgarian phraseologist Rayna Holandi (Holandi, 2012). The study
contrasts two sets of proverbs (English and Bulgarian) with zoonyms in
their lexical content, using as tertium comparationis syntactic patterns,
common lexical semantics, and basic notions such as slyness,
richness, authority, chance, stinginess, etc., exempli ed by the
proverb texts. Another example in this group is the recent empirical
cross-cultural study “If There Were No Clouds, We Shouldn’t Enjoy The
Sun.” The Crosscultural View and Multifaceted Meaning of a Proverb,
conducted by the author of this chapter (Petrova, 2013). In it, the
individual interpretations of a context-free English proverb that were
provided by Bulgarian students are contrasted to its dictionary
meaning, the latter being presented as a set of culturemes. The
ndings reveal a great wealth of semantic variation of the meaning of
the proverb, which has been correctly grasped by the respondents.
Several other recent works deserve to be mentioned, which deal
with contrasting certain aspects of proverbs in di erent languages,
e.g., Spanish and Russian (Vorkachov, 1997), French and Russian
(Dmitrieva, 1997), Japanese, English, Russian, Ukrainian and Russian
(Pirogov, 2003), English and Bulgarian (Petrova, 2006), English,
German and Russian (Voropaeva, 2007), Russian and German
(Savchenko, 2010), Korean and Russian (Kim, 2010), English and
Lak158 (Kallaeva, 2011), Russian and Arabian (Abdu, 2011), English and
Tatar (Bakirova, 2011), to name but a few. Their authors make use of
speci c approaches and employ a wide range of speci cally created
units for conducting contrastive linguocultural analyses, whose
primary aim is to reveal the set of dominant cultural values and
speci c worldview of the people speaking the languages in question.
Our list is of course very incomplete, but we hope it is quite su cient
to show that by now Professor Mieder’s plea back in 1997 has already
been heard and answered.

11.8 New Approaches to Contrastive Paremiology

The authors of the studies discussed above confronted and dealt with
problems very similar to some of the problems illustrated by the
examples of Richard Trench, problems concerned with de ning the
common frame of reference for conducting crosscultural contrastive
analyses. Indeed, their work comes to show how crucial to this type of
research an adequate understanding of proverb equivalence is. But
how do we de ne proverb equivalence?

11.8.1 The Semantic Approach

In more recent times, folklorist Alan Dundes, following Matti Kuusi
(Dundes, 1987: 962) suggested that equivalence should be sought in
proverbs which employ di erent images while putting across the same
message, e.g., He who is bitten by a snake fears even a rope (English), A
scalded cat fears even cold water (French), and Whoever is burned on
hot squash blows on the cold yogurt (Greek). However, by message
Dundes actually means thought in the sense suggested by Trench
above. The common thought embodied in these examples can be
formulated like this: a painful experience makes a person overly
prudent and cautious.
 Proverb scholars have come up with various terms for denoting the
basic thought, or idea that is contained in a single proverb, a group of
proverb synonyms in the same language, or in proverb equivalents or
analogues in di erent languages. Apart from the terms thought, basic
idea, denotational (direct, literal) meaning, gurative meaning, the
sense of a proverb, etc., various other terms have been suggested for
describing the semantics of proverbs for the purposes of comparing
and contrasting them, the most frequent being explanation, and
de nition, while others are message, concept, logeme, cultureme. Let us
note that while some of these terms overlap completely, others have
similar or di erent meanings. Here are two examples of typical proverb
explanations taken from the popular dictionary The Facts on File
Dictionary of Proverbs (Manser, Fergusson, & Pickering, 2007): Once
something has been done, it cannot be changed, no matter how much
you regret having done it for the literal proverb What’s done can’t be
undone, and Do not support any members of your family or household
who cannot earn their keep for the gurative proverb Keep no more cats
than will catch mice. These examples show that a dictionary
explanation of a proverb does not di er from its meaning, sense, or
de nition. This can be seen in the two quotations of de nitions below
found on the Internet: valuable projects take time for the popular
international proverb Rome wasn’t built in a day, and a little preventive
maintenance can eliminate the need for major repairs later for the
widely-known English proverb A stitch in time saves nine (The New
Dictionary of Cultural Literacy).
The Russian scholars P. V. Chesnokova, L. V. Savenkova, and D. Y.
Polinichenko have suggested another term for describing proverb
semantics – the logeme. They use it to designate the meaning not only
of a single proverb text, but rather of the summarized, or generalized,
basic meaning of a group of similar, thematically close proverbs
(Polinichenko, 2004: 83-84). Thus, the English proverbs Actions speak
louder than words, An ounce of practice is worth a pound of precept;
Example is better than precept, and Deeds will show themselves, and
words will pass away are subsumed under the single logeme Speaking
is less e cient than doing (Polinichenko, 2004 85-86). The authors use
the logeme for analyzing and classifying monolingual proverbs (e.g.
Savenkova, 2002), but we are convinced that this unit can be used with
even greater success in conducting cross-cultural studies, where
proverbs in di erent languages can be described contrastively in very
great detail by taking their generalized basic meaning as a starting
point. This approach would most probably yield a really wide range of
speci c, culture-bound linguistic forms that express one and the same
basic idea.

11.8.2 The Linguocultural Approach

Another unit that has steadily been gaining ground recently, mostly
among Russianlanguage scholars who pursue linguocultural
contrastive studies, is the (linguo)cultural concept. With this unit,
scholars have been striving to bridge the gap between linguistics,
culturology, and cognitive science and this can be easily seen from one
of its many de nitions: “a unit of knowledge and conscience shared by
a large group of people who speak the same language, with a xed
linguistic form (expression), which is marked by distinct ethnocultural
speci cs” (Vorkachov, 2002: 30). There continues to be rather a wide
range of current de nitions of the linguocultural concept and its
variant – the linguistic concept, a clear sign that a new set of problems
has been identi ed calling for the creation of a new discipline, whose
task it should be to undertake certain solutions. This discipline –
linguistic conceptology – has already emerged and even succeeded in
acquiring a status almost equal to that of linguistic culturology from
which it originally stemmed about a decade ago. The scholar who has
been particularly instrumental in its creation and development is
Professor G. S. Vorkachov (1997; 2002; 2005). Like linguistic
culturology, linguistic conceptology pursues contrastive studies of
precedent texts in two or more languages. The latter are texts that are
well-known among a monolingual group of people, the proverbs and
phraseological units occupying a privileged position in this class. Such
texts are described as culturally meaningful and highly representative
of the mentality and worldview of one particular people. Some of
them, e.g., The legend of King Arthur or King Lear (for the English), or
the stories of Krali Marco (for Bulgarians), as well as popular
characters from folk tales, like Baba Yaga and Vasilisa the Beautiful
(for the Russian people) may date back to medieval times, or be
entirely ctitious, while others may be quite recent. These texts, which
can be oral or written, are as a rule marked by much higher semantic
(semiotic) density compared to others (Levin, 1984: 111; Maslova, 2001:
62; Petrova, 2006: 19, 21; Vorobyov, 1997: 56). Scholars pursuing this
eld of study use the term semantic density to designate not only the
frequency of occurrences of a certain text, phrase or name in speech
and writing both on the synchronic plane and diachronically, but also
the degree of its grammatical, lexical and thematical elaborateness,
including variability, synonymy, tendency to form derivatives,
conversion, potential for intertextuality, etc. The class of precedent
texts in any given culture is an invaluable national treasure that is held
in esteem and loved by all. These texts are carefully guarded and
handed down from one generation to the next, uniting the members of
a linguistic community into one people. They are the nation’s memory
and history, its heart and life.

11.8.3 The Cognitive Approach

The cognitive aspect of proverbs is the main object of another
exemplary contrastive analysis presented in the article Where cognitive
linguistics meets paremiology: a cognitive-contrastive view of selected
English and Croatian proverbs by the Croatian linguists Gabrijela
Bulijan and Tanja Gradečak-Erdelić (Bulijan, & Gradečak-Erdelić,
2013). The authors contrast three groups of proverb equivalents and
analogues on fear, love and greed applying the conceptual metaphor
and the blending theory to reveal a wide range of additional areas of
linguistic and culture-speci c variation. Studies show that the aims,
objectives and research methods of the cognitive approach are very
closely related to the linguocultural approach.

11.8.4 The Culturematic Method

The culturematic method should be viewed as an extension to, and а
further elaboration of the linguocultural method (Petrova, 2012: 51-83).
A unit that has been speci cally developed for conducting
linguocultural contrastive studies of proverbs is the cultureme
(Petrova, 2003, 2006, 2013). Very brie y de ned, a cultureme is
axiologically marked, verbalised content, explicated through a
semantic transformation of the question-answer kind and represented
by a noun or noun phrase. Simple examples of culturemes are
knowledge (+) for the proverb Knowledge is power and haste (–) for
Haste makes waste. In order for the culturemes of gurative proverbs to
be found, the researcher needs rst to translate the overt (literal)
meaning of the proverb into the meaning of its deep structure, i.e. the
proverb de nition (e.g., All is not gold that glitters should rst be
translated into attractive appearance is rarely a sign of virtue). The
culturemes are explicated by means of asking two questions: What
does this proverb a rm? and What does this proverb condemn /
criticize? If we put the rst question to the deep-structure meaning
(de nition) of the proverb above, the answer will elicit the negative
cultureme attractive but worthless persons and things (–). The most
appealing characteristic of the culturematic method (the research
method involving the application of the cultureme), which makes it
particularly convenient for conducting contrastive research, is that the
semantic density of any given cultureme can be ascertained with a
much greater degree of precision if applied on such axiologically
marked linguistic units as proverbs. For example, if we want to
compare the frequency positions (the semantic densities) of a
particular cultureme (e.g. diligence (+), caution and prudence (+), or
sloth (–)) in the proverb corpora of two di erent languages, we will
have to nd the ratio (the proportion) of all the proverbs containing
this cultureme. It makes sense that the more extensive the corpora that
are being contrasted are, the more reliable the data and the
conclusions will be (and this involves excerpting very large numbers of
proverbs). We will see that in one of the two corpora compared this
cultureme is represented in a larger proportion of proverb texts, i.e. it
has greater cultural weight than in the other, which would mean that
the rst linguoculture has taken much greater interest in this entity
than the other. Applied on a large number of proverb texts, the
culturematic method can thus help elicit truly reliable quantitative
evidence about the hierarchical arrangement of the complete set of
positive and negative culturemes contained in the proverb system. This
can demonstrate very clearly in a consistent and convincing way the
hierarchy of the values and anti-values of the people among whom
these proverbs have originated and are current.

11.9 Concluding Remarks

In the foregoing presentation, an attempt has been made to present a
comprehensive picture, although very general, of some of the works
that have been performed so far by international proverb scholars in
the still new eld of contrastive proverb study. Our discussion has
certainly failed to cover all the contributions in this area, since
information in more languages is needed for the ful llment of such an
ambitious project. So far we have seen that contrastive studies cannot
be discussed separately from cross-cultural studies because of their
common main objective – the explication of culture-bound
characteristics. It was also shown that they vary mostly in the units
that are intended to serve both as tertium comparationis and as
research tools that can bring out in more rigorous ways the speci c
variations and the di erence between the proverb corpora compared.
Indeed, the time has come for a comprehensive and much more
extensive book-length monograph to be written, which will hopefully
cover all that has been done in this eld. With its focus on these most
typical human achievements, culture and cognition and through
uniting an ever-growing number of scholars from all over the world,
who have devoted their professional lives to proverbs, the contrastive
study of proverbs can open further vistas to cultural universals and
cultural diversity,
References
[Abdu, A. M. S.] Абду, А. М. С. (2011). Национально-специфическое в языке и
межкультурная коммуникация (на материале русских и арабских паремий).
Ученые записки Таврического национального университета имени В. И.
Вернадского. Серия „Филология. Социальные коммуникации”, 24 (63)/1, 26-
31. Симферополь: Таврический национальный университет имени В. И.
Вернадского.
[Bakirova, M. R.] Бакирова, М. Р. (2010). Автореферат диссертации „Языковая
концептуализация положительной оценки паремиологического фонда
английского и татарского языков”.Чебоксары: ЧОУ ВПО „Институт
экономики, управления и права”
Bamisile, S. A. (2010). Sexist Prejudices in Yoruba, English and Portuguese Proverbs.
In R. J. B. Soares, & O. Lauhakangas (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third
Interdisciplinary Colloquium on Proverbs, 8th to 15th November 2009 at Tavira,
Portugal (pp. 132-146). Tavira: Tipogra a Tavitense.
Bernjak, E. (2012). Slovenische und ungarische Sprichtwörter kontrastiv. In K. Steyer
(Ed.), Sprichtwörter multilingual. Theoretische, empirische und angewandte
Aspekte der modernen Parömiologie (pp. 405-416). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Brădeanu, L. (2007). From Centre to Margins: Multicultural Aspects of the Origins of
Proverbs. Acta Iassyensia Comparationis. 22-26.
http://literaturacomparata.ro/Site_Acta/Old/acta5/acta5_1.bradeanu.pdf
(accessed September 10, 2013).
Brandimonte, G. (2011). Breve studio contrastive fraseológico y paremiológico: El
disputado voto del señor Cayo y su version italiana. Paremia 20, 77-87.
Bulijan, G., & Gradečak-Erdelić, T. (2013). Where cognitive linguistics meets
paremiology: a cognitive-contrastive view of selected English and Croatian
proverbs. Explorations in English Language and Linguistics 1, 63-83.
Cordry, H. V. (1997). The Multicultural Dictionary of Proverbs. Je erson, N. C.:
McFarland.
[Dmitrieva, O. A.] Дмитриева, О. А. (1997). Автореферат диссертации
„Культурно-языковые характеристики пословиц и афоризмов (по
материале французского и русского языков)”. Волгоград: Волгоградский
педагогический университет.
Dóbisová, M. (2003). Experimentelle Untersuchung der Sprichwörter vom und über
das Essen in deutschen und slowakischen. Proverbium 20, 95-132.
Dundes, A. (1987). On the structure of the proverb. In W. Mieder (Ed.), Proverbium 16
(1971) – 25 (1975) (pp. 961-973). Bern/Frankfurt am Main/New York/Paris: Peter
Lang.
Firyn, S. (2012). Vater und Mutter in deutschen und polnischen Sprichwörtern. In H.
Biadún-Grabarek (Ed.), Fragen der Phraseologie, Lexicologie und Syntax (pp. 53-
93). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Funk, G. (1998). A Contrastive Analysis of the Textual and Social Function of Proverbs
in German and Portuguese. In P. Durco (Ed.), EUROPHRAS 97: Phraseology and
 Paremiology (pp. 110-116). Bratislava: Akadémia PZ.
Georgieva, S. (1998). Reflection of the Seasons of the Year in the Bulgarian and
Russian Phraseology and Paremiology. In P. Durco (Ed.), EUROPHRAS 97:
Phraseology and Paremiology (pp. 134-139). Bratislava: Akadémia PZ.
Grigas, K. (1997). Patarle ‘Negirk dienos be vakaro’ Europos kultura istorijoje.
Tautosakos Darbai 6-7 (13-14), 23-43.
Grzybek, P. (1998). Komparative und interkulturelle Parömiologie: Methodologische
Bemerkungen und empirische Befunde. In W. Eismann (Ed.), EUROPHRAS 95:
Europäische Phraseologie im Vergleich: Gemeinsames Erbe und kulturelle Vielfalt
(pp. 263-282). Bochum: Norbert Brockmeyer.
Hakamies, P. (1998). Comparative Research on the Common Proverbs of the Peoples
of Northern Europe: Presentation of a Project. In P. Durco (Ed.), EUROPHRAS 97:
Phraseology and Paremiology (pp. 156-161). Bratislava: Akadémia PZ.
Holandi, R. (2012). English-Bulgarian parallels in animalistic paremia. Macabéa
Revista Eletrônica do Netlli 1/2, 236-249.
[Kallaeva, D. A.] Каллаева, Д. А. (2011). Автореферат диссертации
„Лингвокультурологический анализ лакских и английских паремий”.
Махачкала: Дагестанский государственный университет.
Kelly, W. (2002). A Collection of the Proverbs of All Nations. In W. Mieder (Ed.).
Burlington: The University of Vermont.
[Kim, A. S.] Ким, А. С. (2010). Автореферат диссертации „Гендерные
стереотипы в паремиях корейского и русского языков”. Алматы: Казахский
университет международных отношений и мировых языков имени Абыгай
хана.
Krikmann, A. (2009). Proverbs on Animal Identity: Typological Memoirs. In W. Mieder
(Ed.), Proverb semantics. Studies in structure, logic, and metaphor. Arvo
Krikmann (pp. 207-246). Burlingon, Vermont: The University of Vermont.
Kuusi, M. (1985). Proverbia Septentrionalia. 900 Balto-Finnic proverb types with
Russian, Baltic, German and Scandinavian parallels. In cooperation with M.
Joalaid, E. Kokare, A. Krikmann, K. Laukkanen, P. Leino, V. Mālk & I. Sarv.
FFCommunications No. 236. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.
[Levin, Y. V.] Левин, Ю. В. (1984). Провербиальное пространство. In Г. Л. Пермяков
(сост. и ред.), Паремиологические исследования. Сб. статей (pp. 108-126).
Москва: Наука.
Litovkina, A. T., K. Vargha, P. Barta & H. Hrisztova-Gotthardt (2008). Punning in
Anglo-American, German, French, Russian and Hungarian Anti-proverbs.
Proverbium 25, 249-288.
Manser, M. H., Fergusson, R. & Pickering, D. (Eds.) (2007). The Facts on File
Dictionary of Proverbs. 2nd ed. New York, New York: Facts On File.
[Maslova V. A.] Маслова, В. А. (2001). Лингвокультурология. Учебное пособие для
студентов высших учебных заведений. Москва: Издательский центр
„Академия”.
Mieder, W. (2004). Modern Paremiology in Retrospect and Prospect. In A. Dundes
(Ed.), Folklore: Critical Concepts in Literary and Cultural Studies 3 (pp. 80-106).
London: Routledge.
Mieder, W. (2004a). Proverbs: A Handbook. Westport, Connecticut & London:
Greenwood Press.
Mieder, W. (2011). Bibliography of Paremiography: Collections of Proverbs, Proverbial
Expressions and Comparisons, Quotations, Gra ti, Slang, and Wellerisms.
Burlington: The University of Vermont.
Mieder, W. & Dundes, A. (1994). Preface. In W. Mieder & A. Dundes (Eds.), The
Wisdom of Many. Essays on the Proverb. 2nd ed. (pp. vii-xiii). New York: Garland
Publishers.
[Molchanova, G. G.] Молчанова, Г. Г. Антропонимическая паремия как
иконический знак и культурологический признак. Вестник Московского
университета, серия 19. Лингвистика и межкультурная коммуникация 4,
96. Москва: Московский государственный университет имени М. В.
Ломоносова.
Paczolay, G. (1997). European Proverbs in 55 Languages with Equivalents in Arabic,
Persian, Sanskrit, Chinese and Japanese. Veszprém, Hungary: Veszprémi Nyomda
Rt.
[Permyakov, G. L] Пермяков, Г. Л. (1978). Пословицы и поговорки народов
Востока: систематизированное собрание изречений двухсот народов.
Москва: Наукa.
[Permyakov, G. L ] Пермяков, Г. Л. (1988). Основы структурной паремиолoгии.
Москва: Наукa.
Petrova, R. (2003). Comparing Proverbs as Cultural Texts. Proverbium 20, 331-344.
[Petrova, R.] Петрова, Р. (2006). Лингвокултурологично съпоставително
изследване на английски и български пословици. Дисертация. София: БАН –
Институт за български език. http://linguocult.uni-ruse.bg (accessed December
15, 2012).
[Petrova, R.] Петрова, Р. (2012). Културемите в Книга на притчите (The Book of
Proverbs) в Авторизираната версия на Библията (AV / KJB). Русе: Лени Ан.
Petrova, R. (2013). “If There Were No Clouds, We Shouldn’t Enjoy The Sun.” The
Crosscultural View and Multifaceted Meaning of a Proverb. Proverbium 30, 255-
280.
[Pirogov, V. L.] Пирогов, В. Л. (2003). Автореферат диссертации „Структура и
семантика паремийних единиц в японском, украинском и русском языках”.
Киев: Киевский национальный лингвистический университет.
[Polinichenko, D. Y.] Полиниченко, Д. Ю. (2004). Концепт “язык” в английской
паремиологии. Язык, сознание, коммуникация, 26, 83-90. Москва: МАКС
Пресс.
Sabban, A. & Wirrer, J. (1991). Sprichwörter und Redensarten im interkulturellen
Vergleich Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
[Savchenko, V. A.] Савченко, В. А. (2010). Автореферат диссертации
„Концептосфера „человек телесный” в русской и немецкой
паремиологической картине мира (кросскультурный анализ соматизмов)”.
Курск: Курский государственный университет.
[Savenkova, L. B.] Савенкова, Л. Б. (2002). Русские паремии как
функционируящая система. Автореферат на диссертация на соискание
 учëной степени доктора филологических наук. Ростов-на-Дону: Ростовский
государственный университет. http://cheloveknauka.com/russkie-paremii-kak-
funktsioniruyuschaya-sistema (accessed February 2, 2012).
[Shayhulin, T. A.] Шайхуллин, Т. А. (2012). Русские и арабские паремии с
компонентом- наименованием родственных отношений: Концептуально-
семантический и этнокультурный аспекты. Автореферат на
диссертация на соискание учëной степени доктора филологических наук.
Казань: Казанский (Приволжский) федеральный университет.
[Shoutina, V. N.] Шутина, В. Н. (2009). Сопоставительный анализ бинарной
оппозиции „мужчина-женщина” в русской и французской пословичных
картинах мира. Вестник Ставропольского государственного
университета 62. 92-98.
Stefanovich, M. (2009). O poslovitsami u prouchvanu iezichke slike sveta (na
materialu ruskog i srpskog iezika). Annual Review of the Faculty of Philosophy 34.
31-42.
Strauss, E. (1994). Dictionary of European Proverbs. In 3 vols. London: Routledge.
Taylor, A. (1975). The collection and study of proverbs. In W. Mieder (Ed.), Selected
Writings on Proverbs by Archer Taylor (pp. 84-100). Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia,
Helsinki. http://info.utas.edu.au/docs/flonta/ (accessed October 20, 2001).
The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy (2010). Houghton Mi n Harcourt Publishing
Company. http://www.yourdictionary.com (accessed August 22, 2013).
Trench, R. C. (2003). Proverbs and their lessons. In W. Mieder (Ed.). Burlington,
Vermont: The University of Vermont.
[Trenda lova, P.] П. Трендафилова (2006). Речник с тълкуване на 200 български
пословици и поговорки и еквивалентите им в руски език. Силистра:
Издателство „Ковачев”.
Vallini, C. (1989). La pratica e la grammatica: Viaggio nella linguistica del proverbio.
Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale.
[Vlahov, S.] Влахов, С. (1998). Съпоставителен речник на пословици (български,
руски, английски, френски, немски (и латински). София: „ЕТО”.
Voigt, V. (2013). Précis of Hungarian Paremiography and Paremiology. Proverbium 30,
347-376.
[Vorkachov, S. G.] Воркачëв, С. Г. (1997). Безразличие как этносемантическая
характеристика личности: опыт сопоставительной паремиологии. Вопросы
языкознания, 4 115-124.
[Vorkachov, S. G.] Воркачëв С. Г. (2002). Концепт счастья в русском языковом
сознании: опыт лингвокультурологического анализа. Краснодар:
Издательство Кубанского государственного технического университета.
[Vorkachov, S. G.] Воркачëв, С. Г. (2005). Лингвоконцептология и межкультурная
коммуникация: истоки и цели. Филологические науки 4, 76–83.
[Vorobyov, V. V.] Воробëв, В. В. (1997). Лингвокультурология: теория и методы.
Москва: Издательство Российского университета дружбы народов.
[Voropaeva, V. A.] Воропаева, В. А. (2007). Автореферат диссертации
„Сопоставительная характеристика английских, немецких и русских
 паремий и фразеологизмов, выражающих толерантность”. Москва:
Тамбовский государственный технический университет.
Wyzkiewcz, R. (1998). Representation of the Home / House in Polish and Serbian
Proverbs. In P. Durco (Ed.), EUROPHRAS 97: Phraseology and Paremiology (pp.
366-369). Bratislava: Akadémia PZ.
Zhukov, K. (2012) Verbalisation of the Concept of Friendship in Russian, Swedish and
English Proverbs. In R. J. B. Soares & O. Lauhakangas (Eds.), Proceedings of the
Fi h Interdisciplinary Colloquium on Proverbs, 6th to 13th November 2011, at
Tavira, Portugal (pp. 218-229). Tavira: Tipogra a Tavirense.

157 In his Introduction to Proverbs and Their Lessons by the notable British
philologist and paremiologist Richard Chenevix Trench, Archbishop of Dublin
(Burlington: Vermont, 2003), the editor Wolfgang Mieder explains that the book was
rst published in 1853 with the title On the Lessons on Proverbs. In 1905 it was
published again under the editorship of A. Smythe Palmer, D.D. with the title
Proverbs and Their Lessons. The latter edition includes a glossary, additional notes,
and appendices, from which the information about this ancient proverb collection is
taken.
158 The language spoken by a linguistic community in Dagestan.
Charles Clay Doyle
12 Proverbs in Literature

12.1 Introduction
Proverbs, it could be said, are themselves little poems. Many proverbs
consist of epigrammatic rhymed couplets: A friend in need / is a friend
indeed; When the cat’s away, / the mice will play; Birds of a feather /
ock together ; Di erent strokes / for di erent folks ; If you want to talk
the talk, / you’ve got to walk the walk ; Les morts / ont toujours tort [ww:
The dead are always wrong]; Morgenstunde / hat Gold im Munde. [ww:
The morning hour has gold in its mouth]. Even Latin, which in
Classical times did not feature rhyme as a poetic device, eventually
yielded numerous rhymed proverbs; for example: Pater qualis, / lius
talis [ee: Like father, like son]; Qualis rex, / talis grex [ww: As the king
is, so are the commoners]; Orimur, / morimur [ww: We are born, [then]
we die]; Homo proponit, / Deus disponit – with its rhyming derivatives
or counterparts Man proposes, / God disposes and Der Mensch denkt /
und Gott lenkt. Countless proverbs, both rhymed and unrhymed,
exhibit other sound e ects and rhetorical or stylistic devices commonly
associated with literary poetry, such as alliteration, assonance,
repetition, parallelism, chiasmus, antithesis, various metrical
properties, word play (a friend indeed or a friend in deed), and, of
course, metaphor. The great literary critic Kenneth Burke once asked,
“Could the most complex and sophisticated works of art legitimately
be considered somewhat as ‘proverbs writ large’?” (Burke, 1967: 296).
The folklorist S. J. Sackett has suggested that the study of familiar
proverbs could be used pedagogically to introduce poetry, which
students so o en nd daunting (Sackett, 1964: 143-53).

12.2 Proverbs in Poetry

Proverbs themselves, of course, even if they might be regarded as folk
epigrams, are not really literature, since they belong to the province of
oral tradition. However, proverbs bear an especially intimate
relationship with written epigrams. Since ancient times, literary
epigrams have sometimes consisted of little more than a quoted
proverb with a minimal comment or elaboration, o en for comic or
ironic e ect. The Greek Anthology (assembled in stages during Imperial
Roman and early medieval times) includes many such epigrams. One
distich, attributed to the satirist Lucian (second century A.D.),
responds to the ancient proverb A beard does not make one wise: (in
translation) “If you think that to grow a beard is to acquire wisdom, a
goat with a ne beard is at once a complete Plato” (Paton, 1917-39:
4:276-277). A four-line poem by Palladas of Alexandria ( h century
A.D.) explicitly quotes a proverb, then rebuts it: “The proverb says,
‘Even a pig would bite a bad man’; but I say that we should not say
that, but ‘Even a pig would bite simple unmeddlesome men, but even
a snake would be afraid to bite a bad man’” (Paton, 1917-39: 3:208-209 ).
An anonymous epigram, framed (by its title) as “What Hector would
say when wounded by the Greeks” applies the Aesopic proverb Even a
hare will insult a dead lion: “Strike my body now a er my death, for the
very hares insult the body of a dead lion” (Paton, 1917-39: 5:160-161 ). In
a Latin epigram, Martial ( rst century A.D.) urges one Faustinus to
publish his work and “begin to live now” rather that hope for
posthumous fame; the poem concludes with what was probably
already a proverb: cineri Gloria sera venit [to ashes glory comes too
late] (Martial, 1968: 1:44).
Energized by the great Erasmus’s magisterial Adagia (1500-1540),
and deeply versed in proverbs by the prevailing education system,
Renaissance Europe vastly enjoyed composing such proverb-epigrams,
in both Latin and vernacular languages.159 Most notable for its extent
was John Heywoods’s Epigrams upon ProverbsEpigrams upon Proverbs
1562), 600 poems nally. An example, responding to the proverb A bird
in the hand is worth ten (two) in the bush (wood): “Better one bird in
hand, than ten in the wood / Better for Birders, but for birds not so
good” (Heywood, 1906: 173). The sudden shi in perspective, playfully
confuting the universality of the proverb’s message, reminds us that
(contrary to what is sometimes supposed) proverbs are not necessarily
regarded as sacrosanct epitomes of venerable wisdom; instead,
proverbs – like the world that they mirror – are subject to vagaries and
complexities in their content and their perceptions. They can be
questioned, sco ed at, merrily reinterpreted, parodied, enjoyed.
Thence their usefulness when artistically placed in literary contexts!
The same sort of reversal in point of view seen in the bird epigram
by Heywood occurs in an epigram by the late-twentieth-century poet
Shel Silverstein, meditating on the proverb The early bird gets the
worm:
Oh, if you’re a bird, be an early bird
And catch the worm for your breakfast plate.
If you’re a bird, be an early early bird–
But if you’re a worm, sleep late. (Silverstein, 1974: 30)

Between the sixteenth and the twenty- rst century, hundreds of

proverb-epigrams have appeared, some anonymous, some by known
authors, major or minor. A number of them are represented in Janet
Sobieski and Wolfgang Mieder’s collection “So Many Heads, So Many
Wits”: An Anthology of English Proverb Poetry (2005). Mieder has
commented on several of the short proverb-poems appearing in the
anthology, many of them epigrams, under such headings as Poems
with Proverb Titles, Poems with Unchanged Proverbs, Poems Containing
Personalized Proverbs, Poems with Proverb Allusions, and Poems with
Proverbs Changed into Anti-Proverbs (Mieder, 2010: 263-289; also
Mieder, 1993: 71-88).
Besides epigrams, proverb-poems may be divided roughly into two
groups. One group consists of poems built out of a multiplicity of
proverbs, varied or modi ed as necessary to t the chosen meter and
rhyme scheme. The conglomerated result is supposed to yield a
coherent poetic statement, although any plot or theme is usually
secondary to the display of proverbial profuseness. Examples include
an 85-line didactic poem in Middle English, from the fourteenth
century, commonly referred to as Proverbs of Good Counsel (Furnivall,
1869: 68-70), and, from eenth-century France, the thirty-six lines of
François Villon’s Ballade des proverbs, each line of which begins with
the adverb tant [so much or as much as], followed by a proverb or a
concept related to a proverb (Villon, 1951: 127-128). Then there was
John Heywood’s sprawling Dialogue of Proverbs (1546-1562), the 2,754
lines of which actually endeavored to include “all the prouerbes in the
englishe tongue,” the dialog and narrative loosely centered on the
subject of marriage. The Elizabethan Michael Drayton wrote a sonnet,
To Proverb (published in 1600), that begins, “As Loue and I, late
Harbour’d in one Inne, / With Prouerbs thus each other intertaine”;
there follow ve agonistic exchanges of proverbs between the speaker
and Love, the dialog concluding, “And hauing thus a while each other
thwarted, / Fooles as we met, so fooles againe we parted” (Drayton,
1953: 1:17; Fools will be fools still is a proverb). In an anonymous
seventeenth-century poem, its 42 lines titled simply Song (1656) – a
later, slightly longer, version titled A Ballad of Old Proverbs – a young
man pleads with a maid to “grant me my desire, / For I’m thrown as
the old Proverb goes, / Out of the frying-pan into the re….” In 1680
the young woman’s reply was appended: “The Youngmans Careless
Wooing; and the Witty Maids Replication; All Done out of Old English
Proverbs” (Doyle, 2012: 89-100). A more modern example, a truly de
and witty one, is A Proverbial Tragedy by Arthur Guiterman, rst
published in Life magazine in 1911; its sixteen lines tell of a journey by
three proverbial companions:
The Rolling Stone and the Turning Worm
And the Cat that Looked at a King,
Set forth on the Road that Leads to Rome–
For Youth will have its Fling.
The Goose will lay the Golden Eggs,
The Dog must have his Day,
And Nobody locks the Stable Door
Till the Horse is stol’n away.
But the Rolling Stone, that was never known
To Look before the Leap,
Plunged down the hill to the Waters Still
That run so dark, so deep;
And the leaves were stirred by the Early Bird
Who sought his breakfast where
He marked the squirm of the Turning Worm–
And the Cat was Killed by Care!160

An idiosyncratic variant of the multiple-proverb-poem is Carl

Sandburg’s ambitious pair Good Morning, America (1928), which
occupies seventeen pages in the Complete Poems of 1970, and The
People, Yes (1936), which occupies 178 pages. Each poem contains a
free-verse montage of proverbs, proverbial phrases, idioms,
colloquialisms, anecdotes, and other kinds of folk speech, resulting in
a panoramic and rhapsodic sense of the ingenuity, wisdom,
colorfulness, and untutored eloquence of the American people; these
lines, for example, come from The People, Yes:
behold the proverbs of a people, a nation:
Give ’em the works. Fix it, there’s always
a way. Be hard boiled. The good die young.
Be a square shooter. Be good; if you can’t
be good be careful. When they put you in
that six foot bungalow, that wooden kimono,
you’re through and that’s that. (Sandburg, 1970: 328)

The other, more numerous, group of proverb-poems consists of works

that are longer than most epigrams, and o en more serious in their
intent or e ect, that employ one or just a few key proverbs to focus on
a central idea, incident, or mood. Perhaps the most basic of such
poems (and among the oldest) are versi ed fables told to illustrate
themes that are embodied by individual proverbs (though in some
cases the proverb itself may have derived from a version of the fable,
rather than the reverse). Socrates, according to Plato, versi ed some of
Aesop’s fables. Greek and Latin verse fables by Babrius and Phaedrus,
respectively – both in the rst century A.D. – are among the earliest
Aesopic texts on record. The famous Fables of Jean de La Fontaine
(1668 et seq.) followed the tradition. One of those fables in French
verse, “L’alouette et ses petits, avec le maître d’un champ” [The Lark,
Her Chicks, and the Landowner] begins – unlike its counterpart by
Babrius – with a proverb: “Ne t’attends qu’à toi seul”, c’est un commun
proverbe [“Don’t count on others” is a common proverb], which the
fable illustrates with a wise mother bird’s recognition that when the
farmer intends to summon rst his friends and then his kinsmen to
help him mow the eld, there is no need for the birds to move their
nest – but when he resolves to do the mowing himself, then they must
take ight promptly (La Fontiane, 1962: 128-30).
 In 1974 Wolfgang Mieder, the great historian and bibliographer of
proverbs and proverb scholarship, seeking to explain the
“concentration of literary proverb studies on prose and drama with an
unfortunate neglect of lyrical poetry,” surmised that “dramatic and
prose writings” may be “more suitable for proverbial integration than
lyrical poetry” (Mieder, 1974: 890). Recent scholarship (including
Mieder’s own) has, at least partly, remedied the perceived neglect, and
called into doubt the surmise about the inhospitality of lyric poetry to
the use of proverbs. For instance, the sonnets and eclogues of Edmund
Spenser – who, of all poets, used proverbs most skillfully and most
extensively – have been examined for their proverb use with
considerable subtlety by several scholars (see Doyle, 2007: 1:330-338,
and the references there). Like some other types of Elizabethan
sonnets, the Spenserian sonnet ends with a freestanding couplet,
which will sometimes quote or allude to a proverb, as if to clinch or
sum up an argument developed in the three linked quatrains, or to
o er a correlative from the larger world outside the recounted situation
in the poem, or occasionally to e ect a reversal or cast an ironic light
on the foregoing matter – or on the proverb itself. In sonnet 37 of the
Amoretti sequence, the persona initially praises his lady’s “golden
tresses,” which then become a “net of gold”; the poem ends unhappily
with the explicit paraphrase of a proverb: “Fondnesse it were for any
being free, / to couet fetters, though they golden bee” (Spenser, 1912:
568; the proverb is No man loves his fetters though made of gold).
Sonnet 11 concludes with the disconsolate lover calling into the
question the veracity of the proverbs All wars end in peace and Great
pains quickly nd ease; he laments, “All paine hath end and euery war
hath peace, / but mine no price nor prayer may surcease” (Spenser,
1912: 564; for discussion of those and other proverb-sonnets, see
Doyle, 2007: 1:331-333).
As for the use of proverbs in other poetic genres: Again, Edmund
Spenser stands foremost. In his great un nished epic The Faerie
Queene (said to be the longest poem in the English language), the
poet’s subtle and extensive use of proverbs has received considerable
notice (Doyle, 2007: 1:333-336). Indeed, the entire action of the rst
book of the poem – and therefore of the whole poem – commences
with an outright rebuttal of the proverb Where re is, smoke will
appear; the wise female companion of a young knight bluntly warns
him, “O re is without smoke, and perill without show” (1.1.12;
Spenser, 1912: 5). The allegory emphasizes the danger of attempting to
ascertain spiritual or even physical realities on the basis of super cial
signs.
Much less attention has been paid to proverbs in other literary
epics of the Renaissance, such as the Os Lusíadas by the Portuguese
Luís Vaz de Camões or La Gerusalemme liberate by the Italian Torquato
Tasso or Paradise Lost by the Englishman John Milton.
In general, though, for their use of proverbs, Renaissance poets
have been studied widely and well during recent decades; so have
poets from the Middle Ages and the twentieth century (less so, with
notable exceptions, for poets of the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries). An example of an insightful study of a twentieth-century
poem is Wolfgang Mieder’s explication of Robert Frost’s famous
Mending Wall (1914), which begins, “Something there is that doesn’t
love a wall” (Mieder, 2004: 69-78; also, at greater length, Mieder, 2005:
210-243). The poem reports a dialog between a seemingly urbane rural
property owner, busy mending a wall, and his rustically stubborn
neighbor, who keeps insisting, proverbially, Good fences make good
neighbors. The poem’s contemplation of the proverb – its nuances and
rami cations – becomes a comment on very modern issues of
boundaries and de nitions, of limits and linkages in property,
personal space, social classes, regions, generations, ideas – the o en
competing necessities of mending (or erecting) such walls and
allowing them to crumble. Mieder comments, “The ‘fence’ proverb ... is
a perfect metaphor for what keeps people apart or together. It is a
folkloristic sign for the divergencies and convergencies of life ...”
(Mieder, 2004: 74). Mieder’s discussion, by focusing on the proverb,
not only illuminates complexities and depths in the poem’s artistry but
also examines the various possible (sometimes con icting) ways to
interpret or apply the proverb itself, and explains the proverb’s
burgeoning popularity in the twentieth century, which has been at
least partly attributable to its appearance in Frost’s poem.
The desideratum of studying proverbs in literature, then, is not
merely to identify the occurrence of proverbs in poems, plays, stories,
or novels (however valuable that activity of itself can be) but rather to
examine the artistry of proverb use in literary contexts. As early as 1939
the great proverb scholar B. J. Whiting, evidently with some frustration
about the current state of a airs, exclaimed that “the excerpting of
proverbs from the works of a particular author should not be
undertaken unless a special purpose is clearly held in view” (Whiting,
1939: 64). There is some irony in Whiting’s declaration, in that the
pioneering dictionary of proverbs compiled by him in collaboration
with Archer Taylor, published in 1958, consists largely of items
“excerpted” from “a variety of American authors whose works were
published between 1820 and 1880” (Taylor & Whiting, 1958: vii). Of
course, a dictionary of proverbs is a special purpose. Otherwise,
though, a multitude of studies prior to the late twentieth century
merely extracted proverbs from published works, mostly sub-
canonical works by regional writers, in lists that suggested nothing
more sophisticated than the mere existence of individual proverbs at
speci c times and places. Even there, the evidence can be suspect:
Literary writers are certainly free to present characters or narrators
who employ archaic or non-local expressions – sometimes as stylistic
features of characterization, sometimes out of the author’s ignorance
about his material.
More recent compilations of proverbs in the works of given authors
typically – or at best – will include an examination of the actual
function of proverbs as employed artistically in the authors’ creations.
Examples are the numerous studies by Wolfgang Mieder of proverbs in
the works of individual authors, among them Carl Sandburg (Mieder,
1971: 160-168; Mieder, 1973: 15-36; also Bryan & Mieder, 2003: 14-49),
George Bernard Shaw (Mieder in collaboration with George Bryan;
Bryan & Mieder, 1994), Eugene O’Neill (Bryan & Mieder, 1995), Charles
Dickens (Bryan & Mieder, 1997), and Bertolt Brecht (Mieder, 1998b;
Mieder 1999: 247-277). The opportunities for more such studies are
practically limitless, if not in the form of published monographs then
as journal articles or post-graduate theses or student essays–and not
necessarily devoted to the corpus of an author but rather to individual
literary works.
12.3 Proverbs in Prose Fiction
An exemplary scholar of the use of proverbs in prose ction is Frank de
Caro, who has subtly examined E. M. Forster’s 1924 novel Passage to
India, Graham Green’s 1940 novel The Power and the Glory, and each
of four short stories: Katherine Mans eld’s Bliss (1918), Ruth Suckow’s
A Start in Life (1924), J. F. Powers’s The Valiant Woman (1947), and
Flannery O’Connor’s A Good Man Is Hard to Find (1953) (de Caro &
Jordan, 2004: 100-116). The best known of those short stories is A Good
Man Is Hard to Find, a work routinely assigned to introductory
literature classes (in America, at least). The story tells of an automobile
journey in the American South, with a middle-class father, a mother,
three young children, and a shabbily genteel and addled grandmother.
Straying from the main route, they encounter a homicidal maniac
known only as The Mis t, recently escaped from prison, whereupon
the family is systematically murdered. The proverb that furnishes the
title of the story had been uttered previously, during a vapid
conversation between the grandmother and the proprietor of a
roadside restaurant, and in her dying moments the grandmother
pleadingly exclaims to The Mis t, who now, in her uncertain eyes,
resembles her son, “I just know you’re a good man.” De Caro explains,
Although the reader nds it impossible to nd a good man in this plainly evil
man, the grandmother nds it pathetically easy to do so, and an absurd contrast
is created between the reader’s perspective and that of the main character, the
grandmother. [¶] The proverb/title comes to have a sort of dual usage. On the one
hand, it can be taken at face value. The reader can agree with the minor character
who earlier in the story utters the proverb as a judgment: indeed a good man is
hard to nd, if the people in the story are to be taken as representative of
humanity. On the other hand, O’Connor plays with the proverb, contradicting it,
showing how easy it can be to nd a good man if one refuses to face up to the
reality of evil… Just as the straightforward use of the proverb is countered by the
ironic twisting, so are the horrifying events contradicted by the hilarity which
pervades the narrative. (de Caro & Jordan, 2004: 115)

Responding to de Caro, another commentator has suggested a further

ironic twist to the use of the proverb in the story:
By discerning The Mis t’s “goodness,” the grandmother, foolish and desperate as
she may appear in worldly terms, rejects the Manichaen notion of “the reality of
 evil.” Exceeding mere forgiveness, she declines to pass judgment on a child of
God, who creates only good. Although readers of the story may nd it (to use de
Caro’s phrasing) impossible to do, the grandmother triumphantly accomplishes
that rare Christian act of loving the unlovable, accepting The Mis t as a “good
man.” (Doyle, 2012: 164)

So we see how complex can be the use of one seemingly simple

proverb in a short story that, at rst glance, could be mistaken for a
mere comical slice of Southern gothic life.
Longer literary works like novels, of course, are less likely to
revolve about a single key proverb. On the larger scale, much can o en
be learned about the development of themes and characters and
attitudes by close attentiveness to the way the narrative voice and the
individual characters use or adapt or misuse proverbs. As noted
previously, so many of the early surveys of proverbs in novels had
concentrated on minor works by minor authors, with little or no
analysis. Some major novelists and their works by minor authors, with
little or no analysis. Some major novelists and their works have
received attention – for instance, Charles Dickens (see Mieder, 1998a:
179-199, and works cited there; also Bryan and Mieder, 1997). Most
notably, the character Sam Weller’s famous use of his eponymous
wellerisms (a phenomenon that certainly existed centuries earlier than
Dickens’s time) helps reveal his eccentric personality, his character.
Also noteworthy are Kevin McKenna’s several studies of proverb use by
Russian novelists: Leo Tolstoy, Vladimir Nabokov, Boris Pasternak,
and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (McKenna, 2013: 19-81 and 101-122).
Wolfgang Mieder has examined the uses of proverbs in Friedrich
Nietzsche’s philosophical novel Thus Spoke Zarathustra (2013: 171-226).
The function of Nigerian proverbs in the novels of Chinua Achebe has
received considerable scholarly attention (for example, by Adeeko,
1998).
However, a survey of Mieder and Bryan’s Proverbs in World
Literature: A Bibliography (1996) and some later bibliographies suggest
that several central canonical writers of ction have been hardly
glanced at for their use of proverbs, among them: Jane Austen, Emily
Brontë, George Meredith, Robert Lewis Stevenson, Rudyard Kipling,
Virginia Woolf, H. G. Wells, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Henry James, Edith
Wharton, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Jack London, Kate Chopin, John
Steinbeck, Sinclair Lewis, Willa Cather, Thomas Wolfe, Henry Miller,
Richard Wright, Ralph Ellison, Norman Mailer, J. D. Salinger, Ivan
Turgenev, Jorge Luis Borges, Stendahl (Marie-Henry Beyle), Alexander
Dumas, Émile Zola, Guy de Maupassant, Jules Verne, Andre Gide,
Anatole France, Albert Camus, Herman Hesse. Many others have been
mentioned only brie y or tangentially.
As for extended ctional narratives that are not exactly novels,
both François Rabelais’s Gargantua and Pantagruel (1532 et seq.) and
Miguel de Cervantes’s Don Quixote (1605-1615) have been scrutinized
by several proverb scholars (see the bibliography by Mieder and Bryan,
1996: 222 and 63-67). In contrast, Jonathan Swi ’s Gulliver’s Travels
(1726) and Voltaire’s Candide (1759) have received little attention or
none.
Nothing has been noticed about the famous American writer O.
Henry (pen name of William Sydney Porter), who proverbially entitled
one of his stories The Proof of the Pudding (1910; the full proverb is The
proof of the pudding is in the eating). That choice of a title suggests a
handy subject for research or student writing: narratives (and other
literary works) with proverbs or allusions to proverbs as their titles,
like O’Connor’s A Good Man Is Hard to Find or her story The Life You
Save May Be Your Own. Allusions are more common than full proverbs,
since most titles do not take the form of complete sentences.

12.4 Proverbs in Plays

Detailed and subtle examinations of how proverbs are used in literary
works will continue to be in demand, regardless of the genre. Drama is
an especially fertile eld for investigation, since (generally speaking) a
play consists solely of the speech of characters, who – whether in
conversations, orations, or soliloquies – can exhibit their eloquence,
their wisdom, their folly, their foibles, and their quirks by their
utterance or adaptation or misuse or misunderstanding of proverbs.
Elizabethan plays have provided the basis for much of our
knowledge of what English proverbs existed in early times. B. J.
Whiting published Proverbs in the Earlier English Drama in 1938. In
1950 M. P. Tilley’s crucially important Dictionary of the Proverbs in
England in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries included a special
Shakespeare Index (803-808). During the 1950s and early 1960s Archer
Taylor presented a series of articles extracting the proverbs used by the
Elizabethan playwrights John Marston, Francis Beaumont and John
Fletcher, and Thomas Middleton (Taylor, 1960a: 193-216; 1957a: 25-36;
1957b: 39-59; 1960b: 77-100; 1959: 79-89). Partly on the basis of those
earlier collections, R. W. Dent has compiled separate dictionaries:
Shakespeare’s Proverbial Language: An Index (1981) and Proverbial
Language In English Drama Exclusive of Shakespeare, 1495-1616: An
Index (1984).
As for studies that closely analyze the ways in which playwrights
have used proverbs, it is not surprising that William Shakespeare
occupies the rst position. One conspicuous user of proverbs among
Shakespeare’s characters is Polonius in Hamlet. His lengthy advice to
his impatiently embarking son is full of proverbs and other
commonplaces; taken out of context, the speech can sound
patriarchally sage, but in its context it becomes tedious, trite, and
downright foolish–like the speaker himself. The voluble, convivial,
and cowardly Sir John Falsta , in Henry IV, Part 1, is also characterized
partly by his blustering proverbial pronouncements. In King Lear the
tragedy hurtles forward (or downward) from the king’s petulant threat
to his daughter, in the opening scene, that Nothing will come of
nothing, with Lear’s fool then spouting proverbs at a manic pace. In
Romeo and Juliet the young lovers know more about how to speak
beautiful language than about the realities and con icts of the real
world–but more of the proverbs in their play are uttered by Juliet’s
scatter-brained Nurse and Romeo’s madcap friend Mercutio, including
the mysterious wellerisms Shake, quoth the dove-house (by the Nurse)
and Dun’s the mouse, the constable’s own word (by Mercutio).
Otherwise, besides the mere notation of the occurrence of proverbs,
the plays of Elizabethan dramatists have gone largely unexamined:
Thomas Kyd, Christopher Marlowe, Thomas Dekker, George Chapman,
Ben Jonson, John Webster, Cyril Tourneur, Francis Beaumont, John
Fletcher, Thomas Middleton, John Marston, Philip Massinger, John
Ford, James Shirley. The same is true of English playwrights from the
Restoration period: among the prominent ones, John Dryden, William
Congreve, William Wycherley, George Etheridge, Aphra Behn.
At the end of the eighteenth century in France arose the popular
proverb play or (in French) proverbe dramatique or simply proverbe, in
which the play’s title will state a proverb, and then the dialogue and
action will proceed to illustrate or assess the wisdom of the proverb.
The most prominent authors of proverbes were Louis Carmontelle,
Michel-Théodore Leclercq, and Alfred de Musset (Shaw, 1959: 56-76;
Gipson, 2007: 153-166). The French sub-genre was anticipated by minor
English plays of the Tudor era, which likewise use proverbs as titles,
such asUlpian Fulwell’s Like Will to Like, Quoth the Devil to the Collier
(1568), and William Wager’s Enough Is as Good as a Feast (c1571). In
Wager’s play, the prolog announces the strategy:
Our title is Inough is as good as a feast,
Which Rhethorically we shall amplyfye
So that it shall appeer bothe to moste and least
That our meaning is but honestie,
Yet now and then we wil dally merily.
So shall we please them that of mirth be desirous:
For we play not to please them that be curious. (Wager, c1570: sig. A3r)

Even Shakespeare’s so-called problem plays All’s Well That Ends Well
and Measure for Measure, address, in complex ways, the proverbs
pointed to in their titles. George Bryan has listed numerous other plays
with proverb titles from the sixteenth century and later (Bryan, 2002:
65-74). Proverb plays probably owed much to the standard academic
exercises during the Renaissance and eighteenth century, in which
students were required to compose discourses based on assigned
proverbs (Neuss, 1984: 1-18).
Much more remains to be said about proverbs in the works of the
ancient Greek and Roman dramatists. The plays of Lope de Vega, Jean-
Baptiste Moliere, Friedrich Schiller, George Bernard Shaw, Henrik
Ibsen, Eugene O’Neill, and Bertolt Brecht have received a fair amount
of scholarly attention for their use of proverbs – those of other
playwrights just a little or none at all: Pierre Corneille, Richard
Brinsley Sheridan, Anton Chekhov, August Strindberg, John Millington
Synge, Luigi Pirandello, Samuel Beckett, Noël Coward, Thornton
Wilder, Tennessee Williams, Arthur Miller, Eugène Ionesco, William
Inge, Harold Pinter, Jean Anouilh, Lillian Hellman, Edward Albee,
John Osborne, Jean Genet, Tom Stoppard, Derek Walcott, Václav Havel,
Neil Simon.

12.5 Proverbs in Other Kinds of Literature

Pondering the use of proverbs in kinds of literature other than poetry,
prose ction, and drama raises the question of what, exactly, the term
literature refers to. Should the category include personal essays?
Historical and philosophical writing? Sermons and religious tractates?
The verses of popular songs, operas, and stage musicals? The scripts of
motion pictures (which are, a er all, the most popular form a dramatic
art in our time)? Radio and television programs? Speeches of
statesmen and other public gures? Political and social commentary
like newspaper editorials or thought pieces in magazines? News
reporting? Letters? Folklore itself – especially items that may have
been bent in the direction of accommodating literary tastes, like the
Grimm brothers’ Märchen or Bishop Thomas Percy’s English and
Scottish ballads?
Few will object to Mieder and Bryan’s prominent inclusion, in
Proverbs in World Literature: A Bibliography (1996), of such writers as
Plato, Cicero, Erasmus, Michel de Montaigne, Francis Bacon,
Immanuel Kant, Benjamin Franklin, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry
David Thoreau, or even Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Winston Churchill,
and Adolph Hitler. Some of those writers, however, are literary in very
di erent senses from the canonical poets, novelists, and playwrights –
and from one another. Surely there is also much more to be said about
proverbs in the non- ction prose works of the following major writers,
among others – works that have been largely neglected by proverb
scholars: Baldassare Castiglione, Niccolo Machiavelli, William
Tyndale, Jean Calvin, John Harington, Richard Hooker, Robert Burton,
Thomas Browne, Isaac Walton, John Locke, Bento Spinoza, Gottfried
Leibniz, Joseph Addison, Samuel Johnson, Thomas Je erson, Adam
Smith, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Jeremy Bentham, Matthew Arnold,
Charles Lamb, Thomas DeQuincey, Thomas Carlyle, John Ruskin, John
Stuart Mill, Henry Adams, William James, Arthur Shopenhauer, Søren
Kierkegaard, Sigmund Freud, Karl Jung, G. K. Chesterton, H. L.
Mencken, Max Beerbohm, Jacques Barzun, Bertrand Russell, James
Baldwin. Again, some of those writers’ works are more literary, in a
conventional sense, than others. For example, the essay is a well-
recognized literary genre. It is o en deemed to have been invented
(and the term coined, in this special usage) by Montaigne in his
famous Essais of 1580 (on the general subject of proverbs in
Montaigne’s essays, see Schmarje, 1973). An essay (in the literary
sense) is a comparatively brief, o en informal prose monolog on
almost any subject, serious or lighthearted.
Near its beginning, Montaigne’s essay Du Pédantisme [Of Pedantry]
features the sober proverb, current in several languages, The greatest
scholars are not the wisest men. In the essay, however, the pedants are
ridiculed as false scholars, ignorant schoolmasters – even false
pedants. Montaigne (whose rst language, incidentally, was Latin)
quotes the proverb not in French but in Latin, as a proper scholar, or a
proper pedant, might. However, the proverb as quoted appears in
ridiculously incorrect Latin: “Magis magnos clericos non sunt magis
magnos sapientes” (Montaigne, 1974: 1:141-142). That is exactly how the
proverb was uttered by Rabelais’s ignorant pedant Frère Jean in
Gargantua! So, the proverb is not simply there in Montaigne’s essay, to
amplify the prose or lend a bit of authority to the discourse. Rather, in
its context, the proverb calls for an active interpretation by the reader,
involving several complex layers of irony. As Roger Abrahams and
Barbara Babcock have said regarding another literary work, “the
proverb has ironically become part of a complex literary internal cross-
reference system which assumes a comprehensive experience of
Western literature” (Abrahams & Babcock, 1977: 426).
Francis Bacon, Charles Lamb, William Hazlitt, Ralph Waldo
Emerson, G. K. Chesterton, George Orwell, Max Beerbohm, and James
Baldwin are other foremost practitioners of the essay as a literary form.
It could be argued that some entries among the thousands in
Erasmus’s early-sixteenth-century Adagia were, in e ect, essays: for
instance, his famous anti-war manifesto occasioned by the proverb
Dulce bellum inexpertis [War is sweet to those who have not
experienced it], and the wryly querulous discussion of his own
tribulations as a proverb scholar by way of commenting on the adage
Herculei labors [the labors of Hercules]. The leisurely discursiveness
and relaxed style that tend to characterize the genre have made essays
especially hospitable to the use of proverbs.
For purposes of persuasion, writers of political speeches and other
polemics have found proverbs useful for connecting the argument in
progress with the traditional wisdom that proverbs so o en express,
wisdom implicitly shared between the writer (or speaker) and the
readers (or audience). Sages, humorists, and politicians have used
proverbs in hopes of sounding wise or folksy–among them such
gures as Benjamin Franklin in his Poor Richard persona, Josh Billings
(pen name of Henry Wheeling Shaw), Anne Landers (pen name of
Eppie Lederer) and her twin sister and rival advice-columnist Dear
Abby (pen name of Pauline Phillips), and the U.S. president Ronald
Reagan. Other writers employ proverbs in a fashion that might be
called merely decorative.

12.6 Conclusion
The range of uses of proverbs in literature is manifold. Of course, in
oral discourse – even in casual conversations – proverbs can also have
a considerable range of uses, as, moment by moment, we endeavor to
characterize ourselves, to create and project advantageous personas. It
is a tradition that goes back to the Renaissance and beyond: the
fashioning (or refashioning) of an identity, a self (Greenblatt, 1980).
Like other aspects of language, proverbs are continually being used in
that quasi-literary manner. We resemble the famous character in
Moliere’s play, who was delighted to discover that he could speak
uent Prose. We may not think of ourselves as sounding especially
literary; however, like the great writers of our heritage, we can all
speak Proverbs, and proverbs are the poetry of the people.

References
Abrahams, R. D., & Babcock, B. A. (1977). The literary use of proverbs. Journal of
American Folklore 90, 414-429.
Adeeko, A. (1998). Proverbs, textuality, and nativism in African literature. Gainesville,
Florida: University Press of Florida.
Bryan, G. B. & Mieder, W. (1994). The proverbial Bernard Shaw: An index to proverbs
in the works of George Bernard Shaw. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press.
Bryan, G. B. & Mieder, W. (1995). The proverbial Eugene O’Neill: An index to proverbs
in the works of Eugene Gladstone O’Neill. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood
Press.
Bryan, G. B. & Mieder, W. (1997). The proverbial Charles Dickens: An index to the
proverbs in the works of Charles Dickens. New York: Peter Lang.
Bryan, G. B. & Mieder, W. (2003). The proverbial Carl Sandburg (1878-1967): An index
of folk speech in his American poetry. Proverbium 20, 14-49.
Burke, K. (1967). The philosophy of literary form. 2nd ed. Baron Rouge: Louisiana
State University Press.
de Caro, F. A. & Jordan, R. A. (2004). Re-situating folklore. Knoxville: University of
Tennessee Press.
Dent, R. W. (1981). Shakespeare’s proverbial language: An index. Berkeley,
California: University of California Press.
Dent, R. W. (1984). Proverbial language in English drama exclusive of Shakespeare,
1495-1616: An index. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.
Doyle, C. C. (2007). Proverbs in the works of Edmund Spenser. In H. Burger, D.
Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn & N. R. Norrick (Eds.). Phraseologie: Ein international
Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung (1:330-338). 2 vols. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Doyle, C. C. (2012). Doing proverbs and other kinds of folklore: Philological and
historical studies. Burlington, Vermont: Proverbium.
Drayton, M. (1953). Poems. Edited by John Buxton. 2 vols. London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul.
Furnivall, F. J. (Ed.). (1869). A booke of precedence, etc. EETS extra series 8. London:
N. Trübner.
Gipson, J. (2007). Once a proverb, always a proverb? The function of proverbs in
Carmontelle’s Proverbes Dramatiques. Proverbium 24, 153-166.
Greeenblatt, S. (1980). Renaissance self-fashioning: From More to Shakespeare.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Guiterman, A. (1911). A proverbial tragedy. Life 57/3493, 1110.
Heywood, J. (1906). The proverbs, epigrams, and miscellanies of John Heywood.
Edited by John S. Farmer. London: Early English Drama Society.
La Fontiane, J. de. (1962). Fables choisies. Edited by Georges Couton. Paris: Garnier
Frères.
McKenna, K. J. (2013). Russkie poslovitsy: Russian proverbs in literature, politics, and
pedagogy. New York: Peter Lang.
Martial, M. V. (1968). Epigrams. Edited by W. C. A. Ker. 2 vols. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Mieder, W. (1971). Behold the proverbs of a people: A florilegium of proverbs in Carl
Sandburg’s poem “Good morning, America.” Southern folklore quarterly, 35 160-
 168.
Mieder, W. (1973). Proverbs in Carl Sandburg’s “The People, Yes.” Southern folklore
quarterly 37, 15-36.
Mieder, W. (1974). The essence of literary proverb studies. Proverbium 23, old series,
888-894.
Mieder, W. (1993). Proverbs are never out of season: Popular wisdom in the modern
age. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mieder, W. (1998a). “Conventional phrases are a sort of reworks”: Charles
Dickens’s proverbial language. Proverbium 15, 179-199.
Mieder, W. (1998b). “Der Mensch denkt, Gott lenkt–keine Red davon!”:
Sprichwörtliche verfremdungen im Werk Bertolt Brechts. Bern: Peter Lang.
Mieder, W. (1999). “Man is a wolf to man”: On proverbial dialectics in Bertolt Brecht.
Proverbium 16, 247-277.
Mieder, W. (2004). Proverbs: A handbook. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press.
Mieder, W. (2005). Proverbs are the best policy: Folk wisdom in American politics.
Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press.
Mieder, W. (2010). “Proverbs and poetry are like two peas in a pod”: The proverbial
language of modern mini-poems. In R. J. B. Soares & O. Lauhakangas (Eds.),
Proceedings of the third interdisciplinary colloquium on proverbs, 8th to 15th
November 2009, at Tavira, Portugal (pp. 263-289). Tavira: Tipogra a Tavirense.
Mieder, W. (2013). “My tongue – is of the people”: The proverbial language of
Friedrich Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Proverbium 30, 171-226.
Mieder, W. & Bryan, G. B. (1996). Proverbs in world literature: A bibliography. New
York: Peter Lang.
Montaigne, M. de. (1974). Essais. Edited by M. Rat. 2 vols. Paris: Garnier Frères.
Neuss, P. (1984). The sixteenth-century English “proverb” play. Comparative Drama
18, 1-18.
Paton, W. R. (editor and translator) (1917-39). The Greek Anthology. 5 vols. Loeb
Classical Library. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Sackett, S. J. (1964). Poetry and folklore: Some points of a nity. Journal of American
Folklore 77, 143-53.
Sandburg, C. (1970). Complete poems. Revised edition. New York: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich.
Schmarje, S. (1973). Das sprichwörtliche Material in den Essais von Montaigne. 2
vols. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Shaw, M. (1959). Les proverbes dramatiques de Carmontelle, LeClercq et Alfred de
Musset. Revue des sciences humaines 93, 56-76.
Silverstein, S. (1974). Where the sidewalk ends. New York: Harper & Row.
Sobieski, J. & Mieder, W., editors. (2005). “So many heads, so many wits”: An
anthology of English proverb poetry. Burlington, Vermont: Proverbium.
Spenser, E. (1912). Poetical works. Edited by J. C. Smith & E. de Selincourt. London:
Oxford University Press.
Taylor, A. (1957a). Proverbial comparisons in the plays of Beaumont and Fletcher.
Journal of American Folklore 70, 25-36.
Taylor, A. (1957b). Proverbial phrases in the plays of Beaumont and Fletcher. Bulletin
of the Tennessee Folklore Society 23, 39-59.
Taylor, A. (1959). Proverbs and proverbial phrases in the plays of Thomas Middleton.
Southern Folklore Quarterly 23, 79-89.
Taylor, A. (1960a). Proverbs and proverbial phrases in the plays of John Marston.
Southern Folklore Quarterly 24, 193-216.
Taylor, A. (1960b). Proverbs in the plays of Beaumont and Fletcher. Southern Folklore
Quarterly 24, 77-100.
Taylor, A. & Whiting, B. J. (1958). A dictionary of American proverbs and proverbial
phrases, 1820-1880. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Tilley, M. P. (1950). A dictionary of the proverbs in England during the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
Villon, F. (1951). Œuvres. Edited by André Mary. Paris, Garnier Frères.
Wager, W. (c1570). A comedy or enterlude intituled, Inough is as good as a feast.
London: John Allde.
Whiting, B. J. (1938). Proverbs in the earlier English drama, with illustrations from
contemporary French sources. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University
Press.
Whiting, B. J. (1939). The study of proverbs. Modern Language Forum 24, 57-83.

159 Erasmus’s compilation rst appeared in 1500 as a modest Adagiorum collectanea,

then in everexpanding editions, now titled Adagiorum chilliades [thousands of
proverbs’), from 1508 through Erasmus’s death in 1536, with the nal and largest
published in his posthumous Opera Omnia of 1540. Erasmus glossed his thousands
of classical Greek adages with Latin commentaries of varying lengths (from a few
lines to several pages), introducing scholars and school boys to a wealth of ‘reborn’
proverbs, many of which then emerged in neo-Latin and vernacular forms. Erasmus
not only enriched the fund of European proverbs; in large measure he established
the scholarly study of proverbs.
160 The proverbs and proverbial sayings that are here quoted or alluded to (in
sequence): A rolling stone gathers no moss; Even a worm will turn; A cat may look at
a king; All roads lead to Rome; Youth will have its ing; Don’t kill the goose that lays
the golden eggs; Every dog has its day; There’s no use locking the stable door a er
the horse is stolen; Look before you leap; Still waters run deep; Tremble (Shake) like
a leaf; The early bird gets the worm; Care killed the cat.
Anna Konstantinova
13 Proverbs in Mass Media

13.1 Introduction
The present chapter explores various aspects of application of
proverbs in the English language media texts which is predetermined
by the speci cs of the mass media discourse. In modern mass media
the proverb proves to be a tool of choice for conveying di erent
attitudes and views. The primary resource data include English and
American newspapers and magazines, an American TV series, and
popular English language songs.

13.2 Proverbs in the Media Discourse: General

Remarks
The importance of the mass media in the modern societies is
indisputable. For many people they serve as the rsthand source of
information and, thus, understanding of the world. Their in uence is
so overwhelming, it is next to impossible to stay una ected.
The mass media aimed at reaching a wide audience by mass
communication encompass a range of broadcast (TV, radio, cinema,
recorded music), print (newspapers and magazines), digital (Internet),
and outdoor (billboards, placards etc.) vehicles. Thus, media discourse
is a multidisciplinary eld dealing with a number of overlapping
discourses. The mass media include both technical means of
transmitting information and people involved in the process
(Константинова, 2008: 23). As scholars point out, the key features of
the verbal language of human interaction converge and alter in their
particular way in the language of mass communication (Володина,
2004: 11).
 The task of any author conveying some piece of information
through a mass medium is to a ect a vast audience. In this respect all
the media, print press in the rst place, rely heavily on the language
used for the stated purpose. Beyond doubt, information delivered to
their recipients must not only be of interest and some use to them but
also be presented in some special manner as to make it appealing and
noticed. The success of a print piece, be it a newspaper editorial or a
magazine interview, is in many ways predetermined by the e ective
choice of linguistic means. It is a bit di erent case with broadcast
media, for they mainly employ visual and/or audio channels of
communication. This, however, does not diminish the importance of
the language content. The authors of media texts use language freely,
creatively, even boldly sometimes. It comes as no surprise that in
modern media discourse proverbs are one of the preferred tools for
conveying a myriad of attitudes, opinions, beliefs, and such.
Apart from in uencing the audience, media authors are challenged
to transmit substantial pieces of information as succinctly as possible.
As tokens of culture and miniature theories (Honeck, 1997: 103)
paremias are capable of successfully handling the task. Proverbs serve
as contextual cues in discourse, and, therefore, can a ect the meaning
of the message and its perception. Studies show that application of
proverbs is a signi cant feature of modern mass media discourse
(Константинова, 2008). No wonder this eld has presented some
scholarly interest to paremiologists around the world. It is not our task
to review these many researches: Prof. Wolfgang Mieder’s most
comprehensive bibliography will give an idea of what has been done in
the realm of application of proverbs in the media discourse in di erent
European languages (Mieder, 2009).
Let it be once again stressed that modern media texts are
permeated with proverbs. Both old proverbs and modern ones, i.e.
those with no reference earlier than 1990 (Mieder, 2012: 138), make
their frequent appearance in media discourse. Mieder, an outstanding
proverb scholar based in Vermont, USA, stated it as a must for
paremiologists to “look at which traditional proverbs survive today
and which have actually been coined in the twentieth and twenty- rst
centuries”. Media texts can serve as a plentiful and fruitful material for
this kind of research (Mieder, 2004: 150). Here are a couple of
examples of modern proverbs employed in media texts:
Meredith: You’re operating?
Richard: I am. A Whipple.
Meredith: That’s big.
Richard: I say, go big... or go home. (“I Like You So Much Better When You’re
Naked” 6-12/ “Grey’s Anatomy”)
Oprah Winfrey: During the campaign, how did you handle all the jokes about
your husband being “not very smart”? Did it hurt?
Laura Bush: It made me mad, actually–though I didn’t hear that many of the
jokes because we were campaigning every day. <…>
Oprah: But did the jokes hurt?
Laura: Yes. Coming to terms with the jokes doesn’t mean that your feelings aren’t
hurt or that you aren’t mi ed, but you learn to take it with a grain of salt.
Oprah: I don’t know if you take it with a grain of salt, or with a whole box of salt!
Laura: It does make you feel like things are unfair. But you just know that
happens. As they say, if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. (interview
with Laura Bush/ O, The Oprah magazine)

Such media discourses as television, popular music, cinematography,

and advertising, which is part and parcel of modern mass media, are
distinguished as having originated and started the circulation of many
modern paremias, as: Diamonds are a girl’s best friends (the Broadway
musical Gentlemen Prefer Blondes)161, We’re not in Kansas anymore
(the movie The Wizard of Oz)162, Knowing is half the battle (G. I. Joe
cartoon TV series)163, Diamonds are forever (the DeBeers advertising
catchphrase)164. As for the lm discourse, certain proverbs (in some
cases modi ed) have even become a kind of hallmark for some motion
pictures. Here are just to name a few: A boy’s best friend is his mother (<
A dog is a man’s best friend) (Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins)/
Psycho)165, Carpe diem. Seize the day (John Keating (Robin Williams)/
Dead Poets Society166, Life will nd a way (< Love will nd a way) (Dr.
Ian Malcolm (Je Goldblum)/ The Lost world: Jurassic Park)167, A er
all, tomorrow is another day! (Scarlett O’Hara (Vivien Leigh)/ Gone
with the Wind)168.
13.3 Traditional Proverbs in Mass Media
Proverbs belong to the realm of linguistic and cultural knowledge
shared by a nation (or nations, in case of internationally disseminated
paremias). In this respect, the employment of proverbs in discourse
can be treated as quotation, calling upon for authority and traditional
views of the majority. Standard proverbs in their dictionary form do
appear in modern media texts, though not as frequently as their
transformed variations. Proverbs are autonomous utterances having
no bonds with the originating context (i.e. context of the very rst use)
and no known (or, rather, generally known) author. Proverbs are,
metaphorically speaking, in the custody of the people; therefore, by
employing one in discourse we can be said to be quoting folk speech.
So, one of the issues concerning the standard use of proverbs in the
mass media is the way these folklore utterances are placed in
discourse. Numerous scholars are engaged in the study of introductory
proverb formulas (see Yankah, 1986). In some languages these are set
phrases obligatorily used in discourse as a reference to folk culture
and tradition. Such introductory formulas frequently occur in the
Anglo-American mass media, as well. Their use, however, is not
predetermined by cultural tradition but rather pragmatic factors, i.e.
the goals and intentions of the author.
In some mass media texts, proverbs are employed as solid
statements of apparent truth with no commentary from the author.
Such application is consistent with O. Arewa and A. Dundes’s theory
according to which a person using a proverb is but “the instrument
through which the proverb speaks to the audience” (Arewa & Dundes,
1964: 70). Here is an example from the O. Winfrey’s interview with the
American R’n’B singer Mary J. Blige:
Oprah: Has your transformation compelled you toward a greater responsibility in
your artistry and lyrics? <…>
Mary: <…> A er the “No More Drama” album, people came up to me and said,
“You saved me. You talked me out of an abusive relationship”. <…> A lot of people
hate me for this. People say things like “Mary, I liked it better when you were
singing them sad songs. <…> You need to pick up a pack of cigarettes and come
back down with us”. It blows my mind – then again, not really. They just want
someone to waddle with them in their environment.
 Oprah: Misery loves company. People identify with the rawness and pain in your
music. <…> They have an expectation about you based upon themselves.
(interview with Mary J. Blige/ O, The Oprah magazine)

Such cases of bare proverbs are scarce in media texts, which is, in my
opinion, a testimony to the fact that application of proverbs in the
language of the mass media is a highly innovative and creative
process, a sort of exercise in quotation (Yankah, 1986). In general,
referring to someone else’s words in discourse presupposes a certain
attitude (agreement or disagreement) to what is being stated. In a
small number of cases media authors, however, introduce a proverb as
an epitome of some situation, presenting it as a conventional opinion,
and, thereby, remain impartial to what is being said:
Great minds, it is said, think alike . Which must make the Observer’s Andrew
Rawnsley and the Sunday Telegraph’s Matthew d’Ancona the wisest of the wise.
(The Sunday Columnists / The Guardian 19/01/2004)

In other cases, the traditional folk view expressed in a proverb is either

supported by the speakers and, thus, sounds as their own:
Oprah: I’ve read that you no longer want people to dress like you. What do you
mean by that?
Madonna: I mean just that. In the beginning of my career, I was consumed with
fashion and the way I looked.
Oprah: Aren’t you still?
Madonna: I think about clothes all the time – you see the boots and pants I’m
wearing. But who cares? You know as well as I do that clothes don’t make the
woman. <…> (interview with Madonna/ O, The Oprah magazine),

or is claimed to be shared with the audience:

We all know that death is a great leveler and that Princess Diana and Fred West
are dead, but that is the only connection between them as far as I am aware.
(More than a laughing matter / The Guardian 8/06/2000)

Proverbs are indeed handy vehicles to address the audience. By

applying these folklore dicta, media authors can feel safe as they rely
on common knowledge and share the same ground with the intended
recipients. Thus, the sense of belonging and intimacy can be easily
achieved. Consider the following examples:
 Sorry, but it’s true – no pain, no gain. If you want to get t and lose weight, you
need to sweat. (Just for kicks / The Guardian 4/10/2003);
In America, the Beg, Borrow or Steal website is a runaway hit, with women
signing up for as little as £12 a month to hire goodies by the likes of Prada, Fendi
and Burberry <…> Although more than 700 bags are available on the US site,
many are the more basic o erings from the heavyweight fashion houses. But
beggars can’t be choosers, girls, and if you can’t a ord to live out the Carrie
Bradshaw Fendi bag dream (i.e. owning the real thing), at least you could soon
have the option to rent. (Snippets / The Guardian 30/07/2004).

In the majority of cases media authors distinctly express their attitude

to proverb wisdom. By commenting on it, they either support it:
Home is where the heart is , to be sure. But home may also be where the money is
these days, as Americans put away their dancing shoes and come back home
again. At least, that is what publishers of the elite home-design magazines are
betting on. (Elite Magazines Compete for a Place at Home / The New York Times
5/11/1990);

or contest it:
Opening voice-over: In general, people can be categorized in one of two ways.
Those who love surprises and those who don’t. I don’t. I’ve never met a surgeon
that enjoys a surprise, because as surgeons, we like to be in the know. <…> My
point is this: whoever said “What you don’t know can’t hurt you”, was a complete
and total moron. Because for most people I know, not knowing is the worst feeling
in the world <…> (Into You Like a Train 2-6/ Grey’s Anatomy);
First things rst. Look before you leap. A stitch in time saves nine. Don’t put the cart
before the horse. Worthy mottoes, all of them, brimming with wisdom. But
sometimes such thinking can suck the life out of a project before you even get
started”. (“Parlor Doors, Outdoors”/ “The New York Times” 21/08/2005);
or contradict it:
They say death is a great leveler. They’re wrong. Inequality pursues us a er life
too. Consider Ground Zero. While international attention has shi ed to
Afghanistan, the vast project of bodypart retrieval in Lower Manhattan is
probably the most exorbitant expenditure on the dead in our lifetime, and yet
remains almost entirely exempt from criticism or debate. (The Hierarchy of Death
/ The Guardian 28/11/2001)

13.4 Modi cation of Proverbs in Mass Media

Along with standard proverbs encapsulating pieces of folk wisdom,
media authors increasingly resort to creative use of these cultural and
linguistic gems, which produces sometimes remarkable modi cations
o ering fresh views and di erent interpretations.
The need for alterations and the quest for something new are
perhaps in the human nature. The phenomenon of proverb
modi cation has been observed and attended to by scholars for quite a
while now. Recent decades have proved it to gain momentum both in
English and Russian mass media. Likewise, the process is widely
studied in many other major European languages.
As for Anglo-American media discourse, it can be stated that
creative use of proverbs yielding all sorts of nonce modi cations is far
more predominant than their standard use. Traditional proverbs do
occur in the media, but the scale of the modi cation phenomenon is so
extensive that it can be considered a universal method of a ecting the
audience. Constant changes in life lead to changes in opinions,
ideologies, and morals. This inevitably and naturally re ects in the
paremiological lore of the language.
The dynamic development which the mass media has gone through
at the turn of the twenty- rst century has dramatically triggered the
aforementioned phenomenon of proverb modi cation. The modern
media can virtually reach vast audiences in all corners of the world, in
no time, with messages intended to communicate new cognitive
content and, thus, encapsulating new, i.e. non-standard, approaches
and views. On the whole, such creative transformations broaden the
linguistic boundaries of a given culture, demonstrate novel ways of
thinking, and, more importantly, introduce new directions for action.
Proverbs can be adapted to any socio-cultural context, and, therefore,
frequently modi ed, immediately come in view of broad audiences
with the help of any of the existent mass media.
According to my study the process of proverb modi cation is
predetermined by cognitive and pragmatic factors. These
transformations occur due to the necessity to name the yet unnamed,
to convey new (or in some cases renewed) cognitive content. The
creative use of proverbs enables authors to ful ll the following
pragmatic tasks, all of which are indispensible to the principal goal of
a ecting the mass audience:
1) attention grabbing;
2) expressing evaluations/attitudes;
3) creating stylistic e ect, i.e. enhancing expressiveness and
emotionality (Константинова, 2008: 87).
Of all the wealth of proverb transformations in the mass media, it is
possible to distinguish four groups on the principle of stylistic and
aesthetic e ects achieved thereby:
1. Hapaxes, or nonce proverbs (Greek hápax eirēménon – (something)
said (only) once). This group is composed of modi ed proverbs that are
(1) context bound, i.e. to interpret them you need originating context,
and/or (2) o en lack imagery and, therefore, have little aesthetic value
and impact potential. Consider the following examples:
Macho man decides: don’t get even – get mad (headline)
Tony Blair is evidently upset by the leaking of a memo in which he appeared to
demand help at question time.
So yesterday we met the new prime minister, Mr. Mucho Macho Man. When asked
the formula question – what his engagements were for the day – he snarled like a
home football fan trapped in the visitors’ enclosure. “This morning I had
meetings with ministerial colleagues and others,” he barked. “You got a problem
with that?” (Naturally he didn’t say the last bit. But he sounded as if he should.
William Hague can count himself lucky that his ear lobes are still intact). (< Don’t
get mad, get even) (The Guardian 18/05/2000)
Home ain’t where his heart is anymore
He may hang his hat behind our bedroom door
But he don’t lay his head down to love me like before
Home ain’t where his heart is anymore. (< Home is where the heart is) (“Home Ain’t
Where His Heart Is”/ Shania Twain)169.
Izzie: Um, I feel like we should say stu . Denny, do you want to say stu ?
Denny: Kiss me. Right here. (they kiss)
Izzie, that kiss was worth a 1,000 words. Izzie: A picture. A picture is worth a 1,000
word. (17 seconds 2-25/ Grey’s Anatomy).

2. Authorial expressions created on the basis of standard proverbs

existing in the language. Such modi cations can be seen as the signs of
authors’ ingenuity and great literary potential. A deeper look at these
expressions reveals the way both linguistic and extra-linguistic factors
work together in the process of applying proverbs. The worldview of
the author, i.e. his/her ideas, opinions, judgments receive such
linguistic embodiment which being built from the elements of
preformed linguistic material (standard proverbs) appears so creative,
original and novel! Here are several examples:
It’s like being tired but you just can’t sleep
Your bed is obsolete
It’s like nding out the best things in life are free
A er you already paid. (< The best things in life are free) (Don’t look back /
Mxpx)170;
Patient: Oh, I’m not his wife. What’s that saying — uh, they won’t buy the cow if
you give ‘em the milk for free? Yeah, we’re working on eight years of free milk” (<
Why buy a cow when you can get milk for free) (Tainted Obligation 6-4/ Grey’s
Anatomy);
(3) We must call the political tune...
...even if that means paying the piper (headline) (< He who pays the piper calls the
tune) (The Observer 3/02/2002).

The third and the fourth group of modi cations are made up of anti-
proverbs and pseudo-proverbs, which are amazing instances of
creativity and succinctly formulated modern wisdom. They frequently
occur in the English language media and, thus, constitute a salient
feature of the mass media discourse.
3. Anti-proverbs – that are in fact new proverbs per se created on the
basis of traditional ones – are profusely and successfully studied all
around the world, major European languages being considered. Anti-
proverbs use the elements of traditional paremias but express some
di erent idea. Their meaning is clear irrespective of the originating
context. Should you visit Forbes magazine website, for instance, and
you will learn a succinctly put strategy of e cient career making,
which also happens to be an anti-proverb teaching modern prudence:
Snooze, you lose; schmooze, you win (< If you snooze, you lose). In his
song Second mouse the American country singer Tim O’Brien resorts to
one more astute observation: “It’s the early bird that catches the worm,
but it’s the second mouse that gets the cheese” (< The early bird catches
the worm). Film directors and screen writers frequently share their life
philosophy through the characters they create. In W. Allen’s comedy
drama The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985) this is also done with the help of
a somewhat careless anti-proverb Life’s too short to spend time thinking
about life (< Life’s short). These are just few of the innumerable
examples found in modern Anglo-American media!
4. Pseudo-proverbs. The phenomenon of creating proverb-like
formations is quite spread in contemporary English language media.
Although these formations are not proverbs, they are built on the basis
of paremic structural-semantic models typically with traditional
stylistic markers, and express some general ideas o en similar to those
conveyed by real proverbs. Let us consider some examples:
You can kill the protestor, but you can’t kill the protest ◂ You can take the
boy out of the country, but you can’t take the country out of the boy
(song title/ Anti- ag); Every song has its play◂ Every dog has his day
(album title/ Gilbert O’Sullivan); Hand ts giving, so do it ◂ If the cap
ts, wear it (Sky Fits Heaven/ Madonna); Sleep with a snake, you get bit
◂ If you lie down with dogs, you’ll get up with eas (Grey’s Anatomy).
Another aspect of creative application of proverbs in the mass media
worthy of attention is their multiple use. The phenomenon goes back
to the Middle Ages and is tightly connected with iconographic art. In
his signi cant textbook on proverbs Prof. W. Mieder distinguishes a
group of poems written wholly in proverbial language, featuring, for
instance, Carl Sanberg’s famous Good Morning, America (Mieder, 2004:
225). An anthology of English proverb poetry came out in 2005, which
included lyric poems and song lyrics composed by such outstanding
authors as R. Frost, E. Dickinson, A. Bierce, B. Dylan, P. McCartney
(15th – 21st centuries) (Mieder & Sobieski, 2005). The same tendency of
bringing multiple proverbs together in one small stretch of text is
discussed in the articles by A. L. Mac e and F. Mac e on Turkish
poetry (13th – 20th centuries) (Mac e & Mac e, 1989; Mac e & Mac e,
2001). The phenomenon has not yet been thoroughly studied. It is
possible, however, to distinguish two types of multiple use of proverbs
in the mass media, proverb clusters and proverb collages.
Proverb clustering consists in insertion of two or more proverbs
(standard or modi ed) into a non-proverb context. Thus, a blend of
proverb and non-proverb texts emerges, as in the song Innocent by
Clan of Xymox171:
And it’s cold in here when you’re all in tears
Your vision is in black and white, you feel so afraid
You fail to show your better half, it’s such a shame
Tomorrow’s dream never comes, it remains in shades
Remains in shades
Sticks and stones break my bones and it hurts too much
Easy come and easy go, in love and war all seems fair
But it’s better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all
Now I am holding ground
Now I am safe and sound
But it’s the last straw that breaks my back and life’s too short
Handsome is as handsome does and there’s so much more
A change is good as rest they say and all that glitters is not gold
Now I am holding ground
Now I am safe and sound
No way I found love sane and sound
And it’s cold in here when you’re all in tears
Those endless nights of intrigues make it all too clear
In this dark world and wide I am innocent
I am innocent. (Сf. Tomorrow never comes; Sticks and stones may break my
bones, but words will never hurt me; Easy come, easy go; All is fair in love and
war; It’s better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all; It’s the last
straw that breaks the camel’s back; Handsome is as handsome does; A change is
as good as a rest; All that glitters is not gold).

Other remarkable examples of proverb clustering can be found in a

whole set of magazine feature interviews conducted by Oprah Winfrey.
The media mogul and experienced interviewer winds up her every
interview with some high-pro le respondent with one and the same
question What do you know for sure? It is noteworthy that in every
interview the respondents use proverbs in their reply, and occasionally
build proverb chains to formulate their thoughts, as does the famous
American actress Bette Midler:
That laughter feels really good. That there’s a lot of conscious, tangible evil afoot
in the world. That the planet will always go on. That you can nd peace in nature.
That music has great charm and is a great communicator. That dancing is good
for the soul. That beauty is very healing and great for the spirit. That you gotta eat
a little dirt before you die. That payback is a bitch. And that no matter who you
are, there is no free lunch. (< You have to eat a peck of dirt before you die; Payback
is a bitch; There is no such a thing as a free lunch).

Proverb clustering is a favorite tool in the American ABC medical

drama Grey’s Anatomy as well. Opening and closing voice-over
narrations frequently play with proverb clusters. Here is one such
example of grouping thematic proverbs that help to present the
dilemma the main characters are facing in the episode:
Opening voice-over: As doctors, we’re trained to be skeptical, because our
patients lie to us all the time. The rule is, every patient is a liar until proven
honest. Lying is bad. Or so we are told, constantly from birth – honesty is the best
policy, the truth shall set you free, I chopped down the cherry tree, whatever. The
fact is, lying is a necessity. We lie to ourselves because the truth, the truth freaking
hurts. (< Honesty is the best policy; The truth shall set you free; The truth hurts).
(Tell Me Sweet Little Lies 2-14/ Grey’s Anatomy)

Proverb collages are entire texts or their structural parts composed of

proverbs (standard or modi ed) and/or sometimes other easily
recognized elements, like familiar quotations, proper names,
phraseologisms. Stretches of narrator’s speech can be occasionally
inserted as well. In this type of multiple use of proverbs paremias serve
as ready-made material for constructing discourse. Proverb collages
are typically found in popular song discourse related to poetic
discourse known for this phenomenon since the Middle Ages. Consider
the song My Best Was Never Good Enough172 by the famous American
songwriter and performer Bruce Springsteen:
Every cloud has a silver lining, every dog has his day
She said, ‘Now don’t say nothin’
if you don’t have something nice to say’.
The tough, now they get going, when the going gets tough
But for you my best was never good enough
 ‘Now don’t try for a home run, baby
If you can get the job done with a hit’
Remember, ‘ A quitter never wins and a winner never quits’
‘The sun don’t shine on a sleepin’ dog’s ass’
And all the rest of that stu
But for you my best was never good enough
‘ If God gives you nothin’ but lemons, then you make some lemonade’
‘The early bird catches the fuckin’ worm,
Rome wasn’t built in a day’
‘ Now life’s like a box of chocolates,
You never know what you’re going to get’
‘Stupid is as stupid does and all the rest of that shit’
Come’on pretty baby, call my blu
‘Cause for you my best was never good enough.
(< Every cloud has a silver lining; Every dog has his day; The tough get going when
the going gets tough; A quitter never wins, a winner never quits; The sun doesn’t
shine on a sleeping dog’s ass; If life gives you lemons, make lemonade; The early
bird catches the worm; Rome wasn’t built in a day; Life is like a box of chocolates:
you never know what you’re going to get; Stupid is as stupid does).

Another brilliant proverb collage was created by a female reader of The

New York Times as her response to an earlier article, and constitutes
her letter-to-the editor with the allusive title The Futile Pursuit of
Happiness173:
What? Is Daniel Gilbert saying money can’t buy happiness; time heals all wounds;
it’s the little things that count; look before you leap; act in haste, regret at leisure
(Jon Gertner, Sept. 7)? Good lord, what will psychologists think of next? A stitch in
time saves nine? (The New York Times September 21, 2003).

13.5 The Role of Proverbs on the Structural Level of

Media Texts
Proverbs are syntactically complete sentences laden with semantic
value, so another important aspect of applying paremias in media
texts is their performance on the structural and semantic levels. Of
special signi cance is the role proverbs play in the structuring of texts,
be it a newspaper or a magazine article, a TV show episode or a
popular song. First, I shall look at their role on the structural level of
di erent media texts.
One of the strong positions of a text is its title. It is a well-
established tradition to use proverbs as titles of media texts. Paremias
appear in the titles of motion pictures (Silver Linings Playbook (2012) (<
Every cloud has a silver lining), Fools Rush In (1997) (< Fools rush in
where angels fear to tread), All’s Faire in Love (2011) (< All is fair in love
and war), Money Talks (1997) and TV series (There Is No ‘I’ in a Team /
Grey’s Anatomy, Necessity Is a Mother / Beverly Hills (< Necessity is the
mother of invention), Out of Mind, Out of Sight / Bu y the Vampire
Slayer (< Out of sight, out of mind), All Roads Lead to Fitz / Scandal (<
All roads lead to Rome)). Countless examples of proverb titles are
found in print press Who pays the piper? (< Who pays the piper, calls
the tune) (The Guardian August 37, 2001), A Cultural Reluctance to
Spare the Rod; Newcomers Say Americans Spoil Children (< Spare the
rod and spoil the child) (The New York Times February 29, 2006), Power
corrupts, and how! (< Power corrupts) (The Observer May 1, 2005) and
popular songs: You Only Live Twice (Nancy Sinatra) (< You only live
once), What Goes Around Comes Around (Justin Timberlake), Practice
Makes Perfect (Billie Holiday).
Proverbs prove to be e cient tools for ful lling the main tasks of
the title. Apart from the general function of identifying a work of art,
they brilliantly help arouse curiosity of the audience, convey meaning,
and provide a summary of the whole text (Gill, 2008: 22-23).
Of all the media discourses considered here popular music is
unsurpassed in the scope of the application of proverbs in titles. In
some song titles proverbs appear in their standard form, as, for
instance, in Elton John’s Like Father Like Son, B. B. King’s Tomorrow Is
Another Day, or Garbage’s Silence Is Golden. Applying a non-modi ed
paremia in the title of a song makes it inde nite and, thus, addressed
at virtually unlimited number of listeners. In such cases proverb titles
depend on other recurrent elements of the song, mainly refrains, to
serve as interpretative clues for the audience. More o en than not,
though, proverbs undergo changes in song titles, which is a natural
phenomenon predetermined by the contents peculiarities and
compositional characteristics of the song. The most frequently
employed modi cation devices are truncation (When in Rome (< When
in Rome, do as the Romans do)/ Billy Joel, None But the Brave (< None
but the brave deserve the fair)/ Bruce Springsteen, If Wishes Were
Horses (< If wishes were horses, beggars would ride)/ Bryan Adams) and
application of proverb imagery (Eye of the Beholder (< Beauty lies in the
eye of the beholder) / Metallica, Spilt Milk (< There is no use crying over
the spilt milk)/ Public Announcement, Thorn and a Wild Rose (< Every
rose has a thorn) / The Allman Brothers Band). More intricate cases
include di erent instances of allusions All My Roads (< All roads lead
to Rome) / Collin Raye, When the Piper Calls (< Who pays the piper,
calls the tune) / China Crisis, word play Jack of All Parades (< Jack of all
trades, master of none)/Elvis Costello, Bitter They Are, Harder They Fall
(< The bigger they come, the harder they fall) / Elvis Presley, and anti-
proverbs You Are What You Love (< You are what you eat) / Jenny Lewis,
Men Will Be Boys (< Boys will be boys) / Guy Clark, Someday Never
Comes (< Tomorrow never comes) / Brandie Carlile.
For the illustration of the role proverbs play in the structuring of
the TV series discourse I shall consider the afore mentioned ABC
medical drama Grey’s Anatomy, the rst seasons of which are
especially marked by profuse application of proverbs that appear on
the local structural level (within the framework of a single episode)
and the global structural level (within the framework of a narrative
arc). The local discursive elements featuring paremias include episode
titles, opening and closing voice-overs, characters’ dialogues.
Of considerable interest is the way proverbs function in voice-over
narrations. Being an audio-visual system, the lm frequently relies on
the use of voice-over technique which serves as a unique way of
conveying meaning and establishing special relations with the
viewers. Therefore, the voice-over narration is not only a signi cant
structural element of the TV series discourse but it also contributes to
building its cognitive and content planes. What is being voiced by the
invisible narrator in each Grey’s Anatomy episode is laden with
interpretational value. These opening and closing narrations are
perhaps the most crucial parts of the whole episode. When proverbs
are employed in them, they help focus the attention of the audience on
the information necessary to interpret the meaning of the events and,
thus, deduce the message. The episode entitled The Heart of the Matter
(4-4) explores the problem of forgiveness or, rather, the ability to
forgive. The opening narration contains allusions to two popular
proverbs Nothing is certain but death and taxes and To err is human /
People make mistakes that help establish the theme of the episode:
Opening voice-over: In life, only one thing is certain, apart from death and taxes.
No matter how hard you try, no matter how good your intentions, you are going to
make mistakes. You’re going to hurt people. You’re going to get hurt. And if you
ever want to recover... there’s really only one thing you can say.
Character’s voice: I forgive you.

The closing voice-over narration summarizes all the events by

opposing the traditional proverb providing a seemingly useful piece of
advice – Forgive and forget. As the invisible narrator proceeds, it
becomes clear that it is sometimes impossible in real life to forgive the
ones who hurt us:
Closing voice-over: Forgive and forget. That’s what they say. It’s good advice, but
it’s not very practical. When someone hurts us, we want to hurt them back. When
someone wrongs us, we want to be right. Without forgiveness, old scores are
never settled… old wounds never heal. And the most we can hope for, is that one
day we’ll be lucky enough to forget.

In the dialogues of the Grey’s Anatomy characters proverbs serve as

eloquent means of expressing attitudes, i.e. emotional perception of
people and events, as in a conversation between two rivaling interns
fresh out of med school:
Karev: 4B’s got post-op pneumonia. Let’s start antibiotics.
Nurse: Are you sure that’s the right diagnosis?
Karev: Well I don’t know, I’m only an intern. Here’s an idea, why don’t you go
spend four years in med school and let me know if it’s the right diagnosis. She’s
short of breath, she’s got fever, she’s post-op. Start the antibiotics. (walks over to
Meredith) God I hate nurses. I’m Alex. I’m with Jeremy, you’re with the Nazi,
right?
Meredith: She may not have pneumonia, you know. She could be splinting, or
have a PE.
Karev: Like I said, I hate nurses.
Meredith: What did you just say? Did you just call me a nurse?
Karev: Well, if the white cap ts... (A Hard Day’s Night 1-1/ Grey’s Anatomy)
Interviewing is considered today as an entertainment rather than
information vehicle (Altheide, 2001: 411). This transformation is
believed to be caused by “the media logic that has developed since the
early days of print journalism”. The main thesis behind this
assumption is that a major reason for interviewing being so relevant
nowadays is its shi “from an information orientation to an impact
orientation that is more characteristic of our media culture” (Altheide,
2001:411). As ubiquitous as proverbs are they play a special role in the
structural organization of the interview discourse. I shall start my
analysis of the role Anglo-American proverbs play in the interview
discourse structural organization with looking at their functioning in
adjacency pairs. In a conventional interview communicants orient to
the strict question-answer format. In Oprah Winfrey interviews I
studied proverbs are used both as questions:
Oprah: Do you think all people are created equal?
Jamie Foxx: No. If that were true, there’d be no poverty, no shortcomings... We’re
all energy. Some people are stronger forces than others. (< All men are created
equal) (interview with Jamie Foxx/ O, The Oprah magazine);

and answers:
Julia Roberts: <…> I’ve had people call me with numbers, and I say, “I can’t even
tell by the tone of your voice whether this is good or bad news”. You just have to
let it go.
Oprah: And you have?
Julia Roberts: Whatever happens is going to happen, whether you’re sitting by the
phone anxious and worried about it or not. (< What’s going to happen will
happen/ Whatever happens, happens) (interview with Julia Roberts/ O, The Oprah
magazine)

In several of Oprah’s interviews, proverbs are used in prefaced

questions, which help prepare both the interviewee and the audience
for the next question, to herald new topics for discussion, thus
providing their smooth switch:
Oprah: <…> You’ve been quoted as saying that fame and money are great, but they
don’t bring you happiness. What does?
Venus: My family. Laughter. Being able to decide what I want to do. My health. (<
Money can’t buy happiness) (interview with Venus Williams/ O, The Oprah
magazine)
Celebrity pro le interviews as compared with canonical news
interviews are notable for the use of continuers, i.e. utterances
complementing the question-answer pair and situating “their producer
as the intended, and attentive, primary recipient of the talk being
produced by an interlocutor” (Hutchby, 2005: 214). In each particular
case they ful ll di erent pragmatic functions, e.g. passing judgments,
or evaluating what is being said, as in the conversation with Salma
Hayek:
Oprah: <…>So you didn’t question whether you could or couldn’t – it just was?
Salma: I wanted to do lms, and at that time in Mexico, a lm industry didn’t
really exist. So where do you go to do movies? You go to the mecca. I also was
afraid I was a very bad actress, because I’d become famous very fast and was
making money for people. <…> I never wanted to be a famous bad actress! I had a
panic that people would think, She’s good only because everyone knows her.
Oprah: Girl, that’s deep! Many would’ve settled for being a big sh in a not-so-small
pond. (< Better a big sh in a little pond than a little sh in a big pond) (interview
with Salma Hayek/ O, The Oprah magazine)

13.6 The Role of Proverbs on the Semantic Level of

Media Texts
It would not be an overestimation to say that newspaper journalists are
keen on applying proverbs in their writings. The topics of their articles
are indeed multifarious. Political and nancial reviews along with
sport reports or life and style stories feature all possible proverbs – old
and modern, standard and modi ed. In Oprah Winfrey’s magazine
interviews, for instance, proverbs support the topics discussed by the
famous journalist and her respondents. They include the 9/11 tragedy,
personal growth and success stories, life lessons, women’s problems,
just to name a few. Here is an allusive use of the caution-giving proverb
Beware of a silent dog and silent water in the talk with Madleine
Albright:
Oprah: Could we have protected ourselves against the World Trade Center and
Pentagon attacks?
Madeleine: I don’t know the answer to that. What most Americans don’t know is
that we have prevented a lot of terrorist incidents before this one. There’s always
 the dog that doesn’t bark that you don’t know about. We need to be very careful not
to get so into the blame game that we forget those who died. The challenge is to
draw lessons from the past and move forward without spending time nger-
pointing. (interview with Madleine Albright/ O, The Oprah magazine)

As for popular music discourse, proverbs play a signi cant role in

disclosing the themes of songs. These include love songs and songs
addressing social issues. Profuse application of proverbs in both is
tightly linked with the task to entertain and a ect the listeners’
feelings and emotions. Consider the following examples:
“And I believe in helping everybody,
But when it comes to all them foreign loans,
I think we oughta remember that charity begins at home.
Yes it starts right now in (America, America) <...>” (America, I Believe in You/
Charlie Daniels)174;
“Just look him in the eye and simply shout:
Enough is enough
I can’t go on, I can’t go on no more no
Enough is enough
I want him out, I want him out that door now
Enough is enough
Enough is enough
That’s enough”.175 (No More Tears/Enough is Enough/ Barbra Streisand and
Donna Summer)

Some media reveal how widespread in real communication proverbs

are. Print interviews, magazine and newspaper articles are live, i.e.
non- ctitious, speech. As some of the examples reveal, playful
application of proverbs proves to be not only a tool of choice in
professional media writing but also in everyday speech that happens
to appear or to be quoted in the mass media. This fact is indicative of
the universality of the phenomenon and the critical approach to
proverb wisdom giving way to reconsideration of old notions and
expounding fresh ones.
Media texts serve as a wonderful platform for conveying opinions
and judgments with the help of proverbs and about proverbs
themselves. Journalists, screen writers, interviewees share their views
on the role proverbs play in life. Broadly speaking, these re ections are
a mere evidence of how (and to what e ect) proverb pragmatic forces
are applied in actuality. In the exemplary article Cutting hospital
corners (The Guardian Septermber 29, 1999) the author dwells on the
problem of contradictory proverbs adding his layman’s everyday
observations to a great many scholarly studies:
Many proverbs are less axiomatic than they sound. People who murmur sagely
that many hands make light work will, when it suits them, announce with equal
certainty that too many cooks spoil the broth. He who hesitates is lost, and yet fools
rush in where angels fear to tread.
Here’s a typical example of how the swindle works. The project to rebuild
University College Hospital, London, will “save” £160m in capital costs by using
PFI, but for the next 30 years the hospital trust will have to shell out almost £30m
a year to the developers. In other words, the taxpayer is obliged to pay nearly
£900m for something that would otherwise have cost £160m. And, at the end of
those 30 years, the hospital will belong to the private consortium. As I have
suggested before, it’s like taking out a mortgage from a loan shark to buy a house
which you already own – and then discovering, 25 years down the line, that the
property has been repossessed by the lender anyway.

The end of the article is permeated with proverbial allusions, too:

Perhaps such analogies don’t mean much to Gordon Brown, who has two
handsome residences – 11 Downing Street and Dorneywood – provided free of
charge. So let us put it in the sort of language which this connoisseur of proverbs
ought to understand: when the PFI goes a-borrowing, our children go a-sorrowing.
Or, if you prefer, there’s no such thing as the never-never – merely a delayed day of
reckoning. (< He who goes a-borrowing, goes a-sorrowing; There is no such thing as
a free lunch).

Another article from the Guardian discusses the way proverb authority
is exploited in the society:
Most people are brought up by parents who hope to waylay our inherent
shallowness with platitudes such as “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”, “A cat
may look at a king” and other unlikely bollocks. Given the option, and whatever
the circumstances, the majority of us will elect to bo a gorgeous person over a
wart-covered hog. <…> But I will concede that, once one knows a person well, it is
easier and quite correct that we see beyond their physical appearance. (All the
men I’ve never slept with / The Guardian December 20, 2003)
Here is one more brilliant example of applying several synonymous
proverbs to express philosophical re ections that constitute the
message of a Grey’s Anatomy episode. The starting point for these
ideas in the opening voice-over narration is the popular dictum Never
leave that ‘til tomorrow, which you can do today also serving as a
leitmotif for all the happenings in the episode:
A couple hundred years ago Benjamin Franklin shared with the world the secret
of his success. Never leave that ‘til tomorrow, which you can do today. This is the
man who discovered electricity; you’d think we’d pay more attention to what he
had to say. I don’t know why we put things o , but if I had to guess it has a lot to
do with fear. Fear of failure, fear of pain, fear of rejection. Sometimes the fear of
just making a decision. Because... What if you’re wrong? What if you make a
mistake you can’t undo? <…>

At the end of the episode the narrator reveals her interpretation of the
popular proverb informed by her practical observations. We-narration
is used in this case proving this understanding to be shared by many
people, the viewers included:
“ The early bird catches the worm”. “A stitch in time saves nine”. “He who hesitates
is lost”. We can’t pretend we haven’t been told. We’ve all heard the proverbs,
heard the philosophers, heard our grandparents warning us about wasted time;
heard the damn poets urging us to seize the day. Still, sometimes we have to see
for ourselves. We have to make our own mistakes. We have to learn our own
lessons. We have to sweep today’s possibility under tomorrow’s rug until we can’t
anymore. Until we nally understand for ourselves what Benjamin Franklin
meant. That knowing is better than wondering. That waking is better than
sleeping. And that even the biggest failure, even the worst most intractable
mistake, beats the hell out of not trying. (< Time wasted is time lost) (If Tomorrow
Never Comes 1-6/ Grey’s Anatomy)

Thus, closing the present chapter, I can conclude that the mass media
discourse proves to be a really fascinating realm for proverb scholars.
Paremias categorize reality by capturing some typical, i.e. recurrent,
situations and, therefore, are unique ready-made linguistic vehicles for
representing similar ones. By doing so, they describe, interpret the
world and help express various attitudes. The abundance of these
folklore dictums, especially their creative transformations, in media
texts testi es to their ubiquity and inexhaustible potential in handling
all sorts of pragmatic tasks serving the goal of in uencing the mass
audience. Much is yet to be explored in this paremilogical eld, and it
is my hope that the approaches and results o ered here can be of help
in new scholarly endeavors.
References
Altheide, D. L. (2001). Journalistic Interviewing. In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.),
Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method (pp. 411-430). Thousand
Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Arewa, O. E. & Dundes, A. (1964). Proverbs and the Ethnography of Speaking
Folklore. American Anthropologist 66, 70-85.
Gill, P. (2008). “The Name of the Game”: Form and Function of Episode Titles in
Grey’s Anatomy. In C. Burkehead & H. Robson (Eds.), Grace under Pressure:
Grey’s Anatomy Uncovered (pp. 22-30). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars
Publishing.
Hutchby, I. (2005). News Talk: Interaction in the Broadcast News Interview. In A.
Stuart (Ed.), Journalism: Critical Issues (pp. 210-223). Maidenhead: Open
University Press.
Honeck, R. P. (1997). A Proverb in Mind. The Cognitive Science of Proverbial Wit and
Wisdom. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
[Konstantinova, A.] Константинова, А. (2008). Коммуникативно-прагматический
потенциал пословиц и поговорок в современной англо-американской
прессе. Краснодар: Советская Кубань.
Mac e, A. L. & Mac e, F. (1989). A Proverb Poem by Levni. Asian Folklore Studies,
48/2, 189-193.
Mac e, A. L. & Mac e, F. (2001). A Proverb Poem by Re ki. Asian Folklore Studies
460/1, 5-19.
Mieder, W. (2004). Proverbs. A Handbook. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press.
Mieder, W. (2009). International Bibliography of Paremiology and Phraseology.
Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Mieder, W. (2012). “Think Outside the Box”: Origin, Nature, and Meaning of Modern
Anglo-American Proverbs. Proverbium 29, 137-196.
Mieder, W. & Sobieski, J. (Eds) (2005). “So Many Heads, So Many Wits”: An
Anthology of English Proverb Poetry. Burlington, Vermont: The University of
Vermont Press.
Yankah, K. (1986). Proverb Speaking as a Creative Process: The Akan of Ghana.
Proverbium 3, 195-230.
[Volodina, M.] Володина, М. (2004). Язык средств массовой информации. In М.
Володина (Ed.), Язык СМИ – особый язык социального взаимодействия (pp.
11–40). Москва: Издательство Московского университета.

161 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentlemen_Prefer_Blondes_(musical)
162 http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/m/muppets-wizard-of-oz-
script.html
163 http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/a2/gi-joe-rise-of-cobra-script.html
164 http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/a-diamond-is-forever.html
165 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0054215/quotes?ref_=tt_ql_3
166 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097165/quotes?ref_=tt_ql_3
167 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119567/quotes
168 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0031381/quotes?ref_=tt_ql_3
169 http://www.metrolyrics.com/home-aint-where-his-heart-is-anymore-lyrics-
shania-twain.html
170 http://www.metrolyrics.com/dont-look-back-lyrics-mxpx.html
171 http://www.lyricstime.com/clan-of-xymox-innocent-lyrics.html)
172
http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/b/bruce_springsteen/my_best_was_never_good_
enough.html
173 This earlier article by the same title presented the results of a series of
experiments conducted by the Harvard Psychology professor Daniel Gilbert and
team, who studied how we predict what will make us happy or unhappy and also
how we feel a er the actual experience.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/07/magazine/the-futile-pursuit-of-
happiness.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm.
174
http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/c/charlie_daniels/america_i_believe_in_you.html
175 http://www.songlyrics.com/barbra-streisand/no-more-tears-enough-is-enough-
with-donnasummer-lyrics/
Sabine Fiedler
14 Proverbs and Foreign Language
Teaching

14.1 Introduction
This chapter intends to provide answers to the following questions: (1)
Why should proverbs play a part in foreign language teaching? (2)
Which proverbs should be taught and learnt? (3) How can the teaching
of proverbs be best accomplished? At the same time, it will o er an
overview of current issues in phraseodidactic research and will, in
addition, attempt to compile a proverb minimum (or optimum) found
in the appendix. The chapter draws on the results of a survey on the
knowledge of proverbs conducted among advanced learners of
English. It focuses speci cally on English and German, but the ideas
presented can easily be adapted to the teaching of other languages.

14.2 Proverbs in Foreign Language Learning and

Teaching

14.2.1 On the Signi cance of Including Proverbs into

Foreign Language Teaching
The task of foreign language teaching is to enable students to
communicate in a language that is not their mother tongue. This
means providing them with the most useful lexical and grammatical
material and the necessary communicative strategies to apply their
knowledge adequately. The characteristic features of language use in
the target language should therefore form the point of departure.
Research has established that phraseology is fundamental to the way
language is used (Biber & Conrad, 1999; Moon, 1998; Wray, 2002,
2008; Schmitt, 2004; Granger & Meunier, 2008; Meunier & Granger,
2008). Phraseology includes a set of xed polylexemic linguistic units
which are characterized by semantic and syntactic stability and to a
great extent by idiomaticity (Fiedler, 2007: 28), such as formulae,
phrasal verbs, proverbial sayings, similes, binomials, and proverbs.
Proverbs are considered here to be a part of the phrasicon of a
language, and a subtype of phraseology. Knowledge of them is
necessary for native and non-native speakers of a language to
communicate e ectively.
Despite the pervasiveness of proverbs in oral and written
communication there is no accepted consensus about their role in
foreign language teaching. On the one hand, as the time that teachers
have at their disposal in language classes is limited, it seems to be a
sheer luxury to teach proverbs in a context in which the pronunciation
of words and grammatical structures still causes problems. If the
importance of phraseological units is acknowledged at all, it might be
reasonable to prioritize subtypes such as collocations or phrasal verbs
over proverbs, because these may constitute a serious problem for
language production and have to be mastered as an active language
skill. On the other hand, textlinguistic research and discourse analysis
have revealed that proverbs realize a large number of referential,
communicative and textual functions and that they are also used in
academic discourse (Gläser, 1990). It is due to the progress in
phraseodidactics and its interconnectedness with other disciplines
that the majority of researchers today agree on including proverbs in
foreign language teaching (e.g. Mieder, 2004d; Hallsteinsdóttir, 2011;
Nuessel, 2003; Lennon, 1998; Baur & Chlosta, 1996).
The important role that phraseology plays in communication,
foreign language learning and teaching is also acknowledged by the
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR),
which aims to provide a common basis for the development of
curricula, teaching materials and levels of pro ciency for foreign
language learning in Europe. The knowledge and appropriate use of
proverbs are considered to be a relevant part of a learner’s lexical
competence (5.2.1.1 of the CEFR) as well as a key factor for the
development of pupils’ sociolinguistic competence:
These xed formulae, which both incorporate and reinforce common attitudes,
make a signi cant contribution to popular culture. They are frequently used, or
perhaps more o en referred to or played upon, for instance in newspaper
headlines. A knowledge of this accumulated folk wisdom, expressed in language
assumed to be known to all, is a signi cant component of the linguistic aspect of
sociocultural competence.

The following subgroups and examples of the so-called expression of

folk wisdom are mentioned:
proverbs, e.g. a stitch in time saves nine
idioms, e.g. a sprat to catch a mackerel
familiar quotations, e.g. a man’s a man for a’ that
expressions of:
belief, such as – weathersaws, e.g. Fine before seven, rain by eleven
attitudes, such as – clichés, e.g. It takes all sorts to make a world
values, e.g. It’s not cricket. (CEFR p. 120)
The English dra forms the basis of this important document and,
strangely enough, the German translation tries to nd examples that
take the English ones as its means of orientation. In this way, Gleich
getan, ist viel gespart – obviously a translation of the English A stitch in
time saves nine, but unknown in German – is given as an example of a
proverb, where a commonly used German proverb would have been
expected. Other drawbacks of this document are the heterogeneous
use of terms (for example, xed phrase [p. 111], stock phrase [p. 35, 86],
xed formulae [p. 120], expression of folk wisdom [p. 120], frequently
used ‘routines’ and patterns [p. 29] are used interchangeably to denote
the same subject) and the fact that the CEFR does not address the
question of which phraseological units (including proverbs) are to be
taught on which levels, i.e., that it does not tackle the problem of a
phraseological (and paremiological) minimum (Pirttisaari, 2006).
Further phraseodidactic research will thus have to place particular
emphasis on these aspects (Konecny et al., 2013). In the following we
examine in more detail why proverbs should be taught and learnt, and
identify motivational, linguistic, cultural and epistemological reasons.

14.2.2 The Motivational Potential of Proverbs

B. Wotjak (1996: 7) mentions the strong interest that learners have in
proverbs. This can mainly be attributed to their colourful authenticity
and the insight they provide into a language community’s culture and
history. In addition, proverbs are popular because of their stylistic
features (e.g. alliteration, rhyme, rhythm, parallelism) (chapter 1 of
this Handbook). Therefore, proverbs can present great motivational
potential because students are challenged by being obliged to analyse
their linguistic content and to understand their o en gurative
meaning in a given situational context. As the CEFR quote above
indicates (and as chapter 15 about anti-proverbs in this book will show
in more detail), proverbs are o en modi ed or alluded to. Those
creative uses, as language play in general, evokes humour and
intellectual joy, which stimulates learners and helps to enliven
lessons.

14.2.3 Proverbs as a Basis for Language Learning and

Teaching
Proverbs are a ubiquitous phenomenon, an integral part of authentic
language use. This seems to be especially true for the situations and
genres that the major part of our language learners, school and
university students, are faced with. Pop music is rich in proverbs
(Mieder, 1989; Lenk, 2001); so are lms (Winick, 2003); funny proverbs
are used as status updates on Facebook, and manipulated proverbs are
popular in genres of youth culture (e.g. T-shirt slogans, yers, false
logos). The inclusion of proverbs in the curriculum gives learners the
chance to apply the linguistic knowledge they have acquired outside
the classroom and o ers teachers the opportunity to make their pupils
familiar with vocabulary, grammatical patterns and phonetic rules on
the basis of the material that is in the focus of their interests. One
might call this the linguistic reason or the language competence
argument. Proverbs are a substantial constituent of language overall
and they illustrate important functions in discourse. Litovkina (2000:
vii) argues as follows (see also Hanzén, 2007: 8-10):
The person who does not acquire competence in using proverbs will be limited in
conversation, will have di culty comprehending a wide variety of printed matter,
radio television, songs etc., and will not understand proverb parodies which
presuppose a familiarity with a stock proverb. Furthermore proverbs are ideally
suited to pedagogical purposes because they are easy to learn (…) They contain
frequently used vocabulary and exemplify the entire gamut of grammatical and
syntactic structures.

A large number of researchers have argued in this direction and

provided material for several languages taking proverbs and other
types of phraseological units as a starting point for second language
classes176 (e.g. Litovkina, 2000; Abadi, 2000; Wilson, 2004; Hessky &
Ettinger, 1997; Bardósi, Ettinger & Stölting, 2003; Lattey & Hieke, 1990;
Nuessel, 1982; Wotjak & Richter, 1988).

14.2.4 Proverbs and Figurative Language

Another factor that makes the signi cance of proverbs for foreign
language teaching evident is its extensive reliance on gurative
speech. The majority of proverbs are metaphorical or involve some
kind of metaphor (Norrick, 1985). Examples are proverbs such as Too
many cooks spoil the broth and Make hay while the sun shines. As
Lako & Johnson (1980: 5) put it, “the essence of metaphor is
understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of
another”. Metaphors involve a transfer from one (usually relatively
concrete) cognitive domain to another (typically more abstract one)
based on a relationship of similarity or analogy. They enable us to
describe the world because we grasp new concepts with the help of
already existing categories. This “epistemological function of
metaphor” (Nuessel, 2003: 402) is central to our cognitive
development. Proverbs can also be metonymic as they are based on an
objectively existing relationship between two entities. In Two heads are
better than one and Absence makes the heart grow fonder, for example,
the two parts of the human body are used on the basis of a pars pro
toto relationship. Both metaphor and metonymy are important
because they ful l crucial functions in discourse. The metaphors and
metonymies we nd in proverbs are not freely created, but
prefabricated. The decoding processes, however, are similar.
Therefore, the inclusion of proverbs and the discussion of their nature
in foreign language learning can help students to develop the ability to
further understand gurative language.

14.2.5 Proverbs as a Mirror of Culture

Proverbs provide insight into culture in a number of ways. As they are
inherited from generation to generation they preserve traditional (and
sometimes outdated) views and values, behaviour, experiences, and
working methods (e.g. Early to bed and early to rise, makes a man
healthy, wealthy, and wise; Spare the rod and spoil the child; A woman’s
place is in the home). Simultaneously, modern proverbs (e.g. What you
see is what you get; Garbage in, garbage out; A woman without a man is
like a sh without a bicycle) re ect life in the age of computers as well
as the changing position of women in society. In addition, culture-
boundedness can be seen in the positive or negative connotations of
particular proverbial elements. For example, dog is mainly used in a
derogatory sense in English (e.g. Every dog has its day) and heart is
commonly considered the seat of feelings (e.g. Absence makes the
heart grow fonder).
Proverbs not only give insight into former ways of thinking, judging
and working, but some of them also provide insights into previous
stages of a language. Examples in English are He who hesitates is lost
and Manners maketh the man. In this way, the incorporation of
proverbs creates a tremendous opportunity to integrate literary-
cultural with linguistic education (Awramiuk, 2011).
 The idea that proverbs re ect the culture of a speech community
does not mean, however, that there is a 1:1-relation between the
content of proverbs and the worldview of a nation. As Mieder (2007:
402) argues, “[c]are must be taken when looking at proverbs as
expressing aspects of a certain worldview or mentality of a people that
no stereotypical conclusions about a so-called ‘national character’ are
drawn.”
In fact, proverbs o en contain national stereotypes and racial
prejudice and their potential as disseminators of those views should
not be underestimated. As Mieder (1993) shows, the proverb-like
formula Only a dead Indian is a good Indian not only served as a
defamatory slogan about native Americans, but became a productive
model for slurs against other ethnic groups. It is, however,
questionable whether this is a reason to ignore them. They should
instead be addressed and challenged within the language curriculum
as proverbs that include stereotypes have potential in terms of
character-education. Their appropriate treatment in the language
classroom can help raise awareness and cultivate an open and critical
mind (Popovic, 2004).
A cultural perspective on proverbs should also include their use. It
has been widely acknowledged that there are a number of culture-
bound di erences and peculiarities with regard to this. For example, in
China proverbs are more o en used than in other countries, and signal
an author’s high level of education and experience (You Ting, 2010:
151; Günthner, 1990), which is why they permeate even academic
works. Such cultural di erences and traditions have to be taken into
consideration in foreign language teaching. As regards English, the
dominance of this language as a means of international
communication should be born in mind. The use of a foreign language
is not restricted to the application of vocabulary and grammar, as
textual conventions and rhetorical traditions that exist in the speech
community are of importance as well. As contrastive discourse
analyses have revealed, metaphor plays a central role in English
academic prose (Thielmann, 2009), and humorous introductions are
characteristic for scienti c presentations (Reershemius, 2012).
Proverbs can play an important part in the realisation of both these
textual functions and should be considered in this context at least in
advanced stages of foreign language classes.

14.2.6 Proverbs and Fluency

As mentioned before, phraseology (including proverbs) is a substantial
constituent of language. Data about their proportion in
communication vary and depend on register and genre. Erman and
Warren (2000) found that as much as 58.6% of spoken discourse and
52.3% of written language was prefabricated. Howarth (1998) in his
study on academic writing found that between 31 and 40% was made
up of phraseological units (collocations and idioms). Phraseology
serves to facilitate language use by providing a processing advantage
and as a number of studies have revealed, the use of prefabricated
phrases and sentences decreases processing e orts in speech
production and improve learners’ uency (e.g. Wray, 2002; Conklin &
Schmitt, 2008). Pawley & Snyder (1983: 208), introducing the term
institutionalized sentence stem for holistically stored sequences, were
among the rst to describe this:
Indeed, we believe that memorized sentences and phrases are the normal
building blocks of uent spoken discourse, and at the same time, that they
provide models for the creation of many (partly) new sequences which are
memorable and in their turn enter the stock of familiar usages.

Their list of examples includes a number of proverbs, such as You can

lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink; A stitch in time saves
nine; Think twice before you +verb phrase [e.g. leap]). Their knowledge
is advantageous to foreign language learners both in receptive and
productive language use. It aids comprehension because it makes the
incoming language ow predictive, and eases processing loads in
speech production as the speaker is able to concentrate on passages
which are produced creatively (Lennon, 1998: 18).

14.3 Towards a Proverb Optimum

14.3.1 Selection Criteria
In foreign language instruction it is important to teach the most well-
known and current material. This is true for both simple or complex
word lexemes and for sentence-like expressions such as proverbs. “It is
the proverbs that are in use today that ought to be taught,” writes
Mieder (2004d: 147). Therefore, it is of utmost importance to nd the
current and most frequently used proverbs as a base for teaching.
According to Grzybek & Chlosta (2009), studies aimed at compiling
a paremiological minimum can be subdivided into frequency-oriented
approaches, which are based on the analysis of written and spoken
texts, and knowledge-oriented methods, which are based on testing a
particular number of subjects. Corpora, which are now generally used
in language studies in order to check theoretical hypotheses, provide
problems for phraseologists and paremiologists. A number of studies
conducted for several languages have shown that the average
frequency of well-known phraseological units including proverbs, is
very low in corpora (Moon, 1998, Colson, 2007). “[T]here are o en
wide discrepancies between implicit native-speaker knowledge of
idioms, catchphrases, proverbs and other word-combinations and
their frequency of occurrence in large-scale computer corpora” (Cowie,
2003: 73). Corpus analysis can therefore not be the only method for
nding a proverb optimum for foreign language learners. One of the
rst paremiologists to conduct research with regard to the second
approach was G.L. Permiakov (1982, 1985), who published a list of 300
commonly used Russian proverbs. So-called paremiological minima
(or proverb minima) have meanwhile been established for several
languages (Čermák, 2003; Ďurčo, 2004; Hessky & Ettinger, 1997;
Kacjan, 2013).
With regard to the English language, a precise proverb minimum is
still a desideratum. However, a number of researchers have done
important preparatory work in this eld. Litovkina’s (2000) book
includes exercises to practise and apply 450 Anglo-American proverbs.
Mieder (2004d: 129f.) presents a list of 75 proverbs that “are certainly
used with high frequency in the United States”. Lau’s (1996) study on
US-proverbs and their relation to American values includes a list of 188
American proverbs with their number of occurrences in Lexis/Nexi, a
corpus of US and overseas newspapers, magazines and journals. On
the basis of empirical research (proverb generation tasks and proverb
familiarity tests with college students in four regions of the USA), Haas
(2008) presents a list of 313 commonly known and used English
proverbs. Using these collections in combination with the author’s
own proverb collection (Fiedler 2007: 90)177 and the Collins COBUILD
Idioms Dictionary (2002)178 as sources, a list of 100 commonly used
English proverbs has been compiled (see Appendix 1).
A decisive factor for the inclusion of a proverb into this list was its
use in a ‘marked’ or innovative way (Fiedler, 2007). Those marked uses
include di erent types of modi cations of proverbs (exchange,
reordering or addition of constituents), the creation of deliberate
ambiguity (of phraseological puns – Naciscione, 2010), combinations
of proverbs (or accumulation – Partington, 2009: 1808), their overuse,
nonverbal presentation and other techniques. These uses are a type of
ludic linguistic behaviour or language play (Crystal, 1998). The
following newspaper headlines and text passages illustrate this:

Hillary, not curiosity, killed the cat179

Why writers want to swap pens for swords180
The sequester chickens have come home to roost or they would have if
they could get clearance to take o .181
The use of a proverb in such a marked way (as well as the existence of
so-called antiproverbs – see chapter 15) can be considered proof of its
currency. The authors presuppose that the reader/listener detects the
phraseological base form, i.e. the proverb in its ordinary form
(Naciscione, 2010: 47). Otherwise the intended e ect would not be
brought about. For all the 100 proverbs listed in the appendix, marked
uses have been found.
The 100 expressions presented in Appendix 1 ful l the following
conditions for items in a paremiological minimum: Firstly, they
correspond to the de nition of proverbs presented in chapter 1 of this
Handbook;182 secondly, they are familiar to and widely used by native
speakers (Haas, 2008; column 4); thirdly, they are considered to be
relevant to the English language and culture, according to the research
of leading paremiologists (e.g. Mieder, 2004d; Litovkina, 2000; column
2); fourthly, they occur relatively frequently in corpora (CCID, column
5); and nally, they are used in the media (Lau, 1996; columns 3 and
6). The 100 items therefore present the proverbs a user of English is
likely to encounter in oral and written communication, so that it will
be useful for a learner of this language to know them and their
meaning, at least in terms of receptive use. The question of whether
the 100 proverbs presented in Appendix 1 constitute an individual
learner’s paremiological optimum is di cult to answer as it depends
on a large number of factors, such as age, personality, learning
context, native language, degree of language pro ciency, purpose of
learning the foreign language and others.

14.3.2 A Questionnaire Study

14.3.2.1 The Knowledge of Proverbs Among Advanced

Learners of English
Due to their metaphorical contents and connotations proverbs are
problematic for even uent language learners. We have acquired the
phraseological competence in our native language over the course of
many years as a result of immersion in the cultural context in which
the language is rooted (Prodromou, 2007: 23), and it is hardly possible
to gain this competence in a foreign language.
To gain further insight into the state of knowledge of phraseology
and especially proverbs and to nd how their acquisition can be
improved a survey among German university students of English was
conducted (160 respondents; level of pro ciency: B2/C1). In the rst
part of the questionnaire students were asked to paraphrase the
meaning of eight English proverbs and, if possible, to note where or
how they had learnt them. From these, four were presented non-
verbally and had to be identi ed rst from caricatures and a
photograph (see appendix 2), which is cognitively and linguistically
challenging for language learners. The results of this rst part of the
survey are presented in Table 14.1.
As Table 14.1 shows, the knowledge of the eight English proverbs –
which are all considered to be part of the proverb minimum for English
– was relatively poor. Only two of them (I The early bird catches the
worm and III An apple a day keeps the doctor away) were known by the
majority of students. Two proverbs (IV Waste not, want not and VIII
The chickens come home to roost) were known by only 4 and 2 students
respectively.
Those students who had spent a period of at least one term in an
English-speaking country achieved better results, as in 4 out of the 8
proverbs they scored higher. As expected, older students knew more
proverbs than younger ones. However, for the knowledge of some of
the proverbs the year of studying does not seem to be as in uential as
a stay abroad.
The majority of respondents were not able to indicate where and
how they had learnt a particular proverb, but those who provided
information on this gave the following situations as sources: media
(television/ lms/Internet/pop songs; 11 respondents), friends (e.g. “A
friend told me about a couple of things that happened and ended: that
was the last straw”/”my host mother in the UK always said so”; 9
respondents), linguistics seminar (7 r.), literature (e.g. “read it in a
book”; 7 r.), school (4 r.), and family (4 r.).

Table 14.1: Correct paraphrases (%) of proverbs (presented in the given form [V-VIII]
or in pictures – Appendix 2 – [I-IV])
14.3.2.2 Mother Tongue Influences
Irujo (1986) found that advanced learners of English rely on their rst
language to comprehend and produce second language idioms. The
survey con rms these nding for the apprehension of proverbs. It
reveals that L1 transfer plays an important role in learners’ processing
of L2 proverbs and that this transfer can be positive and negative. The
two best known proverbs are I and III, which can be attributed to the
fact that, due to the impact of English, both are well known as German
proverbs as well. Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm is the popular
German loan translation of the English proverb The early bird catches
the worm (Mieder 2004a); An apple a day keeps the doctor away can be
found in various German translations (Fiedler 2012a: 75) as well as in
the English original (Mieder 2004c).
Negative transfer can be seen in the relatively large number of
wrong answers for some of the little known proverbs. For the last
straw, for example, no less than 45.1% of the paraphrases given were
wrong, comprising “the last chance / hope / possibility / the only help
/ the only thing that helps / if nothing else works / the last thing you
can cling to”. Obviously, they go back to the German literal counterpart
der letzte Strohhalm (an den man sich klammert) (with the meaning ‘to
clutch at any straw’), which might be called a false friend.

14.3.2.3 The Role of Context

The second part of the survey referred to the role that context can play
when proverbs are processed. The relatively little known proverbs II,
IV, and V-VIII were now once more presented embedded in authentic
texts (see Appendix 2). The survey reveals that the students, who again
were asked to paraphrase the meaning of the proverbs, scored
signi cantly higher in this part (see Table 14.2 and Figure 14.1).

Table 14.2: Correct paraphrases (%) for proverbs embedded in texts

The use of context (to be understood here as the immediate co-text,

the words and phrases used together with the proverb) can be seen as
a strategy to arrive at the meaning of an unknown unit (Cooper, 1999).
This is obvious especially in the case of the proverb The pen is mightier
than the sword. The high score for this proverb can be attributed to its
self-explicatory character and its use in a report that illustrates it (see
Appendix 2). The explicit phrase to reduce violence in America that is
used in connection with the proverb will have been understood by all
students. Even in the case of a little known and opaque proverb, the
chickens come home to roost, a suitable context made more than a
quarter of the students infer the correct meaning.
Nevertheless, context should not be overestimated. In none of the
examples was it possible to reach a 100% score for an embedded
proverb. Reasons for this might be that students were not able to
understand all lexical items in the given texts or that they lacked the
socio-cultural background knowledge to interpret the textual situation
adequately.

Figure 14.1: Correct paraphrases (context-isolated and embedded)

14.3.3 Some Implications for the Learning and

Teaching of Proverbs
The questionnaire study presented in 3.2. threw some light on the
knowledge of proverbs among advanced learners of English and on the
way they processed them. Despite the limited number of participants
and the relatively small number of proverbs tested the survey leads us
to valid conclusions regarding the teaching of proverbs.

14.3.3.1 Teaching Proverbs in an Appropriate Context

One of the main results of the questionnaire study is that the meaning
of proverbs is best apprehended in actual contexts of use. Proverbs
need to be acquired in living performance (Mechling, 2004: 122). As
Mieder (1996: 597) points out, “[p]roverbs in collections are almost
meaningless or dead.” They refer to social situations and can be seen
as strategies for dealing with them. For this reason, we should not
divorce them from their contexts. Corpora enable us to provide suitable
contexts. An example is given in appendix 2, where The chickens come
home to roost is used in an authentic context, a spoken radio
commentary. The socio-cultural background knowledge is easily
activated by means of Internet sources (Wikipedia Moscow theatre
hostage crisis, July1, 2013). More recent examples include the austerity
program introduced in the USA in March 2013 known as Sequester.
When it led to a number of problems in the economy, several
newspapers made use of the proverb in their reports (3.1).
Students’ analyses of those texts can form an ideal starting point in
advanced language classes. As Nuessel (2003: 399) argues, “[t]he real
linguistic task starts when the language learner attempts to learn when
and how to apply the proverb to a concrete communicative situation”.
As the examples above show, modi ed proverbs should not be
excluded from teaching materials and they give a good impression of
the creative use of proverbs in present-day media.
The insight that proverbs and phraseology should be taught and
acquired on the basis of authentic texts is very much in line with the
three-step teaching model for phraseology in general
(“phraseologischer Dreischritt”) which was introduced by Kühn (1992).
The rst step (“Erkennen”) is the identi cation of the proverb in a text.
Learners have to be enabled to realise that a string of words is meant in
a gurative sense. The second step (“Entschlüsseln”), the decoding
process, includes that learners understand the meaning of a unit,
which should therefore be presented in a typical context and genre.
The third step (“Gebrauchen”) is the use of a phrase or proverb. Lüger
(1997: 98f.) proposes an extention of the model with a fourth step
between steps two and three, which aims at consolidation: The use of
a unit should be prepared and facilitated by suitable exercises.
The phase of identifying proverbs will be facilitated by students’
knowledge of the formal characteristics of proverbs (such as rhyme,
rhythm, formulaic pattern – chapter 1 of this Handbook) and their
metaphorical contents. The sentences Don’t count your chickens before
they are hatched and Make hay while the sun shines cannot be
interpreted as ordinary propositions referring to animals or farming.
As we have seen in the survey, metaphorical proverbs possess various
degrees of transparency, and the existence of an equivalent in one’s
mother tongue can be important. In general, with regard to English,
the identi cation of proverbs is not likely to cause severe problems. In
the survey described above a considerable number of students were
able to mark a proverb as something well-known, but they were not
able to give its meaning (e.g. “I have heard it in pop songs, but I don’t
know what it means” for Absence makes the heart grow fonder). The
dominant role of English in popular culture might be the reason why
people are to a certain extent familiar with a number of proverbs and
phrases in this language without really understanding or knowing
them.

14.3.3.2 Sources of Reference

In order to understand proverbs, special dictionaries that are based on
word usage in corpora have proven to be very helpful, as they contain
examples excerpted from the corpora, like the Collins Cobuild Idiom
Dictionary. As proverbs do not occur frequently in corpora (3.1.),
however, not all of those that are considered as belonging to the
paremiological minimum can be found in dictionaries. For example,
Waste not, want not (known by only 2.3% of the respondents in our
survey) is not included in the CCID. In cases like these on-line
resources can be recommended, such as, for English, The Phrase
Finder (www.phrases.uk.com). Here a query about Waste not, want not
results in the following information:
Waste not...
Posted by ESC on May 10, 2000
In Reply to: Phrase posted by sherri novak on May 09, 2000
: Where and when and by whom did the phrase “waste not want not”
start?
“Waste not, want not. The less we waste, the less we lack in the future.
The proverb has been traced back to 1772, and is rst cited in the
United States in the 1932 ‘Topper Takes a Trip’ by T. Smith...” From the
“Random House Dictionary of Popular Proverbs and Sayings” by
Gregory Y. Titelman (Random House, New York, 1996).
Re: Waste not... ESC 05/10/00
“A Dictionary of American Proverbs” by Wolfgang Mieder & others
(Oxford University Press, New York, 1992) cites the 1932 use of the
phrase. It also has “1. Those who waste will want. (recorded distribution)
[…]”
In addition, students can be encouraged to join forums for debate on
phraseology. As the following passages show, in the case of Waste not,
want not this turns out to be helpful, as the information given by users
includes synonyms for some of the words as well as on the structure of
the proverb:
What exactly does the term “waste not want not” mean?
CLIVE H: The term “waste not want not” probably originates in
Yorkshire and means exactly what it says, never wasting anything results
in never wanting anything.[…]
D_r_siva: […] If we don’t waste what we have, we’ll still have it in the
future and will not lack (want) it.
Snow ake…: If you waste stu , later on you will nd yourself without
stu and therefore “want”. So if you don’t waste, you are conservative
and won’t want things later. I don’t see how it relates to food, though.
Mandy_01: If you don’t waste what you have now, you won’t be in want
(needy, lacking, poor) later.
Maxwell: If you don’t waste food then you’ll have less reason to want it
later. I personally think ‘waste not, need not’ is more e ective.
Kevin: It means if you don’t waste things, you will never lack (want) for
things that you need.
Merlin: it means If you don’t waste things, you are less likely to end up
lacking. (http://de.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?
qid=20081121140038AAMLiQ6, July1, 2013)

14.3.3.3 Receptive and Productive Knowledge

Kühn’s third step, Use or Application, leads us to the principal
question of whether the productive use of proverbs should be
considered an aim of foreign language teaching at all. Several authors
have expressed their hesitancy towards it because it might be seen as
an inappropriate penetration into the native speaker’s domain
(Dobrovol’skij & Ljubimova, 1993, Lüger, 2004: 158). O’Kee e et al.
(2007: 80) mention the “status as the ‘badge of membership’ of the
speech communities from which they spring” that idioms have
“because of their cultural resonance”. This is certainly true for
proverbs as well with their long traditions and cultural roots and so
their use might be interpreted as an excessive identi cation with the
target language community.
With regard to the productive use of proverbs, language learners’
aims have to be taken into consideration. For those who have the
desire to become members of the native-speaker culture, the
productive use of frequent proverbs can be important. It will enable
new immigrants to communicate e ectively with Anglo-American
native speakers, as Mieder (1994: 312) argues. Proverbs are o en used
to establish and solidify relationships, create humour and to confront
problems in communities of practice (Wenger, 1998). The shared
knowledge of a proverb can help to achieve interpersonal harmony
between speakers.
For the majority of foreign language learners, however, the
principle will be that “receptive mastery is more important than
productive repertoire” (O’Kee e et al., 2007: 76; see also Baur &
Chlosta, 1996: 23; Lüger, 2004: 157; Ettinger, 2007). As explained in
3.2.1., phraseological units including proverbs are stumbling blocks for
non-native speakers. Prodromou (2007) has shown that non-native
speakers are o en not granted the same rights concerning the use of
phraseology as native speakers. What is seen as creative play in native
speaker conversations is o en regarded as an error in non-native
speakers’ talk. The specialist literature includes more than a few
examples of stylistic blunders with sayings and proverbs (e.g. Wotjak,
1996). They are probably what the authors of the CEFR had in mind
when they described the “sociolinguistic appropriateness” of a B2-
level speaker in the following way: “Can sustain relationships with
native speakers without unintentionally amusing or irritating them or
requiring them to behave other than they would with a native
speaker.” (Wotjak, 1996: 123)
Against the background of this eld of tension – that, on the one
hand, nonnative speakers want to be expressive and creative though
using a foreign language and, on the other hand, the observation that
the use of phraseology o en presents a mine eld – the strategy of
metacommunicative signalling is worthwhile considering. Proverbs are
o en accompanied by expressions such as so to speak, as the proverb
goes, as they say or we say. In this way speakers control and support
the receiver’s comprehension by marking their linguistic choices as
something special, something that cannot be understood literally
(Fiedler, 2007: 87-89; Čermák, 2004). Compare the following examples:
The grass is always greener over here.
“The grass is always greener on the other side”, as the old saying goes. But here in
Ireland it happens to be true. We’ve de nitely got green grass. At least 40 shades of
it. (Leipziger Volkszeitung 4/5 December 1999)
One more big payday with Petty and that would be it for me. I was what they call
over the hill. (B. Dylon Chronicles, 2004: 148)

Metacommunicative signals like these are highly recommended in

intercultural communication, when the speaker is not sure of the
stylistic adequacy of a proverb (Dobrovol’skij & Ljubimova, 1993).
Students have to be made aware of the fact that an additional cultural
hedge such as, as you might say in English or isn’t this a situation where
you say … can avoid embarrassment and unwelcome reactions.

14.3.3.4 The Contrastive Perspective

Phraseological equivalence presents an intensively studied eld
(Korhonen, 2007; Dobrovol’skij, 2011), and a number of authors have
recently stressed the complexity of the issue by outlining di erent
approaches of contrastive idiom research (Farø, 2006; Menado-Blanco,
2010). The present chapter of this handbook does not focus on
equivalence as an abstract property used to describe the aimed-at
quality of a target text in the translation (Koller, 2004), but instead is
concerned with the existence of equivalents, i.e. of proverbs that can
be regarded as identical or at least corresponding, and which serve as
substitutes in two languages. The contrastive perspective is helpful in
making students aware of the similarities and di erences that exist
between proverbs in a foreign language and their mother tongue.
Altogether four types of correspondence between L1 and L2
proverbs can be distinguished: Total equivalence, partial equivalence,
zero-equivalence and pseudoequivalence. The reason for the existence
of corresponding proverbs can be found in language contact and
common sources. Examples of the former can be easily found due to
the growing in uence of English on European languages (Mieder,
2004a-c, 2010; Fiedler, 2006, 2010, 2012b; Rozumko, 2012b). With
regard to common sources, identical or similar proverbs can be traced
back to mythological stories, classical literary works (e.g.,
Shakespeare, Dante, Cervantes), folk narrations, fables and legends
(Piirainen, 2010: 12; 2012). Among those internationally known loan
translations are One hand washes the other, One swallow does not make
a summer and All’s well that ends well. Equivalents are not restricted to
European languages, however. Paczolay’s 1997 work registers
equivalents of Like father, like son and Walls have ears in 46 languages
each, including Chinese and Japanese and Arabic, Persian, Chinese,
and Japanese respectively.
Taking the 100 English proverbs in Appendix 1 as a basis,
equivalents for more than 40% can be found for German. However, as
the inverted commas with the word total above serve to indicate, full
equivalence, i.e. total correspondence in all possible parameters, does
not seem realistic in two languages. As a number of researchers have
convincingly shown (e.g. Gehweiler, 2006; Dobrovol’skij, 2002),
super cially equivalent phraseological units, including proverbs, can
di er with respect to frequency and register, and can have di erent
variants and prefer di erent external arguments.
The group of partial equivalents encompasses proverbs with minor
structural and/or lexical di erences. The biblical warning “Pride goeth
before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall” (Proverbs 16: 18)
is known with the inde nite or de nite article in English (Pride comes
before a fall) and only with the de nite article in German (Hochmut
kommt vor dem Fall). The English proverbs A bird in the hand is worth
two in the bush is known in German with the same imagery basis, but
di erent constituents, as Lieber den Spatz in der Hand als die Taube
auf dem Dach [ww: Better a sparrow in the hand than a pigeon on the
roof]. For the foreign language learner and user those minor
grammatical and lexical di erences can cause central problems as
structural stability can be a decisive precondition of the proverbial
character of an expression.
A further constellation is the lack of equivalents, i.e. the situation
that a proverb in one language has no correspondent proverb in the
other. For example, the English Every dog has its day has no
counterpart in German. As mentioned above, in a situation where one
language exercises dominant in uence on other languages such a
constellation is o en a starting point for loan processes.
Finally, there is the occurrence of pseudo-equivalents, which are
normally termed false friends (faux amis). They have identical
constituents and are based on the same image, but carry di erent
meanings. In the questionnaire study the last straw turned out to be
one for the students. The complete proverb The last straw breaks the
camel’s back, which is rarely used today, would certainly not have
caused problems. The popular reduction the last straw, however, made
the participants remember the German expression with identical
constituents, der letzte Strohhalm, which is a false friend (see 3.2.2.).
Students should know about these di erent types of equivalents to
be alert to potential pitfalls. Here again it is on the level of the text that
subtle di erences become obvious and should be discussed. From a
pragmatic point of view, the knowledge of equivalents and proverb
parallels seems to be especially important, as their use might be a way
for non-native speakers to be expressive and creative without entering
the social space of another speech community or merely aping native
speakers. It can be very useful for learners to know about the existence
and correct wording of a proverb that they know from their native
language and are therefore able to use adequately in the foreign
language (Vajičková, 2000). In combination with the
metacommunicative techniques described above (There is a proverb in
my language …) this might be a strategy to use colourful language,
bring one’s own culture and identity into the discourse and create a
cooperative atmosphere by nding something that people have in
common. The learner’s individual proverb optimum should include
some of those expressions, although they do not necessarily constitute
the proverb minimum described above. For the two languages this
chapter is focused on, this means that the following English proverbs
are useful to know for German learners:
Constant dropping wears away the stone (German: Steter Tropfen höhlt
den Stein)
A burnt child dreads the re (German: Ein gebranntes Kind scheut das
Feuer)
The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree (German: Der Apfel fällt nicht
weit vom Stamm) In wine is truth (German: Im Wein ist Wahrheit)
Coming events cast their shadows before (German: Große Ereignisse
werfen ihre Schatten voraus).
An important aim of foreign language teaching is to enable students to
continue their acquisition as part of their individual studies. As
phraseological units and proverbs are ubiquitous phenomena, as we
said in 1.1., they present an ideal subject for autonomous learning.
Students should be encouraged to keep notebooks containing proverbs
that they encounter outside the classroom (Irujo, 1993: 217) or to use
worksheets, models of which Ettinger (2001) and Lüger (2004)
prepared for French. In addition, several researchers (e.g. Ettinger,
2001; Bergerová [no year]) show didactic perspectives in combination
with modern media (web-concordancer, Internet, CD-ROM) (see also
Konecny et al., 2013).
14.4 Final Remarks
The ndings to emerge from this study can be summarized in the
following theses:
– Proverbs should be incorporated into foreign language teaching as
they present a ubiquitous phenomenon that the learner encounters
in authentic communication. In addition, the inclusion of proverbs
motivates learners, helps to develop the ability of understanding
gurative language, provides an insight into foreign cultures and
supports natural and uent communication by providing a
processing advantage.
– Proverbs should be taught and learnt in context under
consideration of their multiple functions in various text types of
oral and written communication.
– Students should be taught those proverbs that they are likely to
nd in authentic communication. A collection of the most
frequently used proverbs, i.e. a proverb minimum or optimum is
therefore a desideratum. A proposal for English based on previous
studies has been made here (see Appendix 1).
– The contrastive perspective should be considered in proverb
teaching and learning because comparative studies help to nd
cross-linguistic di erences. Since the learner’s rst language is a
key factor in proverb processing and use in a foreign language, as a
number of studies have found, proverb equivalents in L1 and L2
should be a special focus of instruction.
– Autonomous learning is an integral part of proverb acquisition.
A nal point is that the interest in phraseology and paremiology
should not be restricted to practical language classes. Phraseology is
an expanding area of research that has become an internationally
recognized discipline in linguistics. As a subject at the intersection of
lexicology and syntax with strong pragmatic and semantic
implications it should also be taught as part of the linguistics program
at universities, above all, in teacher training courses. Phraseology
seminars can achieve a twofold aim: rst, to introduce students to the
most important theoretical concepts (de ning criteria, classi cation,
main approaches of research) and, second, to enlarge their individual
stock of phraseological units including proverbs.
References
Abadi, M. ( 2000). Proverbs as ESL Curriculum. Proverbium 17, 1–22.
Awramiuk, E. (2011). Phraseology in Poles’ language education. In J. Szerszunowicz,
B. Nowowiejski, K. Yagi et al. (Eds.), Focal Issues of Phraseological Studies
Volume I (pp. 371-387). Bialystok: University of Bialystok Publishing House
Bardósi, V., Ettinger, St. & Stölting, C. (2003). Redewendungen Französisch-Deutsch
(3. Aufl.). Tübingen/Basel: Francke.
Baur, R. S. & Chlosta, Ch. (1996). Welche Übung macht den Meister? Von der
Sprichwortforschung zur Sprichwortdidaktik. Fremdsprache Deutsch 2, 17-25.
Bergerová, H. (o.J./no year indicated). Multimediales Unterrichtsmaterial zur
deutschen Phraseologie. http://frazeologie.ujepurkyne.com/index2.htm
(accessed July 1, 2013).
Biber, D. & Conrad, S. (1999). Lexical Bundles in Conversation and Academic Prose.
In H. Hasselgard & S. Okse ell (Eds.), Out of Corpora. Studies in Honour of Stig
Johansson (pp. 181-189). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Collins Cobuild Idioms Dictionary (CCID). (2002). J. Sinclair et al. (Eds.) 2nd ed.
Glasgow: Harper-Collins.
Colson, J.-P. (2007). The World Wide Web as a corpus for set phrases. In H. Burger, D.
Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn & N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseologie. Phraseology. Ein
internationals Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung. An International Handbook
of Contemporary Research (pp. 1071-1077). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching,
Assessment. Ed. by Language Policy Division, Council of Europe, Strasbourg 2001,
www.framework_en.pdf.
Conklin, C. & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic Sentences: Are the Processed More
Quickly Than Nonformulaic Language by Native and Nonnative Speakers? Applied
Linguistics 28, 1-18.
Cooper, Th. C. (1999). Processing of Idioms by L2 Learners of English. TESOL
Quarterly 33/2, 233-262.
Cowie, A. (2003). Exploring native-speaker knowledge of phraseology: informant
testing or corpus research. In H. Burger, A. Häcki-Buhofer & G. Gréciano (Eds.),
Flut von Texten – Vielfalt der Kulturen (pp. 73-81). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider-
Verlag Hohengehren.
Crystal, D. (1998). Language Play. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Čermák, F. (2003). Paremiological minimum of Czech: The corpus evidence. In H.
Burger, A. Häcki-Buhofer & G. Gréciano (Eds.), Flut von Texten – Vielfalt von
Kulturen (pp. 15-31). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.
Čermák, F. (2004). Text introducers of proverbs and other idioms. In C. Földes & J.
Wirrer (Eds.), Phraseologismen als Gegenstand sprach- und
kulturwissenscha licher Forschung (pp. 27-46). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider
Verlag Hohengehren.
Dobrovol’skij, D. (2002): Phraseologismen in kontrastiver Sicht. In: D. A. Cruse, F.
Hundsnurscher, M. Job et al. (Eds.), Lexikologie. Lexicology. Ein internationales
 Handbuch zur Natur und Struktur von Wörtern und Wortschätzen. An International
Handbook on the Nature and Structure of Words and Vocabularies (pp. 442-451).
Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Dobrovol’skij, D. (2011). Cross-Linguistic Equivalence of Idioms: Does it Really Exist?
In A. Pamies & D. Dobrovol’skij (Eds.), Linguo-Cultural Competence and
Phraseological Motivation (pp. 7-24). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider.
Dobrovol’skij, D. & Ljubimova, N. (1993). ‘Wie man so schön sagt’, kommt das gar
nicht in die Tüte’: Zur metakommunikativen Umrahmung von Idiomen. Deutsch
als Fremdsprache 3, 151-156.
Ďurčo, P. (2004). Slovak Proverbial Minimum. In C. Földes (Ed.), Res Humanae
Proverbiorum et Sententiarum. Ah honorem Wolfgangi Mieder (pp. 59-70).
Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Erman, B. & Warren, B. (2000). The idiom principle and the open-choice principle.
Text 20, 29-62.
Ettinger, St. (2001). Vom Lehrbuch zum autonomen Lernen. Skizze eines
phraseologischen Grundkurses für Französisch. In M. Lorenz-Bourjot & H. Lüger
(Eds.), Phraseologie und Phraseodidaktik (pp. 87-104). Wien: Edition Praesens.
Ettinger, St. (2007). Phraseme im Fremdsprachenunterricht. In H. Burger, D.
Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn & N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseologie. Phraseology. Ein
internationals Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung. An International Handbook
of Contemporary Research (pp. 893-908). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Farø, K. (2006). Idiomatizität – Ikonizität – Arbitrarität. Beitrag zu einer
funktionalistischen Theorie der Idiomäquivalenz. (Dissertation) Copenhagen:
University.
Fiedler, S. (2006). „Willkommen zurück!“ – der Einfluss des Englischen auf die
Phraseologie der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. In H. Burger & A. Häcki-Buhofer
(Eds.), Phraseology in Motion I. Methoden und Kritik (pp. 451-465).
Baltmannsweiler: Schneider-Verlag Hohengehren.
Fiedler, S. (2007). English Phraseology. A Coursebook. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Fiedler, S. (2010). „Am Ende des Tages zählt die Performance.“ – Der Einfluss des
Englischen auf die Phraseologie der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. In J.
Korhonen, W. Mieder, E. Piirainen et al. (Eds.), Phraseologie global – areal –
regional. Akten der Konferenz EUROPHRAS 2008 vom 13.-16.8.2008 in Helsinki
(pp. 163-172). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Fiedler, S. (2012a). Englische Redewendungen und Sprichwörter in der Praxis.
Leipzig: Engelsdorfer Verlag.
Fiedler, S. (2012b). Der Elefant im Raum … The influence of English on German
phraseology. In C. Furiassi, V. Pulcini & F. Rodríguez González (Eds.), The
Anglicization of European Lexis (pp. 239-259), Amsterdam/Philadelphia:
Benjamins.
Gehweiler, E. (2006). “Going to the Dogs?” A Contrastive Analysis of sth. is going to
the dogs and jmd./etw. geht vor die Hunde. International Journal of Lexicography
19/4, 419-438.
Gemeinsamer europäischer Referenzrahmen für Sprachen: Lernen, lehren,
beurteilen. (2001). Berlin: Langenscheidt.
Gläser, R. (1990). Fachtextsorten im Englischen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Gläser, R. (11986,2 1990). Phraseologie der englischen Sprache. Leipzig:
Enzyklopädie.
Granger, S. & Meunier, F. (2008). Phraseology. An Interdisciplinary Perspective.
Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Grzybek, P. & Chlosta, C. (2009). Some essentials on the popularity if (American)
proverbs. In K. J. McKenna (Ed.), The Proverbial “Pied Piper”. Festschri Volume of
Essays in Honor of Wolfgang Mieder on the Occasion of his Sixty-Fi h Birthday
(pp. 95-110). New York: Peter Lang.
Günthner, S. (1990). Sprichwörtliche Redensarten in interkulturellen
Kommunikationssituationen zwischen Deutschen und Chinesen. In B. Spillner
(Ed.), Interkulturelle Kommunikation (pp. 53-61). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Haas, H. A. (2008). Proverb familiarity in the United States: Cross-regional
comparisons of the paremiological minimum. Journal of American Folklore
121/418, 319-347.
Hallsteinsdóttir, E. (2011). Aktuelle Forschungsfragen der deutschsprachigen
Phraseodidaktik. Linguistik Online 47, 3, 1-25 (accessed July 1, 2013).
Hanzén, M. (2007). ‘When in Rome, Do as the Romans Do’. Proverbs as a Part of EFL
Teaching (Undergraduate Thesis Jönköping University, 33p.).
Howarth, P. (1998). Phraseology and second language pro ciency. Applied
Linguistics 19/1, 24-44.
Hessky, R. & Ettinger, St. (1997). Deutsche Redewendungen. Ein Wörter- und
Übungsbuch für Fortgeschrittene. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Irujo, S. (1986). Don’t put your leg in your mouth: transfer in the acquisition of idioms
in a second language. TESOL Quarterly 20, 287-304.
Irujo, S. (1993). Steering clear: Avoidance in the production of idioms. IRAL XXXI (3),
205-219.
Kacjan, B. (2013). Sprichwörter zwischen korpusbasierter Frequentanalyse und DaF-
Wörterbüchern. In C. Konecny, E. Hallsteinsdóttir & B.Kacjan (Eds.), Phraseologie
und Sprachunterricht / Phraseology in Language Teaching and Language
Didactics (pp. 71-88). Bielsko-Biała/Budapest/Kansas et al.
Koller, W. (2004). Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenscha . Wiesbaden: Quelle &
Meyer.
Konecny, C., Hallsteinsdóttir, E. & Kacjan, B. (2013; in preparation). Zum Status quo
der Phraseodidaktik: Aktuelle Forschungsfragen, Deiderata und
Zukun sperspektiven. In C. Konecny, E. Hallsteinsdóttir & B. Kacjan (Eds.),
Phraseologie und Sprachunterricht / Phraseology in Language Teaching and
Language Didactics (pp. 153-172). Bielsko-Biała/ Budapest/Kansas et al.
Korhonen, J. (2007). Probleme der kontrastiven Phraseologie. In H. Burger, D.
Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn & N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseologie / Phraseology. Ein
internatonales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung. An International
Handbook of Contemporary Research (pp. 574-589). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Kühn, P. (1992). Phraseodidaktik. Entwicklungen, Probleme und Überlegungen.
Fremdsprachen Lehren und Lernen 21, 169-189.
Lako , G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Lattey, E. & Hieke, A.E. (1990). Using Idioms in Situational Contexts. Tübingen:
Francke.
Lau, K. J. (1996). ‘It’s about time’: The ten proverbs most frequently used in
newspapers and their relation to American values. Proverbium 13, 135-159.
Lenk, H. E. H. (2001). Von Felsmalereien und Hobbyethnologen. Die Phraseologie des
Deutschrock als Gegenstand des DaF-Unterrichts. In M. Lorenz-Bourjot & H. Lüger
(Eds.), Phraseologie und Phraseodidaktik (pp. 155-178). Wien: Praesens.
Lennon, P. (1998). Approaches to the Teaching of Idiomatic English. IRAL, XXXVI (1),
11-30.
Litovkina, A.T. (2000). A Proverb A Day Keeps Boredom Away. Pécz-Szekszárd: IPF-
Könyvek.
Lüger, H. (1997). Anregungen zur Phraseodidaktik. Beiträge zur
Fremdsprachenvermittlung 32, 69-120.
Lüger, H. (2004). Idiomatische Kompetenz – ein realistisches Lernziel? Thesen zur
Phraseodidaktik. Beiträge zur Fremdsprachenvermittlung Sonderhe 7, 121-169.
Mechling, J. (2004). “Cheaters Never Prosper” and Other Lies Adults Tell Kids:
Proverbs and the Culture Wars over Character. In K. J. Lau, P. Tokofsky & S. W.
Winick (Eds.), What Goes Around, Comes Around. The Circulation of Proverbs in
Contemporary Life (pp. 107-126). Logan, Utah: State University Press.
Mellado-Blanko, C. (2010). Die phraseologische Äquivalenz auf der System- und
Textebene (am Beispiel des Sprachenpaares Deutsch-Spanisch). In J. Korhonen,
W. Mieder & Piirainen, E. (Eds.), Phraseologie global – areal – regional (pp. 277-
284). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Meunier, F. & Granger, S. (Eds.). Phraseology in Foreign Language Learning and
Teaching. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Mieder, W. (1989). Proverbs in popular songs. In W. Mieder (Ed.), American Proverbs:
A Study of Texts and Contexts (pp. 195-212). Bern: Peter Lang.
Mieder, W. (1993). The only good Indian is a dead Indian: History and meaning of a
proverbial stereotype. Journal of American Folklore 106, 38-60.
Mieder, W. (1994). Paremiological minimum and cultural literacy. In W. Mieder (Ed.),
Wise Words. Essays on the Proverb (pp. 297-316). New York/London: Garland
Publishing.
Mieder, W. (1996). Proverbs. In J. H. Brunvald (Ed.), American Folklore. An
Encyclopedia (pp. 597-601). New York: Garland.
Mieder, W. (2004a). Der frühe Vogel und die goldene Morgenstunde. Zu einer
deutschen Sprichwortentlehnung aus dem Angloamerikanischen. In I. Hyvärinen,
P. Kallio & J. Korhonen (Eds.), Etymologie, Entlehnungen und Entwicklungen.
Festschri für Jorma Koivulehto (pp. 193-206). Helsinki: Societé Néophilologique.
Mieder, W. (2004b). ‘Man soll nicht alle Eier in einen Korb legen’: Zur
deutschsprachigen Entlehnung eines angloamerikanischen Sprichwortes.
Nauchnyi vestnik. Seria Sovremennye lingvisticheskie i metodiko-didakticheskie
issledovaniia 1, 21-31.
Mieder, W. (2004c). ‘Ein Apfel pro Tag halt den Arzt fern’: Zu einigen amerikanischen
Lehnsprichwörtern im Deutschen. Revista de Filologia Alemana, 12 135-149.
Mieder, W. (2004d). Proverbs. A Handbook. Westport, Connecticut/London:
Greenwood Press.
Mieder, W. (2005). “A proverb is worth a thousand words”: Folk wisdom in the
modern mass media. Proverbium 22, 167-233.
Mieder, W. (2007). Proverbs as cultural units or items of folklore. In H. Burger, D.
Dobrovol’skij, P. Kühn & N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Phraseologie. Phraseology. Ein
internationals Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung. An International Handbook
of Contemporary Research (pp. 394-414). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Mieder, W. (2010). ‘Many roads lead to globalization’. The translation and
distribution of Anglo-American proverbs in Europe. In J. Korhonen, W. Mieder, E.
Piirainen et al. (Eds.), Phraseologie global – areal – regional. Akten der Konferenz
EUROPHRAS 2008 vom 13.-16.8.2008 in Helsinki (pp. 43-59). Tübingen: Gunter
Narr.
Mieder, W., Kingsbury, S.A. & Kelsie, B.H. (Eds.) (1992), A Dictionary of American
Proverbs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mieder, W. & Litovkina, A. T. (2006). Old Proverbs Never Die, They Just Diversify.
Veszprém: University Press Veszprém.
Moon, R. (1998). Fixed Expressions and Idioms in English. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Naciscione, A. (2010). Stylistic Use of Phraseological Units in Discourse. Amsterdam:
Benjamins.
Norrick, N. R. (1985). How Proverbs Mean. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Nuessel, F. (1982). Incorporating proverbial language into the Spanish curriculum.
The Canadian Modern Language Review 39, 83-89.
Nuessel, F. (2003). Proverbs and metaphoric language in second-language
acquisition. In W. Mieder (Ed.) Cognition, Comprehension, and Communication. A
Decade of North American Proverb Studies (1990-2000) (pp. 395-412).
Baltmannsweiler: Verlag Hohengehren.
O’Keefe, A., McCarthy, M. & Carter, R. (2007). From Corpus to Classroom: Language
Use and Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Paczolay, G. (1997). European Proverbs. Veszprém: Veszprémi Nyomda Rt.
Partington, A.S. (2009). A linguistic account of wordplay. The lexical grammar of
punning. Journal of Pragmatics 41, 1794-1809.
Pawley, A. & Syder, F.H. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: nativelike selection
and nativelike fluency. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and
Communication (pp. 191-226). Harlow/London: Longman.
Permiakov, G. L. (1982). K voprosu o russkom paremiologicheskom minimum. In E. M.
Vereshchagina (Ed.), Slovari I lingvostranovedenie (pp. 131-137). Moskva: Nauka.
Permiakov, G. L. (1985). 300 obshcheupotrebitel’ nykh russkikh poslovits I
pogovorok. Moskva: Nauka.
Piirainen, E. (2010). Common Features in the Phraseology of European Languages:
Cultural and Areal Perspectives. In: J. Korhonen, W. Mieder, E. Piirainen et al.
(Eds.), Phraseologie. Global – Areal – Regional (pp. 16-27). Tübingen: Gunter
Narr.
Piirainen, E. (2012). Widespread Idioms in Europe and Beyond. Frankfurt am Main:
Peter Lang.
Popovic, R. (2004). National Stereotypes in Teaching English as a Foreign Language
(Master-Thesis). Brattleboro, Vermont.
Pirttisaari, P. (2006). Phraseologie im ‘Gemeinsamen europäischen Referenzrahmen
für Sprachen’. In U. Breuer & I. Hyvärinen (Eds.), Wörter-Verbindungen: Festschri
für Jarmi Korhonen (pp. 247-257). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Prodromou, L. (2007). Bumping into creative idiomaticity. English Today 89 (23),
No.1, 14-25.
Reershemius, G. (2012). Zur pragmatischen Funktion von Humor in
wissenscha lichen Vorträgen. Journal of Pragmatics 44, 863-875.
Rozumko, A. (2012). English influence on Polish proverbial language. In C. Furiassi, V.
Pulcini & F. Rodríguez González (Eds.), The Anglicization of European Lexis (pp.
261-277). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Schmitt, N. (Ed.) (2004). Formulaic Sequences. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Thielmann, W. (2009). Deutsche und englische Wissenscha ssprache im Vergleich:
Hinführen – Verknüpfen – Benennen. Heidelberg: Synchron Wissenscha sverlag
der Autoren.
Vajičková, M. (2000). Sprichwörter im Sprachvergleich unter
fremdsprachendidaktischen Aspekten. In U. Kramer (Ed.), Lexikologisch-
lexikographische Aspekte der deutschen Gegenwartssprache (pp. 157-165).
Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Wilson, A. (2004). Good proverbs make good students. Using proverbs to teach
German quickly. Proverbium 21, 345-370.
Winick, S.D. (2003). Intertextuality and innovation in the de nition of the proverb
genre. In W. Mieder (Ed.) Cognition, Comprehension, and Communication. A
Decade of North American Proverb Studies (1990-2000) (pp. 371-599).
Baltmannsweiler: Verlag Hohengehren.
Wotjak, B. (1996). Redewendungen und Sprichwörter. Ein Buch mit sieben Siegeln?
Fremdsprache Deutsch 15, 4-9.
Wotjak, B. & Richter, M. (1988). Sage und schreibe. Deutsche Phraseologismen in
Theorie und Praxis. Leipzig: Enzyklopädie.
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Wray, A. (2008). Formulaic Language: Pushing the Boundaries. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
You, T. (2010). „Geteiltes Leid ist halbes Leid, geteilte Freude ist doppelte Freude“. In
I.-A. Busch-Lauer (Ed.), Kaleidoskop der Kulturen (pp. 151-168). Berlin: Frank
/Timme.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning, and Identity.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Appendix 1
Introduction: The 100 entries in this list are alphabetized according to
the rst noun in each proverb. If no noun occurs, the rst
autosemantic word is taken as a key word. The proverbs are arranged
in the form of a table with reference to the sources mentioned in
chapter 3.1 of this paper so that readers can make their own choices
with regard to the criteria they nd signi cant. For those who pay
particular attention to the frequency of proverbs in a corpus, for
example, items (14), (17) and (80) might be essential, although they are
not listed in the classical collection by Lau (1996); for those who focus
on the use of proverbs in the media will consider Lau’s list to be the
most important. The references in the last column indicate books in
which examples of the particular proverbs in a modi ed version are
given. The sources are some of Mieder’s articles on proverbs in the
media, Litovkina & Mieder’s collection of antiproverbs, and textbooks
on phraseology by the author of this chapter. CR stands for The Colbert
Report, an American satirical TV program that is known for its playful
use of proverbs.
15 proverbs (in bold letters) ful l all the ve selection criteria
described in 3.1, and 55 four out of ve. The eld with the number in
front of these 70 items has been highlighted in bold.
Appendix 2
Examples of non-verbally presented proverbs and of proverbs
embedded in context (The pictures were found in Mieder [2005: 191;
187])
[…] He sent his troops into Chechnya in 1999 a er a series of explosions
in Russia that the authorities blamed on Chechen rebels. – ehm –
However, throughout this crisis he had not even discussed this prime
demand of the Chechen hostage takers that Russia would draw out its
forces from Chechnya. […] Putin himself has been portraying this
operation or this Chechen take-over in Moscow as part of the world-wide
terror activities. So in the short term perhaps – ehm –ehm – a climb in
popularity for Wladimir Putin, but what this incident has done is to focus
attention on the situation in Chechnya and on the fact that a er years of
having said that he is dealing with it the problem remains and came
home to roost in the very middle of Moscow to me. (spoken report: CNN,
November 2, 2002)
176 The terms second language, foreign language, and L2 are used synonymously in
this chapter.
177 The author’s corpus has been built up primarily during a period of 25 years of
intensive but unsystematic collecting of items from newspapers, literary and
academic texts, conversation, television and radio programmes.
178 This dictionary is based on the Bank of English corpus comprising over 450
million words. It covers both British and American phraseology and includes labels
for the most frequent phraseological units.
179 Sunday Independent (11 November 2007) (Hillary Clinton was accused of having
killed a cat
180 Irish Independent (10 November 2007) (article on the strike launched by the
Writers’ Guild of America)
181 The Colbert Report (23 April 2013) (Flights were cancelled and delayed in the USA
due to budget cuts, called the Sequester)
182 Some of the items in the various lists had to be excluded, as they represent other
subtypes of phraseological units, such as binomials (e.g. penny-wise and pound-
foolish in Mieder’s list), catchphrases (e.g. Life is like a box of chocolates … in Haas’s
list), and phrasal idioms (e.g. kill two birds with one stone in Haas’s list).
183 Including stays for at least 6 months.
184 This word-group unit was included because it is a short version of the proverb
The last straw breaks the camel’s back (Mieder et al., 1992: 567).
Anna T. Litovkina
15 Anti-proverbs

15.1 Introduction
This chapter gives a de nition of the anti-proverb and terminology,
discusses its occurrence, treats proverbs most popular for variation
and proverbs with international distribution, addresses di erent
mechanisms of proverb variation and topics emerging in anti-proverbs,
and last but not least reviews the background of antiproverb research.
The vast majority of the anti-proverbs quoted in this chapter are in
English, and were taken primarily from American and British written
sources185. In some additional cases, anti-proverbs from other
languages (Russian, French, German, and Hungarian) might also be
quoted186.

15.2 Terminology
Proverbs have never been considered sacrosanct; on the contrary, they
have frequently been used as satirical, ironic or humorous comments
on a given situation. For centuries, they have provided a framework for
endless transformation. In the last few decades, they have been
perverted and parodied so extensively that their variations have been
sometimes heard more o en than their original forms. Wolfgang
Mieder has coined the term Antisprichwort (anti-proverb) for such
deliberate proverb innovations (also known in English as alterations,
mutations, parodies, transformations, variations, wisecracks, deliberate
proverb innovations, or fractured proverbs) and has published several
collections of anti-proverbs in both German (see Mieder, 1982a, 1985,
1989a, 1998) and English (see T. Litovkina & Mieder, 2006; Mieder,
2003; Mieder & Tóthné Litovkina, 1999). Wolfgang Mieder’s term
Antisprichwort has been widely accepted by proverb scholars all over
the world as a general label for such innovative alterations of and
reactions to traditional proverbs: anti-proverb (English),
anti(-)proverbe (French), aнтиnословицa (Russian), and
anti(-)proverbium (Hungarian) (see the general discussion of the genre
of anti-proverbs in T. Litovkina 2007b; T. Litovkina & Mieder, 2006: 1–
54; Mieder, 2004, 2007). Besides the term anti-proverb, many other
terms187 exist in di erent languages for such phenomena, e.g.:
German: verballhornte Parömien, Sprichwortparodien, verdrehte
Weisheiten, “entstellte” Sprichwörter, sprichwörtliche Verfremdungen.
French: faux proverbe, perverbe, proverbe déformé, proverbe dérivé,
proverbe détourné, proverbe modi é, proverbe perverti, proverbe tordu,
pseudo-proverbe.
Russian: трансформa, пословичная ”переделка”, прикол.
Hungarian: szokásmondás-közhely, közmondás-paródia, közmondás
tréfás ferdítése, (el)ferdített közmondás, közmondás-perszi ázs, kvázi-
közmondás.
Some anti-proverbs question the truth of a proverb through employing
antonyms ( An exception disproves the rule (< An exception proves the
rule), transforming the proverb into its opposite (A friend that isn’t in
need is a friend indeed (< A friend in need is a friend indeed); Crime pays
– be a lawyer (< Crime doesn’t pay) or posing a naive question (Still
waters run deep – but how can they run if they are still? (< Still waters
run deep); If love is blind, how can there be love at rst sight? (< Love is
blind). The vast majority of anti-proverbs, however, put the proverbial
wisdom only partially into question, primarily by relating it to a
particular context or thought in which the traditional wording does not
t (Money isn’t everything – but it’s way ahead of what’s in second place
(< Money isn’t everything).
Anti-proverbs may contain revealing social comments ( American
money talks in just about every foreign country (Money talks); A condom
a day keeps AIDS away (< An apple a day keeps the doctor away), but
they may also be based on mere wordplay or puns, and they may very
o en be generated solely for the goal of deriving play forms (A fool and
his monkey are soon parted (< A fool and his money are soon parted)).

15.3 Occurrence of Anti-proverbs

Like traditional gems of wisdom, anti-proverbs appear in a broad
range of generic contexts, from personal letters to philosophical
journals, from public lectures and sermons to songs, from science
ction to comics and cartoons (Mieder, 1989b, 2007). Anti-proverbs are
also found in great abundance on the Internet (Mieder, 2007; for a
detailed discussion of the use of Hungarian anti-proverbs on the
Internet, see Vargha, 2005; for a discussion of the use of Bulgarian
anti-proverbs on the Internet, see Hrisztova-Gotthardt, 2006, 2007), in
advertising slogans (Forgács, 1997a; Mieder, 1989b, 2007), in the titles
of books and articles, and in magazine and newspaper headlines. They
are commonly quoted in collections of puns, one-liners, toasts,
wisecracks, quotations, aphorisms, maxims, quips, epigrams and
gra ti (see the lists of bibliography in T. Litovkina, 2005: 211–228; T.
Litovkina & Mieder, 2006: 349–357; Mieder & Tóthné Litovkina, 1999:
246–254). There is no sphere of life where anti-proverbs are not used.
But the anti-proverb is not a new genre born in the era of mass
media and the Internet (Mieder, 2007); rather, it can be traced back to
the distant past. Proverb alterations are as old as proverbs themselves:
they ourished in classical times and in all subsequent eras. Thus, in
the eighteenth century the traditional wisdom of many proverbial
gems was questioned by a number of philosophers, writers and poets
(to name just a few: G. C. Lichtenberg, I. Kant, F. Schiller, Goethe,
Voltaire), who created and inspired many proverb transformations.
The vast majority of anti-proverbs are the products of the
playfulness of a solitary author; they do not catch on, and thus will be
found in just one source. There are some texts, however, which appear
in many sources, exactly in the same form (for more, see T. Litovkina &
Mieder, 2006: XV–XVI). For some anti-proverbs numerous variants
have been found. The di erence may lie in the use of an article,
conjunction, or punctuation mark, or in the substitution of one more
or less synonymous term for another. Let us view the variants of the
proverb To err is human, to forgive divine below: To err is human – to
totally muck things up needs a computer; To err is human, but to really
foul things up requires a computer; To err is human, but it takes a
computer to completely fuck things up; To err is human, but to really
screw things up you need a computer (for more, see T. Litovkina &
Mieder, 2006: XVI–XVII). Some anti-proverbs have even become
proverbial in themselves and have been frequently included in recent
proverb collections, for example, A new broom sweeps clean, but the
old one knows the corners (< A new broom sweeps clean); Absence
makes the heart grow fonder – for somebody else (< Absence makes the
heart grow fonder).

15.4 Proverbs Most Popular for Variation

Typically, an anti-proverb will elicit humour only if the traditional
proverb upon which it is based is also known, thus allowing the reader
or listener to perceive the incongruity (violation of expectation)
between the two expressions. Otherwise, the innovative strategy of
communication based on the juxtaposition of the old and new proverb
is lost. The juxtaposition of the traditional proverb text with an
innovative variation forces the reader or listener into a more critical
thought process. Whereas the old proverbs acted as preconceived
rules, the modern anti-proverbs are intended to activate us into
overcoming the naive acceptance of traditional wisdom.
Below the reader will nd the list of the ten most frequently
transformed Anglo-American proverbs, followed by the lists of
German, French and Hungarian proverbs most frequently parodied.
Each proverb is followed by a number in parentheses indicating the
number of anti-proverbs that has been located for it. Proverbs other
than Anglo-American are followed by their translations into English
(given in [ ] brackets).
The ten most frequently transformed Anglo-American proverbs
from T. Litovkina and Mieder’s second anti-proverb collection (see T.
Litovkina & Mieder, 2006: 12) are found below:
Old soldiers never die (, they simply fade away). (79)
If at rst you don’t succeed, try, try again. (65)
Money talks. (65)
An apple a day keeps the doctor away. (63)
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. (49)
Never [Don’t] put o till [until] tomorrow what you can do today. (48)
A fool and his money are soon parted. (47)
Early to bed, early to rise, makes a man healthy, wealthy and wise. (46)
To err is human (, to forgive divine). (45)
Opportunity knocks but once. (43) (for the list of 54 Anglo-American
proverbs that have generated over twenty anti-proverbs in their corpus
of Anglo-American anti-proverbs, see T. Litovkina & Mieder, 2006: 12–
13)
Proverbs most popular for alteration in the German language are from
Mieder’s antiproverb collection (1998: IX–X) and were translated into
English by Melita Aleksa Varga:
Morgenstunde hat Gold im Munde . [ww: The morning hour has gold in
its mouth.] (76)
Lügen haben kurze Beine. [ee: Lies have short legs.] (75)
Im Wein ist (liegt) Wahrheit. [ee: The truth is (lies) in wine.] (65)
Wer andern eine Grube gräbt, fällt selbst hinein. [ee: Who digs a hole for
another, falls into it himself.] (62)
Reden ist Silber, Schweigen ist Gold. [ee: Talking is silver, being silent is
gold.] (61)
Der Klügere gibt nach. [ww: The wiser gives in.] (59)
Der Zweck heiligt die Mittel. [ww: The goal hallows the means.](54)
Man soll den Tag nicht vor dem Abend loben. [ww: One shoud not
praise the day before the evening.] (52)
Alter schützt vor Torheit nicht. [ww: Old age does not protect from
foolishness.] (51) Wo ein Wille ist, ist auch ein Weg.[ee: Where there is a
will, there is a way.] (51)
The list of ten proverbs most frequently transformed in the French
language compiled and translated into English by Péter Barta is given
below:188
Qui vole un œuf vole un bœuf. [ee: He that steals an egg will steal an
ox.] (34)
Pierre qui roule n’amasse pas mousse. [ee : A rolling stone gathers no
moss.] (30)
Rien ne sert de courir, il faut [mieux vaut] partir à point. [ww: It is no
use running, you must [it is better to] start on time.] (22)
Tant va la cruche à l’eau qu’à la n elle se casse [brise]. [ee: So o en the
pitcher goes to water till it breaks.] (22)
La musique adoucit les mœurs. [ww : Music so ens morals.] (22)
Chassez le naturel, il revient au galop. (21) [ww: Chase away the natural
and it returns at a gallop.]
L’argent ne fait pas le bonheur. [ee: Money does not buy happiness.]
(20)
Noël au balcon, Pâques aux tisons. [ww: (If it’s warm enough to spend)
Christmas at the balcony, (you’ll spend) Easter at the rebrands.] (20)
À bon chat bon rat. [ww: To a good cat, a good rat.] (18)
Il ne faut pas remettre au lendemain ce qu’on peut faire le jour même
[ww: You mustnt’t put o to tomorrow what you can do on that very
day.] (variant: Ne remets pas à demain ce que tu peux faire aujourd’hui
[le jour même].). [ee: Never put o till tomorrow what you can do today
[on that very day].] (18)
L’habit ne fait pas le moine. [ww: Clothes do not make a monk.] (18)
À vaincre sans péril on triomphe sans gloire. [ww: If you win without
risk, you triumph without glory.] (18)
Let us demonstrate here the list of the ten most frequently transformed
proverbs in T. Litovkina and Vargha’s corpus of over 7,000 Hungarian
anti-proverbs (see T. Litovkina & Vargha, 2005b: 16–17):
Addig jár a korsó a kútra, (a)míg el nem törik. [ee: The pitcher goes to
the well until it breaks.] (178)
(A)ki korán kel, aranyat lel. [ww: He who gets up early nds gold.] (153)
Aki másnak vermet ás, maga esik bele. [ww: He who digs a pit for
another falls into it himself.] (149)
Jobb ma egy veréb, mint holnap egy túzok. [ww: Better a sparrow today
than a bustard tomorrow.] (88)
A hazug embert [a hazugot] könnyebb [hamarabb; előbb] utolérni
[utolérik], mint a sánta kutyát. [ww: A liar is caught sooner than a lame
dog.] (88)
Amit ma megtehetsz, ne halaszd holnapra. [ww: What you can do today
do not put o until tomorrow.] (82)
Ajándék lónak ne nézd a fogát. [ww: Do not look at the teeth of a gi
horse.] (76)
Kicsi a bors, de erős. [ww: Peppercorn is small but strong.] (75)
Ahány ház, annyi szokás. [ww: As many houses as many customs.] (66)
Aki a virágot szereti, rossz ember nem lehet. [ww: He who loves owers
can’t be a bad man.] (65)

15.5 Anti-proverbs with International Distribution

When translated from one language to another, an anti-proverb more
o en than not will lose its message: the puns, parodies or wordplay
characteristic of one language will seldom carry over successfully into
another. Nevertheless, there are cases in which an internationally
spread proverb inspires parallel anti-proverbs in two or more
languages. This o en represents a convincing example of the
polygenesis of similar or even identical anti-proverbs. Here are some
examples (they were rst quoted in T. Litovkina & Mieder, 2006: 9–
10189):
English: Don’t do today what you can put o until tomorrow; Never do
today what can be done tomorrow.
Hungarian: Amit holnap is megtehetsz, ne tedd meg ma!; Amit ma
megtehetsz, azt holnap is megteheted. < Amit ma megtehetsz, ne halaszd
holnapra.
Russian: Не делай сегодня то, что можно сделать завтра. < Не
откладывай на завтра то, что можно сделать сегодня.
German: Was du heute kannst besorgen, das verschiebe nicht erst
morgen. < Was du heute kannst besorgen, das verschiebe nicht auf
morgen.
French: Pourquoi remettre à demain ce qu’on peut faire la semaine
prochaine < Il ne faut pas remettre au lendemain ce qu’on peut faire le
jour même.; Il faut savoir remettre à plus tard pour avoir le temps
d’accomplir aujourd’hui ce qu’on aurait dû faire hier. < Il ne faut pas
remettre au lendemain ce qu’on peut faire le jour même.
English: To err is human – to totally muck things up needs a computer.
Hungarian: Tévedni emberi dolog, de igazán összekutyulni valamit csak
számítógéppel lehet. < Tévedni emberi dolog.
Russian: Человеку свойственно ошибаться, но с помощью
компьютера это ему удается намного лучше. < Человеку
свойственно ошибаться.
German: Irren ist menschlich, aber für das totale Chaos braucht man
einen Computer. < Irren ist menschlich.
French: L’erreur est humaine, mais un véritable désastre nécessite un
ordinateur. < L’erreur est humaine.
English: “Everyone makes mistakes,” said the hedgehog a er trying to
mount the hairbrush. < To err is human.
Hungarian: Tévedni emberi dolog, szólt a sündisznó és lemászott a
gyökérkeféről. < Tévedni emberi dolog.
Russian: „Как обманчива внешность“, – сказал еж, слезая со
щетки. < Внешность обманчива.
German: „Irren ist menschlich,“ sagte der Igel, da sprang er von der
Haarbürste. < Irren ist menschlich.
French: Tout le monde peut se tromper, dit le hérisson (confus) en
descendant d’une [de la] brosse (à chaussure/à habits/à cheveux). <
Tout le monde peut se tromper.

15.6 Types of Proverb Alterations

Although proverb transformations arise in a variety of forms, several
types stand out. There are a number of mechanisms of proverb
variation (which are by no means mutually exclusive), e.g., replacing a
single word; substituting two or more words; changing the second part
of the proverb; adding a tail to the original text; adding literal
interpretations; punning; word-repetition; melding two proverbs;
word-order reversal; etc. The most common mechanisms will be
demonstrated separately here, with some representative examples.190
Very popular are such proverb parodies that pervert the basic
meaning of a proverb by simply replacing a single word: He who
hesitates is constipated (< He who hesitates is lost.). The authors of our
anti-proverbs very o en try to nd a word phonologically similar to the
one from the original proverb, as in the following examples:
Matrimony is the root of all evil (< Money is the root of all evil.); Hair
today, gone tomorrow (< Here today, gone tomorrow.). Of particular
interest are such proverb transformations in which only one letter of
the alphabet is changed, added or omitted: A good beginning is half the
bottle (< A good beginning is half the battle.); The best things in life are
fee (< The best things in life are free.); Strike while the irony is hot (<
Strike while the iron is hot.).
Another characteristic mechanism of proverb parody is the
substitution of two words which appeared to the coiners of our
examples not tting their own observations of human life. As Mieder
(1989b: 241) points out, proverbs that possess binary structures
(Dundes, 1975) have become especially popular formulas on which to
base multiple proverb variations, as for example One X is worth a
thousand Y’s, Where there’s X, there’s Y, One man’s X is another man’s
Y, An X a day keeps the Y away, A(n) X in the hand is worth Y in the
bush, An ounce of X is worth a pound of Y and Di erent X’s for di erent
Y’s. Many anti-proverbs are based on linguistic structures that remain
the same even as slight verbal changes introduce dramatically new
images and ideas. The proverb One man’s meat is another man’s
poison, which is among the most popular proverbs for this kind of
variation, is simply reduced to the pattern One man’s X is another
man’s Y, and X and Y can be substituted by whatever variables are
necessary in the context. To illustrate it, let us refer to the three
examples below: One man’s Claire is another man’s a air; One man’s
drive is another man’s funeral; One man’s Jill is another man’s thrill.
Typical proverb parodies of this sort based on the proverb An apple a
day keeps the doctor away are A joint a day keeps reality away; A laugh
a day keeps the psychiatrist away; An e ort a day keeps failure away.
Other examples of this mechanism of proverb alteration include:
Widows rush in where spinsters fear to tread (< Fools rush in where
angels fear to tread); A so drink turneth away company (< A so
answer turneth away warth.). Again, phonologically similar words are
very o en chosen for this purpose, as for example in the proverb
alterations below: Taste makes waist (< Haste makes waste.); A brain is
no stronger than its weakest think (< A chain is no stronger than its
weakest link.).
Very frequent are such anti-proverbs in which the second part of
the proverb is entirely changed. One of the most popular proverbs for
this type of variation in T. Litovkina and Mieder’s anti-proverb
collection of Anglo-American anti-proverbs (2006) is If at rst you don’t
succeed, try, try again which has generated the second largest number
of parodies (65). Here are only three of them: If at rst you don’t
succeed, blame it on your wife; If at rst you don’t succeed, do it the way
your wife told you; If at rst you don’t succeed – you are red. Proverbs
o en exploited for this type of alteration are also: Behind every
successful man there is a woman; Early to bed, early to rise, makes a
man healthy, wealthy and wise; Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow
we may die; and People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
Examples reworking these proverbs include: Behind every successful
man is a woman complaining she has nothing to wear; Early to bed,
early to rise doesn’t make a girl a friend of the guys; Eat, drink, and be
merry, for tomorrow you may not be able to a ord it; People who live in
glass houses should screw in the basement.
Many proverb transformations keep the actual text of the proverb
without any change, adding new words, or a tail to it. Evan Esar calls
this type of twisted proverbs “the extended proverb” (Esar, 1952: 201).
It is amazing with what ease some proverbs (e.g., Half the world doesn’t
know how the other half lives) have been extended into a great number
of twists of this kind: Half the world doesn’t know how the other half
lives – and it’s none of its business; Half the world doesn’t know how the
other half lives, but it has its suspicions; Half the world doesn’t know
how the other half lives on the husband’s salary. The extended type of
proverb variation and parody can also be clearly shown through
wellerisms. Wellerisms, named for Charles Dickens’ character Samuel
Weller, are particularly common in the USA, Great Britain and Ireland
(Carson Williams, 2002, 2007; Mieder, 1982b, 1989b: 223–238; Mieder &
Kingsbury, 1994). This proverbial formulation is normally made up of
three parts: 1) a statement (which o en consists of a proverb or
proverbial phrase), 2) a speaker who makes this remark, and 3) a
phrase that places the utterance into an unexpected, contrived
situation. The meaning of the proverb is usually distorted by being
placed into striking juxtaposition with the third part of the wellerism.
In this way a wellerism o en parodies the traditional wisdom of
proverbs by showing the disparity between the wisdom of the proverb
and actual reality (Mieder 1989b: 225). Observe, for example: “Out of
sight, out of mind,” said the warden as the escaped lunatic disappeared
over the hill (Out of sight, out of mind.); “Tough luck,” said the egg in
the monastery, “out of the frying pan into the friar.” (< Out of the frying
pan into the re.).
According to Shirley Arora, metaphor is one of the most e ective
indicators of proverbiality (Arora, 1984: 12). Metaphor is one of the
most common devices (among personi cation, hyperbole, etc.) which
helps to achieve gurativeness in proverbs.191 It belongs to the most
powerful markers of proverbiality,192 and it is exactly this vivid
imagery of many proverbs which makes them so appealing to us. Thus,
metaphorical proverbs are remarkably common and typically used
metaphorically. In numerous anti-proverbs in our material, however,
the meaning of a metaphorical proverb is narrowed by putting it in a
context in which it is to be interpreted literally, i.e., the literal-
metaphorical relationship is exploited, to wit the following proverb
transformations: When one door shuts, another opens...which means
that you live in a dra y house (When one door shuts, another opens.);
“No friend like a bosom friend,” as the man said when he pulled out a
louse (< No friend like a bosom friend.); A bird in hand is probably
contaminated with salmonella (< A bird in hand is worth two in the
bush.).
 While talking about various forms of proverb alteration, we have to
mention one of the most popular humorous techniques created
through puns.193 Numerous proverbs in our material have provided
good models for exploiting ambiguity through the use of a single word
that is polysemous (i.e., having two meanings) or two words that are
homonymous (i.e., having identical graphemic and phonemic
representation), thus creating comic surprise with unforeseen links
between words or ideas. According to Victor Raskin:
For many speakers, the mere exposure to a homonymous or polysemous word or
phrase constitutes an irresistible temptation to make a joke. ... It is the easy
availability of puns which makes them a cheap and somewhat despicable type of
humor for many individuals and social groups. However, the same factor prevents
them from disappearing, and every new generation goes through many cycles of
discovering the puns, getting tired of them, rejecting them and eventually
rediscovering them again. (Raskin, 1985: 116)

Certain ambiguous words have become real favorites of punsters in our

material, as the word will in the proverb Where there’s a will, there’s a
way: Where there’s a will, there’s an inheritance tax; Where there’s a will
– there’s a delay; Where there’s a will there’s a wait; Where there’s a will
there’s a won’t. In the following three anti-proverbs the word lie
(deceive) is opposed to the lie (be found, exist): Figures don’t lie –
except on the beach (< Figures don’t lie.); As you have made your bed,
why lie about it? (< As you have made your bed, lie in it.); Truth lies at
the bottom of a well, but if it lies, how can it be the truth? (< Truth lies at
the bottom of a well.). The list of polysemeous or homonymous words
employed in our anti-proverbs could be extended beyond the limits of
patience: time, shot, rod, blood, miss, bridge, and port are only a few of
them. Some examples include: “How time ies,” as the monkey said
when it threw the clock at the missionary (< Time ies.); Blood will tell:
nobody criticizes your faults quicker than your relatives (< Blood will
tell.); Any port in a storm – preferably expensive port (< Any port in a
storm.).
One meaning of an ambiguous word may be risqué or indecorous.
Anti-proverbs of this type, which combine a sexual meaning with a
non-sexual one, present examples of double entendre in its strictest
sense. The humor of many proverb parodies is based upon the
incongruous use of the vulgar or taboo word, as well as on the contrast
between an innocent text of a proverb and the sexually-loaded
reinterpretation of it: A cock in the hand is worth two in the pants (< A
bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.); Buggers can’t be choosers
(Beggars can’t be choosers.). In order to understand the numerous
puns quoted in this chapter and in the collections of Anglo-American
anti-proverbs it is essential to know an array of slang terms and
euphemisms for sex organs (e.g., bush for female genitalia or pubic
hair; cock, meat, rod, prick or yard for penis; balls for testicles), for
masturbation (jack o , pull o , in the hand), for ejaculation (come,
shoot), for sexual intercourse (to go to bed, to screw), for homosexual
male (fairy, gay, queer, bugger), and so on.
Word-repetition is a very common device not only in proverbs194
but in antiproverbs as well. The following examples represent such
word duplication: The man who lives by bread alone, lives alone (< Man
doesn’t live by bread alone.); Opportunity knocks but last night a knock
spoiled my opportunity (< Opportunity knocks but once.). The use of
triplication and quadruplication is less o en encountered among our
examples than simple duplication: “Every little helps,” said Mr. Little
and took the six little Littles out to help him saw a pile of wood (< Every
little helps.); such proliferation normally occurs when the original text
of the proverb itself also contains duplication: There’s no fool like an
old fool who marries a young fool (< There’s no fool like an old fool.).
The mixing of two proverbs (contamination) is also a very popular
technique in our material. In about half of the cases of this technique,
the beginning of one proverb is combined with the ending of another
proverb, without any further change: A penny saved gathers no moss (<
A penny saved is a penny earned; A rolling stone gathers no moss.);
Necessity is the mother of strange bedfellows (< Necessity is the mother
of invention; Politics makes strange bedfellows.). Other examples of
proverb contamination are: Behind every successful man is a sh with a
bicycle (< Behind every successful man there is a woman; A woman
without a man is like a sh without a bicycle.); A sleeping dog never bites
(< Let sleeping dogs lie; A barking dog never bites.); Two in a bush is the
root of all evil (< A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush; Money is
the root of all evil.).
 Word-order reversal is also a relatively common technique of
proverb transformation in our corpus: Better never than late (< Better
late than never.); Happiness can’t buy money (< Money can’t buy
happiness.); The hand that rules the cradle rocks the world (< The hand
that rocks the cradle rules the world.).
As opposed to the frequent change of the second part of proverbs,
the change of their rst part is relatively rare: A patient without health
insurance keeps the doctor away (< An apple a day keeps the doctor
away.). Similarly, in contrast to the frequent expansion of proverb
texts, it is quite rare to drop o part of a proverb (e.g., to omit (the last)
word(s) of the source proverb). We can call these proverbs truncated or
clipped: Familiarity breeds (< Familiarity breeds contempt.); Beauty is
only skin (< Beauty is only skin deep).
Many proverb alterations simultaneously employ several methods
of variation discussed before. The following example of a sexual
proverb parody illustrates the variety of forms that proverbial variation
can assume: One orgasm in the bush is worth two in the hand (One bird
in the hand is worth two in the bush.). This anti-proverb displays the
word-order reversal (bush and hand), double entendre (while bush is
here a euphemism for the vagina or pubic hair, in the hand implies
masturbation), and the replacement of bird by orgasm.
In the vast majority of the proverb transformations in our corpus,
the structure of the original proverb is maintained. Sometimes,
however, the authors of proverb alterations, in order to t their modern
needs, twist a proverb so dramatically that only a few words survive
from the original text – or until the structure of the parent proverb is
completely rearranged. Consider examples such as: The only golden
thing that some women dislike is silence (< Silence is golden.); The
noblest of all animals is the dog, and the noblest of all dogs is the
hotdog. It feeds the hand that bites it (< Don’t bite the hand that feeds
you.). As Mieder (1993c: 121) states, “Mere proverb allusions run the
risk of not being understood, even if they refer to very common
proverbs. Nevertheless, such lack of communication is rather rare
among native speakers...” Indeed, the person who does not acquire
competence in using proverbs will not understand anti-proverbs,
which presuppose a familiarity with traditional prov.erbs. However,
parodies like the ones above might be completely unrecognizable to a
foreigner. This is one more reason why anyone wishing to
communicate or read in a language should have an active knowledge
of its most popular proverbs. Like proverbs, anti-proverbs can provide
an especially e ective pedagogical medium for the teacher of a foreign
or native language (for more on incorporation of anti-proverbs in the
language classroom, see Forgács, 1997b; T. Litovkina 2004, 2005: 120–
141; T. Litovkina & Mieder, 2006: 36–45; Tóthné Litovkina, 1996, 1998,
1999c; Walter, 2001).

15.7 Themes Treated in Proverb Transformations

There is hardly a topic that anti-proverbs do not address. As Mieder
states, “Just as proverbs continue to comment on all levels and
occurrences in our daily life, so do anti-proverbs react by means of
alienating and shocking linguistic strategies to everything that
surrounds us” (Mieder, 1989b: 244). Among the themes treated in
Anglo-American proverb alterations are sexuality, women, professions
and occupations, money, love, marriage, divorce, friendship,
education and learning, alcohol and drugs, children and parents,
taxes, God and religion, telephones, cars and computers (for a more
detailed analysis of themes treated in Anglo-American proverbs, see T.
Litovkina, 2005: 87–119; T. Litovkina & Mieder, 2006: 17–26).
Numerous texts of anti-proverbs are sexually oriented (for more on
techniques of creating sexual proverb parodies and themes in sexual
proverb variation, see T. Litovkina, 2005: 87–99, 2011c; T. Litovkina &
Mieder, 2006: 26–29; Tóthné Litovkina 1999a, 1999b). Plenty of proverb
parodies relate to sexual intercourse: People who live in glass houses
should screw in the basement (< People who live in glass houses should
not throw stones). Many anti-proverbs depict or speak of kissing: A kiss
is as good as a smile (< A miss is as good as a mile.). One common
subject of anti-proverbs is oral-genital intercourse (fellatio and
cunnilingus): Cunnilingus is next to godliness (< Cleanliness is next to
godliness.); Sucking a cock every day keeps the doctor away (< An apple
a day keeps the doctor away.). Orgasm is a pervasive theme in a
number of proverb alterations: Christmas comes, but once a year’s
enough (< Christmas comes once a year.). Female or male body parts,
particularly vagina, breasts, testicles, penis, and anus are mentioned
or alluded to in a number of alterations: The penis is mightier than the
sword (< The pen is mightier than the sword.). A striking proportion of
antiproverbs refers to adultery: Love thy neighbor, but make sure her
husband is away (< Love thy neighbor as thyself.). Numerous anti-
proverbs from our material conjure up images of homosexuality: One
man’s meat is another man’s perversion (< One man’s meat is another
man’s poison.). Proverb transformations discuss a number of other
sexual themes, e.g., the contraceptive pills, condoms, sexually
transmitted diseases, bigamy, pornography, erection, libido, chastity,
masturbation, sexual relations with animals, sexual orgies and three-
person sexual liaisons, conception and birth etc.
Like traditional Anglo-American proverbs in general (e.g., Women
and dogs cause too much strife; Women are the devil’s net; Women are
the root of all evil), many proverb parodies in our corpus are
antifeminist and demeaning to women. Hostility toward women is very
prominent in the following transformations that rework one of the
most widespread anti-feminist proverbs in the English language, A
woman’s place is in the house: The male was made to lie and roam, but
woman’s place is in the home. There are many anti-proverbs reducing
women to the status of sex objects: Behind every good moan – there’s a
woman (< Behind every good man – there’s a woman.); The breasts on
the other side of the fence look greener (< The grass on the other side of
the fence looks greener.). Other stereotyping proverb transformations
portray women as promiscuous or lustful: The way to a man’s heart
may be through his stomach, but a pretty girl can always nd a detour (<
The way to a man’s heart is through his stomach.). A number of anti-
proverbs depict women as stupid, talkative and stubborn: Where
there’s a woman, there’s a way – and she usually gets it (< Where there’s
a will, there’s a way.); Woman’s work is never done, probably because
she can’t get o the telephone long enough to do it (< Woman’s work is
never done.). Many additional anti-proverbs portray females as vain
and materialistic: Blondes prefer gentlemen with money (< Gentlemen
prefer blondes.); Man proposes and the girl weighs his pocketbook and
decides (< Man proposes, God disposes.). The overwhelming majority of
Anglo-American anti-proverbs depicting women in a role deal with
women as wives. One of the most deep-rooted stereotypes is that of the
quarrelsome, stupid, demanding, manipulating, nosy and bossy
woman: A man’s castle is his home, and his wife has the keys to all the
rooms (< A man’s home is his castle.); The early bird gets up to serve his
wife breakfast in bed (< The early bird gets the worm.); ’Tis better to
have loved and lost than to marry and be bossed (< ’Tis better to have
loved and lost than to have never loved at all.). Another object of
ridicule in our corpus is the omnipotent mother-inlaw, who is
uniformly depicted as a man’s enemy: No man is a hero to his mother-
inlaw (< No man is a hero to his wallet.); When mother-in-law comes in
at the door, love ies out the window (< When poverty comes in at the
door, love ies out the window.). The gures of spinster and widow are
also frequently ridiculed in our material. Unlike the male bachelor, the
female spinster is treated as a person who is unhappy and unful lled;
similarly, widows are more admirable than spinsters because the
former were once married and more likely to marry again: Spinsters live
longer than married women because where there’s hope there’s life (<
Where there’s life there’s hope.) (for more on women in Anglo-American
anti-proverbs, see T. Litovkina, 2005: 100–106; 2011b; T. Litovkina &
Mieder, 2006: 29–31).
There is a wide range of professions and occupations depicted in
our material (for more on professions and occupations addressed in
Anglo-American anti-proverbs, see T. Litovkina, 2005: 107–112; T.
Litovkina & Mieder, 2006: 31–33). Without any doubt, the lawyer is the
most popular target of humor in our anti-proverbs (for more on lawyers
treated in Anglo-American anti-proverbs, see T. Litovkina, 2005: 107–
112, 2011a: 82–96). The greatest anger and irritation are directed at the
cost of lawsuits, the high income of lawyers, and their greed: Crime
pays – be a lawyer (< Crime doesn’t pay.); Practice makes perfect, but
with lawyers it is more likely to make them rich (< Practice makes
perfect.). The havoc created by an ignorant lawyer is a common theme.
Just observe the examples reworking the popular proverbs Ignorance of
the law is no excuse and Necessity knows no law: Ignorance of the law
excuses no man – from practicing it; Necessity knows no law, and
neither does the average lawyer. Politicians receive almost the same
treatment as lawyers; their portrait is also very un attering: In politics
the choice is constantly between two evils (< Between two evils choose
the least.); Politics makes strange bad fellows (< Politics makes strange
bad fellows.). Qualities most o en ridiculed in politicians are
corruption and dishonesty: A politician is known by the promises he
doesn’t keep (< A man is known by the company he keeps.); Figures don’t
lie, except political gures (< Figures don’t lie.) (for more on the gure of
politician in Anglo-American anti-proverbs, see T. Litovkina, 2013).
A er lawyers and politicians, doctors are among the most frequent
targets for fun in our material. The most irritable qualities in doctors –
ignorance and greediness – are identical to those in lawyers. In the two
examples below, lawyers and doctors are even brought together: The
lawyer agrees with the doctor that the best things in life are fees (< The
best things in life are free.); Advice is cheap...except when you consult a
doctor or lawyer or tax accountant (< Advice is cheap.).

15.8 Background of Research

Although the collection and the study of anti-proverbs nationally and
internationally have begun a while ago, both pursuits are becoming
increasingly popular in the eld of paremiology and paremiography.
Indeed, just thirty-one years have passed since the rst collection of
German anti-proverbs was published (Mieder, 1982a). The rst such
collection in the English language, the book Twisted Wisdom: Modern
Anti-Proverbs, written by Wolfgang Mieder in cooperation with Anna
Tóthné Litovkina, was published only 14 years ago (see Mieder &
Tóthné Litovkina, 1999195).
In Europe and North America the genre of transformed proverbs is
becoming more and more popular, especially due to the mass media
and the Internet. In fact, one may easily believe that the Century of the
Anti-Proverb is now in progress. Consider the following catalogue of
anti-proverb collections that have seen print, as well as panels on anti-
proverbs presented at conferences, during the last decade. In the
course of 2005, four anti-proverb collections were published, including
the rst two to appear in Hungarian („Viccében él a nemzet”. Magyar
közmondás-paródiák [“The Nation Lives in Its Jokes”: Hungarian
Proverb Parodies] (see T. Litovkina & Vargha, 2005b)196 and „Éhes diák
pakkal álmodik”. Egyetemisták közmondás-elváltoztatásai [“A Hungry
Student Dreams about a Parcel”: Twisted Proverbs of Students] (see T.
Litovkina & Vargha, 2005a)197 by Anna T. Litovkina and Katalin
Vargha). Also, a collection of Russian antiproverbs and aphorisms
(Антипословицы русского народа by Harry Walter and Valerij
Mokienko, see Walter & Мokienko, 2005) was published in St.
Petersburg, and a new German collection (Besser Arm dran als Bein ab:
Anti-Sprichwörter und ihresgleichen by Erika Gossler, see Gossler, 2005)
saw print in Vienna.
The year 2006 began with the publication of a new collection of
Russian antiproverbs (Прикольный словарь (антипословицы и
антипоговорки) by Harry Walter and Valerij Mokienko (see Walter &
Мokienko, 2006), as well as the appearance of the second collection of
Anglo-American anti-proverbs, titled Old Proverbs Never Die, They Just
Diversify: A Collection of Anti-Proverbs by Anna T. Litovkina and
Wolfgang Mieder (see T. Litovkina & Mieder, 2006198).
In the course of 2006 two conferences held in Hungary featured
panels on antiproverbs: the XVI. Hungarian Congress of Applied
Linguistics Nyelvi modernizáció – Szaknyelv, fordítás, terminológia
[Language Modernization – Professional Language, Translation,
Terminology] held at Szent István University (Gödöllő, Hungary, April
10–12, 2006); the International Conference Disciplinary and
Interdisciplinary Phraseology held at the Pannonian University of
Veszprém (Veszprém, Hungary, June 9–11, 2006) (for more on the
panels, see T. Litovkina, 2007b: 3–16).
In 2007 a special issue of Acta Ethnographica Hungarica on Anti-
Proverbs in Contemporary Societies saw print in Budapest. The issue,
co-edited by Anna T. Litovkina and Carl Lindahl, and published in four
languages (English, German, French and Russian) contains 10 articles
and 12 reviews by 16 contributors199.
Clearly, anti-proverb research has been experiencing a boom in the
last three decades. Moreover, this new eld has become a gold mine
not only for individual paremiologists and paremiographers, but
particularly for researchers working in pairs, based on the principle
expressed in the proverb Two heads are better than one (especially if
they are anti-proverbialists’ heads).
 Thus, German-born Wolfgang Mieder and Russian-born Anna T.
Litovkina have assembled two compilations of Anglo-American anti-
proverbs (T. Litovkina & Mieder, 2006; Mieder & Tothné Litovkina,
1999), and they have also co-authored a monograph, one chapter of
which focuses on Hungarian and Anglo-American anti-proverbs (T.
Litovkina & Mieder, 2005: 150–176).
A productive anti-proverb collaboration in the eld of Russian anti-
proverbs has occurred between V. M. Mokienko from Russia and Harry
Walter from Germany (Walter & Mokienko, 2005, 2006).
Anna T. Litovkina and Katalin Vargha from Hungary have
undertaken a number of anti-proverb projects together. One of them
was to collect Hungarian anti-proverbs. Now their corpus of anti-
proverbs includes over 7,000 examples, some of which have already
been published in anti-proverb collections (see T. Litovkina & Vargha,
2005a, 2005b, 2006). Vargha and T. Litovkina have also written a
number of co-authored articles analyzing various types of
transformation and humour devices in Hungarian anti-proverbs (T.
Litovkina & Vargha, 2009, 2012; Vargha & T. Litovkina, 2007b). The co-
authors have also conducted a survey exploring popular views of
proverbs and anti-proverbs in contemporary Hungarian society (for a
more detailed analysis of the results of their survey, see T. Litovkina &
Vargha, 2009; T. Litovkina, Vargha & Boronkai, 2012; Vargha & T.
Litovkina, 2007a).200
Anna T. Litovkina and Dóra Boronkai from Hungary have
conducted socio-linguistic surveys in the USA and Hungary (see
Boronkai & T. Litovkina, 2007, 2009, 2010; T. Litovkina & Boronkai,
2009, 2011; T. Litovkina, Vargha & Boronkai, 2012). The main purpose
of the surveys was to employ the methods of correlational and
quantitative sociolinguistics to assess how age and sex (in case of
Hungarian respondents, educational level as well) in uence the
appreciation of humor in anti-proverbs.201 Following T. Litovkina and
Boronkai’s line of research, Bulgaria-born researcher residing in
Hungary, Hrisztalina Hrisztova-Gotthardt, Melita Aleksa Varga from
Croatia and Anna T. Litovkina have analyzed the reception of humour
of anti-proverbs in Germany, Austria and Switzerland (see Aleksa,
Hrisztova-Gotthardt & T. Litovkina, 2009, 2010; Hrisztova-Gotthardt,
Aleksa & T. Litovkina, 2009).
Apart from the productive partnerships already mentioned, other
scholarly teams have recently formed to conduct various anti-proverb
projects (in particular, comparative studies concentrating on anti-
proverbs in di erent languages and social and cultural contexts).
Thus, a group residing in Hungary, consisting of Anna T. Litovkina,
Katalin Vargha, Péter Barta and Hrisztalina Hrisztova-Gotthardt, has
been working on the types of alteration and humour devices most
frequently employed in Anglo-American, German, French, Russian
and Hungarian anti-proverbs (see Barta, T. Litovkina, Hrisztova-
Gotthardt et al., 2008, 2009a, 2009b; Hrisztova-Gotthardt, T. Litovkina,
Vargha et al., 2009; T. Litovkina, Vargha, Barta et al., 2007, 2008;
Vargha, T. Litovkina, Barta et al., 2007; etc.).
Naturally, many other important questions connected with anti-
proverbs could have been touched here as well, but it would have
stretched the length of the chapter past the limits of patience.

15.9 Summary
As the numerous examples quoted in the chapter show, anti-proverbs
respect nobody. Nothing is too valuable or sacrosanct to avoid
exposure to proverbial ridicule. Antiproverbs may contain elements
not only of funniness, but also of o ensiveness, hostility, and
aggression directed toward various social groups, including women,
homosexuals, people of di erent professions, and so on. The sensitive
and controversial topics of anti-proverbs may make them “one man’s
meat and another man’s poison”, a rming the truth of what William
Shakespeare tells us in “Love’s Labour’s Lost” (V, 2):
A jest’s prosperity lies in the ear
Of him that hears it, never in the tongue
Of him that makes it...

As it was pointed out in the introduction to their second collection of

Anglo-American anti-proverbs:
 In fact, the “anti” component in the term “anti-proverb” is not directed against
the concept of “proverb” as such. Proverbs and their wisdom continue to be of
much value and relevance in modern society. But some so-called anti-proverbs
have become new proverbs with their own wisdom that is perfectly appropriate
for the modern age (T. Litovkina & Mieder, 2006: 5).

Since proverbs are considered by many of us sacrosanct, their

reinterpretation in innovative ways can create humor. We laugh at
some anti-proverbs because they skew our expectations about
traditional values, order, and rules. We are, however, sometimes struck
by the absurdity of some situations portrayed in proverb parodies,
especially when they rely purely upon linguistic tricks employed for
the sole purpose of making punning possible. Very o en, however,
anti-proverbs move beyond the realm of fun and wordplay to
commenting on important aspects of society, e.g., AIDS, education,
politics, work, love, sex, money, air-pollution, etc. As Mieder points
out, “In this respect even the anti-proverbs become moralistic if not
didactic statements to a degree...” (Mieder, 1989b: 243). As Mieder
states elsewhere:
These alterations of existing proverbs might be mere humorous wordplay, but
more o en than not such anti-proverbs represent a critical reaction to the
worldview expressed in seemingly antiquated proverbs.…The juxtaposition of the
traditional proverb text with an innovative variation forces the reader into a more
critical thought process. Whereas the old proverbs acted as preconceived rules,
the modern anti-proverbs are intended to activate us into overcoming the naive
acceptance of traditional wisdom (Mieder, 1993c: 90).

The great abundance of anti-proverbs presented here, as well as the

anti-proverbs being created daily in the contemporary world, de nitely
show that the proverb continues to be used as an e ective means of
communication in our modern society (Mieder, 1989b: 223). And even
if one nds some of the transformations displayed here to be obscene,
vulgar, at, nevertheless, they are the proof of human creativity, and
thus, like traditional proverbs, must be collected and studied by
proverb scholars. As a linguist and a folklorist, I am fully in agreement
with Walter and Mokienko (2005: 4), who stress that modern
paremiologists and paremiographers must not only collect and publish
traditional and new proverbs, but also collect and publish their
transformations and discover their functions and interpret their
meanings in the modern world and its communicative processes.

15.10 Implications for Further Research

Anti-proverbs are, like proverbs themselves, both the most pervasive
and the most elusive of expressions. In everyday life, they are so
common that we seldom remember the rst time that we heard them.
The average American may have heard variants of such twisted sayings
as Money isn’t everything – but it’s way ahead of what’s in second place
(Money isn’t everything.) hundreds of times, but a paremiologist
searching for an example of that expression may have to wait many
months to record it in vivo. Yet written anti-proverbs are all too easy to
collect: currently, omnipresent lists of them circulate on the Internet
and in vernacular published collections. The same situation has
obtained with the parent form, the proverb, for millennia. Classical
and medieval scribes have le us long lists of proverbs: orators and
preachers would memorize them and have to ready to mind for
application in their speeches and sermons. Yet no one today knows
just how and when they were used.
In attempting to bring the study of proverbs as textual phenomena
into harmony with the understanding of proverbs as living speech
acts, we once more follow the lead of Wolfgang Mieder, who states:
(…) it would be a mistake to reduce the phenomenon of anti-proverbs to a mere
linguistic or phraseological matter. There is a de nite folkloric element involved
in all of this that should be part of the discussion. It is not enough to identify
hundreds of anti-proverbs and place them into collections organized according to
the original proverbs followed by the altered texts or thematically by the subjects
and meanings of the anti-proverbs. Scholars must also interpret the use and
function of anti-proverbs in oral and written contexts and re ect upon the
signi cance of this preoccupation with anti-proverbs by the folk themselves.
(Mieder, 2007: 18)

A rich understanding of anti-proverbs requires a concerted melding of

diverse approaches: the lexicographer’s expertise at assembling long
lists from written sources, the linguist’s skill of deciphering and
explicating the grammatical and phonological strategies as work in
the transformations, the sociologist’s strengths of statistical analysis
applied to the various populations and sub-groups that use
antiproverbs, the comparativist’s expertise at assessing cultural
di erences, and the folklorist’s focus on ways in which proverbs live in
everyday oral discourse.
It goes without saying that the all-important initial goal for
paremiographers in the eld of anti-proverbs is collecting and
publishing anti-proverbs in any culture where they ourish, by
following the example of Wolfgang Mieder (T. Litovkina & Mieder,
2006; Mieder, 1982a, 1985, 1989a, 1998, 2003; Mieder & Tóthné
Litovkina, 1999). I refer to the languages already reasonably well
represented by in current collections (English, German, and Russian),
as well as to those in which published research has only just begun
(e.g., French and Hungarian), and to many other tongues in which
anti-proverbs exist but are not yet represented in scholarship.
Another equally exciting goal for future research entails
conducting culturalhistorical analyses of individual proverbs, tracing
their various appearances in the form of anti-proverbs. Models for such
studies are readily available in a number of Wolfgang Mieder’s
publications (see Mieder 1993a, 1993b, and many other of his articles
and books).
A third important task is to compare and contrast the most
common types of proverb transformation in languages other than
those discussed in numerous publications (English, German, French,
Russian, Hungarian and Dutch).
Since proverbial language is said to re ect the system of values and
conventions of a country, it would be useful not only to discuss basic
attitudes presented in anti-proverbs of separate languages (some
analysis of di erent topics in separate languages, in particular,
English, Russian and French, has already been done separately by
Péter Barta, Anna T. Litovkina and Harry Walter202), but also to
conduct cross-cultural studies of topics most frequently treated in anti-
proverbs from di erent languages, in di erent countries.
Following Wolfgang Mieder and Fionnuala Carson Williams’s
research on proverbs in wellerisms (Carson Williams, 2002, 2007;
Mieder, 1982b, 1989b: 223–238; Mieder & Kingsbury, 1994), it would be
an interesting task to examine what proverbs turn up in wellerisms in
many other cultures and languages.
It is also apparent that there are some anti-proverbs with
international distribution. Some of such examples have been already
quoted above. Thus, a very exciting task for the future is to identify
anti-proverbs identical in di erent languages. A very important goal
for further research would be analyzing the processes of creativity
involved in coining and performing anti-proverbs. Methods of folklore
eldwork and cognitive linguistics would be crucial for such studies.
A detailed analysis of the functions of anti-proverbs is also needed.
Thus, an important task for the future is to conduct further socio-
linguistics surveys the main goals of which would be exploring
popular views on anti-proverbs and their functions in contemporary
societies (similar to the study conducted by Katalin Vargha and Anna
T. Litovkina in Hungary, the preliminary results of which have been
already reported, see T. Litovkina & Vargha, 2009; T. Litovkina,
Vargha, & Boronkai, 2012; Vargha & T. Litovkina, 2007a).
Last but not least, another possible future task for researchers
could be to extend Aleksa, Boronkai, Hrisztova-Gotthardt and T.
Litovkina’s methods of evaluating the funniness of anti-proverbs to
cultures other than Hungary, the USA, Germany, Austria and
Switzerland (see Aleksa, Hrisztova-Gotthardt & T. Litovkina, 2009,
2010; Boronkai & T. Litovkina, 2007, 2009, 2010; Hrisztova-Gotthardt,
Aleksa & T. Litovkina, 2009; T. Litovkina & Boronkai, 2009, 2011; T.
Litovkina, Vargha & Boronkai, 2012). Along with analyzing the results
of surveys conducted in each country separately, it would be
interesting to do comparative analysis and to investigate how the
cultures correspond, and how they di er, in humor perception.
The work summarized in this chapter also poses many other
possibilities for future research. Some of the tasks described above (in
particular the ones concentrating on di erent languages and di erent
cultural backgrounds, or involving broader and more interdisciplinary
research projects, e.g., sociological, psychological, textual) require
scholarly teamwork. I encourage scholars of varied languages and
cultural backgrounds, representing di erent scholarly disciplines, to
join the team of enthusiastic anti-proverbialists in our anti-proverb
scholarship.
References
Aleksa, M., Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H. & T. Litovkina, A. (2009). The reception of anti-
proverbs in the German language area. In R. J. B. Soares & O. Lauhakangas (Eds.),
2 Colóquio Interdisciplinar sobre Provérbios – Actas – 2nd Interdisciplinary
Colloquium on Proverbs – Proceedings (pp. 83–98). Tavira: IAP.
Aleksa, M., Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H. & T. Litovkina, A. (2010). Befolyásolható-e a
humorérzékünk? Német antiproverbiumok fogadtatásának értékelése. In A. T.
Litovkina, P. Barta & J. Hidasi (Eds.), A humor dimenziói. A II. Magyar
Interdiszciplináris Humorkonferencia előadásai (pp. 104–110). Budapest: Tinta
Könyvkiadó – BGF Külkereskedelmi Kar.
Arora, Sh. L. (1984). The perception of proverbiality. Proverbium: Yearbook of
International Proverb Scholarship 1, 1–38.
Barta, P. (2005a). La place des proverbes-valises parmi les proverbes détournés
français. In Annales Universitatis Scientiarum Budapestinensis de Rolando Eötvös
nominatae, Sectio Linguistica (pp. 119–132). Budapest: Eötvös Loránd
Tudományegyetem.
Barta, P. (2005b). Au pays des proverbes, les détournements sont rois – Contribution
à l’étude des proverbes détournés du français. Ist part. Paremia 14, 139–152.
Barta, P. (2006a). Au pays des proverbes, les détournements sont rois – Contribution
à l’étude des proverbes détournés du français, IInd part. Paremia. Boletín de
Investigaciones Paremiológicas 15, 57–71.
Barta, P. (2006b). Contamination in French Anti-Proverbs (paper). Disciplinary and
Interdisciplinary Phraseology International conference, organised by the Institute
of German Studies of the Pannonian University of Veszprém (Hungary) and the
European Society of Phraseology (EUROPHRAS). Veszprém, June 9–11, 2006).
Barta, P. (2007a). La nourriture et les boissons dans les proverbes détournés du
français. Acta Ethnographica Hungarica, 52/1, 207–218.
Barta, P. (2007b). Quelques caractéristiques des proverbes-valises du français. Acta
Ethnographica Hungarica, 52/1, 191–206.
Barta P., T. Litovkina, A., Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H. et al. (2008). Paronomázia az
antiproverbiumokban – magyar, angol, német, francia és orosz példákkal. In M.
Daczi, A. T. Litovkina & P. Barta (Eds.), Ezerarcú humor. Az I. Magyar
Interdiszciplináris Humorkonferencia előadásai (pp. 83–97). Budapest: Tinta
Könyvkiadó.
Barta P., T. Litovkina, A., Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H., et al. (2009a). Antiproverbium-
tanulmányok III. Vegyülés a magyar, angol, német, francia és orosz
antiproverbiumokban. Modern Nyelvoktatás XV/1–2, 41–54.
Barta P., T. Litovkina, A., Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H. et al. (2009b). Polysémie,
homonymie et homophonie dans les proverbes détournés – avec des exemples
français, hongrois, anglais, allemands et russes. Acta Ethnographica Hungarica
54/1, 63–75.
Boronkai D. & T. Litovkina, A. (2007). Appreciation of humor in Hungarian anti-
proverbs. Acta Ethnographica Hungarica, 52/1, 105–134.
Boronkai D. & T. Litovkina, A. (2009). Appreciation of humor in Anglo-American anti-
proverbs. In Cs. Földes (Ed.), Phraseologie diszciplinär und interdiszciplinär (pp.
671–682). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Boronkai, D. & T. Litovkina, A. (2010). Az amerikai antiproverbiumok
humorértékelésének szociolingvisztikai vizsgálata. In A. T. Litovkina, P. Barta & J.
Hidasi (Eds.), A humor dimenziói. A II. Magyar Interdiszciplináris
Humorkonferencia előadásai (pp. 111–120). Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó/BGF
Külkereskedelmi Kar.
Carson Williams, F. (2002). Wellerisms in Ireland. Burlington: The University of
Vermont.
Carson Williams, F. (2007). Proverb in Wellerisms. Acta Ethnographica Hungarica
52/1, 177–190.
Dundes, A. (1975). On the structure of the proverb. Proverbium 25, 961–973.
Esar, E. (1952). The humor of humor. New York: Horizon Press.
Forgács, E. (1997a). Proverbiumok a reklám nyelvében. Magyar Nyelv 3, 360–366.
Forgács E. (1997b). Deutschstunde hat Gold im Munde… avagy: elferdített
közmondások az idegen nyelvi és anyanyelvi oktatásban. Módszertani
Közlemények 3, 113–120.
Gossler, E. (2005). Besser Arm dran als Bein ab. Anti-Sprichwörter und ihresgleichen.
Wien: Edition Praesens.
Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H. (2006). Bulgarische Antisprichwörter – Ergebnisse einer
Internetrecherche, in: Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb Scholarship
23, 191–210.
Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H. (2007). Modi zierte bulgarishe Sprichwörter im Lichte der
Pragmatik. Zu den Ergebnissen einer Internetrecherche. Acta Ethnographica
Hungarica 52/1, 219–234.
Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H., Aleksa, M. & T. Litovkina, A. (2009). Antiproverbiumok
fogadtatása német nyelvű területen. In E. Lendvai & R. Wolosz (Eds.),
Translatologia Pannonica I (pp. 239–245). Pécs: BTK.
Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H., Barta, P., T. Litovkina, A. et al. (2007). A bővítés és a szűkítés
mint az antiproverbiumok ferdítési módja – magyar, angol, német, francia és
orosz példákkal. Modern Nyelvoktatás XIII/1, 3–21.
Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H., T. Litovkina, A., Barta, P. et al. (2008). Poliszémia,
homonímia és homofónia az antiproverbiumokban – magyar, angol, német,
francia és orosz példákkal. In M. Daczi, A. T. Litovkina, & P. Barta (Eds.), Ezerarcú
humor. Az I. Magyar Interdiszciplináris Humorkonferencia előadásai (pp. 98–
108). Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó.
Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H., T. Litovkina, A., Vargha, K. et al. (2009). Paronomasie oder
wie ein Sprichwort zum Antisprichwort wird. Acta Ethnographica Hungarica 54/1,
77–94.
T. Litovkina, Anna (2000). A proverb a day keeps boredom away. Szekszárd/Pécs: IPF
Könyvek.
T. Litovkina, A. (2004). Old proverbs never die: Anti-proverbs in the language
classroom. In Cs. Földes (Ed.), Res humanae proverbium et sententiarum: Ad
honorem Wolfgangi Mieder (pp. 295–326). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
T. Litovkina, A. (2005). Old proverbs cannot die: they just fade into paroDY: Anglo-
American anti-proverbs. Habilitációs dolgozat. Budapest: ELTE (manuscript).
T. Litovkina, A. (2006a). A good pun is hard to nd: Punning in Anglo-American anti-
proverbs. In R. Benczes & Sz. Csábi (Eds.), The metaphors of sixty: Papers
presented on the occasion of the 60th birthday of Zoltán Kövecses (pp. 260–270).
Budapest: Department of American Studies, School of English and American
Studies, Eötvös Loránd University.
T. Litovkina, A. (2006b). “На net и суда нет”: Punning in Anglo-American and Russian
anti-proverbs. In А. Бирих & Т. В. Володина (Eds.), Слово в словаре и дискурсе.
Сборник научных статей к 50-летию Харри Вальтера (pp. 556–570).
Москва: ЭЛПИС.
T. Litovkina, A. (2007a). “He who laughs, lasts”: The most common types of
alteration in Anglo-American anti-proverbs. In P. Deutschmann (Ed.), Kritik und
Phrase: Festschri für Wolfgang Eismann zum 65. Geburstag (pp. 761–780).
Wien: Praesens Verlag.
T. Litovkina, A. (2007b). Introduction. Acta Ethnographica Hungarica 52/1, 3–16.
T. Litovkina, A. (2009a). “The pun is mightier than the sword”: Types of punning in
Anglo-American anti-proverbs. In K. J. McKenna (Ed.), The proverbial ‘Pied Piper’:
A Festschri volume of essays in honor of Wolfgang Mieder on the occasion of his
sixty- h birthday (pp. 141–154). New York: Peter Lang.
T. Litovkina, A. (2009b). Paronomasia, homonymy and homophony in Anglo-
American anti-proverbs. In R. J. Soares, & O. Lauhakangas (Eds.), 2 Colóquio
Interdisciplinar sobre Provérbios – Actas – 2nd Interdisciplinary Colloquium on
Proverbs – Proceedings (pp. 275–288). Tavira: IAP.
T. Litovkina, A. (2011a). “Where there’s a will there’s a lawyer’s bill”: Lawyers in
Anglo-American anti-proverbs. Acta Juridica Hungarica 52/1, 82–96.
T. Litovkina, A. (2011b). The nature of women as revealed through Anglo-American
anti-proverbs. In: Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb Scholarship 28,
87–120.
T. Litovkina, A. (2011c). Sexuality in Anglo-American anti-proverbs. In M. Dynel (Ed.),
The pragmatics of humour across discourse domain (pp. 191–213). Pragmatics
and Beyond New Series, Amsterdam: John Benjamins,
T. Litovkina, A. (2013). Politicians in Anglo-American anti-proverbs. In E. Grodzki, Sh.
Rehman, C. Calma & K. Colombo (Eds.), International issues from wars to robots
(pp. 95–109). Linus Publications.
T. Litovkina, A., Barta, P., Hrisztova-Gotthardt, H. et al. (2008a). A szójáték egyes
típusai az antiproverbiumokban – magyar, angol, német, francia és orosz
példákkal. In M. Daczi, A. T. Litovkina, & P. Barta (Eds.), Ezerarcú humor. Az I.
Magyar Interdiszciplináris Humorkonferencia előadásai (pp. 109–122). Budapest:
Tinta Könyvkiadó.
T. Litovkina, A. & Boronkai, D. (2009). „Ahány ház, annyi baj legyen” A magyar
antiproverbiumok humorértékelésének szociolingvisztikai vizsgálata. In T. Gecső
& Cs. Sárdi (Eds.), A kommunikáció nyelvészeti aspektusai (pp. 148–155).
Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó.
T. Litovkina, A. & Boronkai, D. (2011). Appreciation of humor in Anglo-American and
Hungarian anti-proverbs. In A. Witalisz (Ed.), Migration, Narration,
Communication: Cultural Exchanges in a Globalised World (pp. 117–134).
Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
T. Litovkina, A., & Lindahl, C. (Eds.) (2007), Acta Ethnographica Hungarica on Anti-
Proverbs in Contemporary Societies 52/1.
T. Litovkina, A. & Mieder, W. (2005). “A közmondást nem hiába mondják”.
Vizsgálatok a proverbiumok természetéről és használatáról. Budapest: Tinta
Könyvkiadó.
T. Litovkina, A. & Mieder, W. (2006). Old proverbs never die, they just diversify: A
collection of anti-proverbs. Burlington: The University of Vermont – Veszprém:
The Pannonian University of Veszprém.
T. Litovkina, A. & Vargha, K. (2005a). „Éhes diák pakkal álmodik”. Egyetemisták
közmondás-elváltoztatásai. Budapest: privately published.
T. Litovkina, A. & Vargha, K. (2005b). „Viccében él a nemzet”. Magyar közmondás-
paródiák. Budapest: privately published.
T. Litovkina, A. & Vargha, K. (2006). „Viccében él a nemzet”. Válogatott közmondás-
paródiák. Budapest: Nyitott Könyvműhely.
T. Litovkina, A. & Vargha, K. (2009). A magyar antiproverbiumok néhány általános
kérdése és első kérdőíves felmérése. In Tomori Pál Főiskola: Tudományos Mozaik
6/1, 231–258.
T. Litovkina, A. & Vargha, K. (2012). Common types of alteration in Hungarian anti-
proverbs. In A. T. Litovkina, P. Medgyes, J. Sollosy & D. Brzozowska (Eds.),
Hungarian humour (pp. 287–315). Cracow: Tertium Society for the Promotion of
Language Studies.
T. Litovkina, A., Vargha, K., Barta, P. et al. (2007). Most frequent types of alteration in
Anglo-American, German, French, Russian and Hungarian anti-proverbs. Acta
Ethnographica Hungarica, 52/1, 47–104.
T. Litovkina, A., Vargha, K., Barta, P. et al. (2008). Punning in Anglo-American,
German, French, Russian and Hungarian anti-proverbs. Proverbium: Yearbook of
International Proverb Scholarship 25, 249–288.
T. Litovkina, A., Vargha, K. & Boronkai, D. (2012). On two recent sociolinguistic
surveys conducted in Hungary on anti-proverbs. In A. T. Litovkina, P. Medgyes, J.
Sollosy, & D. Brzozowska (Eds.), Hungarian humour (pp. 317–340). Cracow:
Tertium Society for the Promotion of Language Studies.
Mieder, W. (1982a). Antisprichwörter. Band I, Wiesbaden: Verlag für deutsche
Sprache.
Mieder, W. (1982b). Sexual content of German wellerisms. Maledicta 6, 215–223.
Mieder, W. (1985). Antisprichwörter. Band II, Wiesbaden: Gesellscha für deutsche
Sprache.
Mieder, W. (1989a). Antisprichwörter. Band III, Wiesbaden: Quelle & Meyer.
Mieder, W. (1989b). American proverbs: A study of texts and contexts. Bern: Peter
Lang.
Mieder, W., Kingsbury, S. A. & Harder, K. B. (Eds.) (1992). A Dictionary of American
Proverbs. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mieder, W. (1993a). “The only good Indian is a dead Indian”: History and meaning of
a proverbial stereotype. Journal of American Folklore 106, 38–60.
Mieder, W. (1993b). ‘The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence’: An
American proverb of discontent. Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb
Scholarship 10, 151–184.
Mieder, W. (1993c). Proverbs are never out of season: Popular wisdom in the modern
age. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mieder, W. (1998). Verdrehte Weisheiten. Antisprichwörter aus Literatur und Medien.
Wiesbaden: Quelle & Meyer.
Mieder, W. (2003). Wisecracks! Fractured proverbs. Shelburne, Vermont: The New
England Press, Inc.
Mieder, W. (2004). Antisprichwörter und kein Ende Von sprachlichen Eintagsfliegen
zu neuen Sprichwörtern. In Thesaurus Polyglottus et flores quadrilingues:
Festschri für Stanisław Prędota (pp. 243–258). Wrocław.
Mieder, W. (2007). Anti-proverbs and mass communication: The interplay of
traditional and innovative folklore. Acta Ethnographica Hungarica 52/1, 17–46.
Mieder, W. & Kingsbury, S. A. (Eds.) (1994). A Dictionary of wellerisms. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Mieder, W. & Tóthné Litovkina, A. (1999). Twisted wisdom: Modern anti-proverbs.
Burlington: The University of Vermont.
Mignaval, Ph. (2004). Proverbes pour rire – De faux proverbes plus vrais que les
vrais. Paris: Marabout.
Norrick, N. R. (1991). ‘One is none’: Remarks on repetition in proverbs. Proverbium:
Yearbook of International Proverb Scholarship 8, 121–128.
Prędota, S. (1994). Over de vorming van Nederlandse antispreekwoorden.
Neerlandica Wratislaviensia 7, 217–226.
Prędota, S. (1995). Phonische Mittel bei der Bildung niederländischer
Antisprichwörter. In J. Cajot, L. Kremer & H. Niebaum (Eds.). Lingua Theodisca.
Beiträge zur Sprach- und Literaturwissenscha . Jan Goossens zum 60. Geburstag
(pp. 857–861). Münster.
Prędota, S. (2002). Phonische Mittel bei der Bildung von Antisprichwörtern. In D.
Hartmann & J. Wirrer (Eds.). „Wer A sägt, muss auch B sägen“: Beiträge zur
Phraseologie und Sprichwortforschung aus dem Westfälischen Arbeitskreis (pp.
341–349). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.
Prędota, S. (2007). Phonische Mittel bei der Bildung niederländischer
Antisprichwörter im Internet. Acta Ethnographica Hungarica 52/1, 235–244.
Raskin, V. (1985). Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Tóthné Litovkina, Anna (1994). The most powerful markers of proverbiality.
Perception of proverbiality and familiarity with them among 40 Americans.
Semiotische Berichte 1–4, 327–353.
Tóthné Litovkina, Anna (1996). A proverb a day keeps students awake. NovELTy 3/3,
88–96.
Tóthné Litovkina, Anna (1998). An analysis of popular American proverbs and their
use in language teaching. In W. Heissig & R. Schott (Eds.), Die heutige Bedeutung
oraler Traditionen – Ihre Archivierung, Publikation und Index-Erschließung (The
 Present-Day Importance of Oral Traditions: Their Preservation, Publication and
Indexing) (pp. 131–158). Opladen/Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Tóthné Litovkina, A. (1999a). “If you are not interested in being healthy, wealthy and
wise – how about early to bed?” Sexual proverb transformations. Semiotische
Berichte mit Linguistik Interdisziplinär 23/1–4, 387–412.
Tóthné Litovkina, A. (1999b). Spare the rod and spoil the child: sexuality in proverbs,
sayings and idioms. Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb Scholarship
16, 141–165.
Tóthné Litovkina, Anna (1999c). Incorporating of Anglo-American proverbs into the
language classroom. In: Communicationes Academiae Paedagogicae
Szekszardiensis. The Scienti c Publications of Illyés Gyula College of Pedagogy
/IPF/ (pp. 135-150). Szekszárd: IPF Books.
Vargha, K. (2004). Mai magyar antiproverbiumok. (Szakdolgozat, ELTE). Budapest:
ELTE. (manuscript)
Vargha, K. (2005). Nincs új a net alatt. Antiproverbiumok az interneten. In R. I.
Csörsz, J. Gulyás & A. Tóth (Eds.), Mindenes Gyűjtemény II. Tanulmányok Küllős
Imola 60. születésnapjára (pp. 371–388). Budapest: ELTE Folklore Tanszék.
Vargha, K. & T. Litovkina, A. (2007a). Proverb is as proverb does: A preliminary
analysis of a survey on the use of Hungarian proverbs and anti-proverbs, Acta
Ethnographica Hungarica 52/1, 135–155.
Vargha, K. & T. Litovkina, A. (2007b). “Hallgatni Arany, beszélni Pető ”. A magyar
antiproverbiumok ferdítési módjai (formai változatok és nyelvi humor). Magyar
Nyelv 2, 179–199.
Vargha, K., T. Litovkina, A., Barta, P. et al. (2007). A csere mint az antiproverbiumok
ferdítési módja – magyar, angol, német, francia és orosz példákkal. Modern
Nyelvoktatás XIII/2–3, 23–42.
[Walter, H.] Вальтер, Х. (2001). Трансформы русских пословиц как объект
преподавания в иностранной аудитории. In: Материалы ХХХ межвузовской
конференции преподавателей и аспирантов. 11–17 марта 2001 г. Вып. 16.
Русский язык как иностранный и методика его преподавания. Часть 2. Санкт-
Петербург, 3–10.
[Walter, H.] Вальтер, Х. (2004a). Не бывает страшных женщин, бывают трусливые
мужчины. Женщина в русских антипословицах. In Проблемы
фразеологической и лексической семантики. Материалы Международной
научной конференции (Кострома, 18–20 марта 2004 г.) (pp. 92–99). Москва:
ООО “ИТИ Технологии”.
[Walter, H.] Вальтер, Х. (2004b). Образ женщины в русских “антипословицах”. In
M. Aleksiejenkim & M. Kuczyńskiej (Eds.), Słowo. Tekst. Czas VII. środki nominacji
w nowej Europie. Новые средства номинации в новой Европе. Neue
Phraseologie im neuen Europa. Materiały VII Miedzynarodowej Konferencji
Naukowej (Szczecin 21–23 listopada 2003 r.). (pp. 327–338).
Szczecin/Greifswald.
[Walter, H.] Вальтер, Х. & Мокиенко, В. (2001). “Пословицы русского
субстандарта” (Материалы к словарю). Greifswald: Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-
Universität für Slawisktik.
[Walter, H.] Вальтер, Х. & Мокиенко, В. (2005). Антипословицы русского народа.
Caнкт Петербург: Heва.
[Walter, H.] Вальтер, Х. & Мокиенко, В. (2006). Прикольный словарь
(антипословицы и антипоговорки). Caнкт-Петербург: Heва.
[Walter, H.] Вальтер, Х. & Мокиенко, В. (2007). Русскиe aнтипословицы и их
лексикографическое описание. Acta Ethnographica Hungarica, 52 (1), 157–175.

185 All the texts of Anglo-American anti-proverbs quoted here can also be found in
two collections of Anglo-American anti-proverbs compiled by Wolfgang Mieder and
Anna T. Litovkina (T. Litovkina & Mieder, 2006; Mieder & Tóthné Litovkina, 1999).
186 German-language anti-proverbs quoted in the chapter come from collections
compiled by Wolfgang Mieder (1982a, 1985, 1989a, 1998) and Erika Gossler (2005), as
well as from an unpublished collection of anti-proverbs from the Internet compiled
by Hrisztalina Hrisztova-Gotthardt in 2005–2006. The French examples are quoted
from Péter Barta’s corpus of over 1,800 French anti-proverbs, the vast majority of
which include items from the Internet, as well as from a tiny collection of French
anti-proverbs (Mignaval 2004). The Russian texts can be found with references to
their sources (primarily, the Internet) in two anti-proverb collections compiled by
Harry Walter and Valerij Mokienko (see Walter & Мokienko, 2001, 2005). Hungarian
anti-proverbs quoted here were recorded by Anna T. Litovkina and Katalin Vargha
and come from their corpus of over 7,000 Hungarian anti-proverbs, some of which
have already been published (see T. Litovkina & Vargha, 2005a, 2005b, 2006).
187 The terms from the German language have been supplied by Hrisztalina
Hrisztova-Gotthardt, and those from the French by Péter Barta.
188 The list ( rst pusblished in T. Litovkina, Vargha, Barta, et al., 2007: 52) is based
on Peter Barta’s corpus of over 1,800 French anti-proverbs, which were primarily
located in the Internet, as well as in Mignaval’s collection of anti-proverbs (2004).
189 The texts of French anti-proverbs were supplied by Péter Barta.
190 For detailed analysis of techniques of variation in Anglo-American anti-
proverbs; see T. Litovkina, 2005: 29–86, 2006a, 2007a; T. Litovkina & Mieder, 2006:
17–26; for types of proverb variation in the Hungarian language, see T. Litovkina &
Vargha, 2012; Vargha, 2004; Vargha & T. Litovkina, 2007b; for various techniques in
proverb alteration in the Hungarian and English languages, see T. Litovkina &
Mieder, 2005: 158–176; for types of proverb variation in the French language, see,
Barta, 2005a, 2005b, 2006a, 2006b; for analysis of proverb alteration in Dutch anti-
proverbs, see Prędota 1994, 1995, 2002, 2007; for various techniques in proverb
alteration in the Russian and English languages, see T. Litovkina 2006b; for the types
of alteration and humour devices most frequently employed in Anglo-American,
German, French, Russian and Hungarian anti-proverbs, see Barta, T. Litovkina,
Hrisztova-Gotthardt et al., 2008, 2009a, 2009b; Hrisztova-Gotthardt, Barta, T.
Litovkinaet al., 2007; Hrisztova-Gotthardt, T. Litovkina, Barta et al., 2008; Hrisztova-
Gotthardt, T. Litovkina, Vargha et al., 2009; T. Litovkina, Vargha, Barta et al., 2007,
2008; Vargha, T. Litovkina, Barta et al., 2007; etc.
191 Tóthné Litovkina’s research (1998) has shown that 68.2% of the 151 best-known
American proverbs from the Folklore Archives at University of California at Berkeley
lend themselves to gurative interpretation. By contrast, out of the 102 proverbs from
ve randomly selected pages from “A Dictionary of American Proverbs” (see Mieder
1992), 49% of proverbs have imagery that would lend itself to gurative
interpretation.
192 Such markers can be: certain grammatical or syntactical features (e.g., omission
of the article is a conspicuous and frequent cue in Spanish and Danish proverbs),
semantic markers (e.g., metaphor, parallelism, paradox, irony), lexical markers (e.g.,
archaic or old-fashioned words; quanti ers such as “never”, “always”, “everybody”,
etc.), phonic markers (e.g., rhyme, alliteration, meter), etc. (see Arora, 1984).
193 For a detailed discussion of categories of puns, as well as punning in Anglo-
American antiproverbs, see T. Litovkina, 2005: 55–86, 2006b, 2009a, 2009b; for the
comparative analysis of punning in Russian and Anglo-American anti-proverbs, see
T. Litovkina 2006a; for a comparative study of punning in Anglo-American, German,
French, Russian and Hungarian anti-proverbs, see Hrisztova-Gotthardt, T. Litovkina,
Barta, et al., 2008; T. Litovkina, Barta, Hrisztova-Gotthardt, et al., 2008a; T.
Litovkina, Vargha, Barta, et al., 2008.
194 Word-repetition is very common in American proverbs and has been found in
about a quarter of American proverbs (see Tóthné Litovkina, 1994, 1998), e.g., Do as I
say, not as I do; A penny saved is a penny earned; Fools’ names and fools’ faces o en
appear in public places; A friend in need is a friend indeed; for more on repetition
gures in American proverbs, see T. Litovkina & Mieder, 2005: 94–95; Norrick, 1991.
195 The compilation contains 320 well-known Anglo-American proverbs, their
meanings, references to some of the standard proverb dictionaries, and more than
3,000 transformations. The twisted proverbs were located in dozens of books and
articles on puns, one-liners, toasts, wisecracks, quotations, aphorisms, maxims,
quips, epigrams and gra ti. About 75 illustrations from the mass media are also
included.
196 The book contains about 1,500 anti-proverbs based on 324 original Hungarian
proverbs. While the vast majority of the sources came from the Internet, recent
Hungarian newspapers, ction, and advertisments, some texts were recorded orally.
197 The collection contains over 1,700 proverb parodies based on 287 Hungarian
proverbs. The sources were collected by Anna T. Litovkina’s students attending her
classes on socio-linguistics and folklore at Illyés Gyula College of Education,
University of Pécs (Szekszárd) from their friends, relatives, etc. in 2004–2005; some
were created by them.
198 The second collection of Anglo-American anti-proverbs includes over 5,000 texts
based on 580 traditional Anglo-American proverbs, providing also a much longer
and detailed introduction than the rst compilation.
199 This issue grew principally from two panels on anti-proverb research presented
in Hungary in 2006 and additional contributions written especially for this issue (for
more, see the introduction to the volume, T. Litovkina, 2007b: 7–9). The core
conference presentations expanded for this publication include Dóra Boronkai’s
analysis of the preliminary results of a sociolinguistic survey assessing how age, sex
and education in uence appreciation of humor in Hungarian anti-proverbs. For this
issue the paper was reworked with the help of Anna T. Litovkina (Boronkai & T.
Litovkina, 2007), Péter Barta’s study on proverb blending in French anti-proverbs
(Barta, 2006b, the paper has been translated into French for this special issue (Barta,
2007b), and Katalin Vargha’s discussion of a sociolinguistic survey of popular views
of anti-proverbs and their functions in Hungary (for this issue the study was
reworked with the help of Anna T. Litovkina (Vargha & T. Litovkina, 2007a). In
preparation for publication, two additional works were prepared by individual
scholars from Hungary – Péter Barta’s examination of French anti-proverbs on food
and drinks (Barta, 2007a), and Hrisztalina Hrisztova-Gotthardt’s treatment of
Bulgarian proverbs from the Internet (Hrisztova-Gotthardt, 2007). Also, four co-
authors residing in Hungary (Anna T. Litovkina, Katalin Vargha, Péter Barta, and
Hrisztalina Hrisztova-Gotthardt) pooled their resources to produce an additional
article on the most frequent types of alteration in Anglo-American, German, French,
Russian and Hungarian anti-proverbs (T. Litovkina, Vargha, Barta, et al., 2007). In
addition, four articles by internationally known anti-proverb researchers from
beyond Hungary’s borders were brought into the mix to round out the coverage, so
that this special issue of Acta Ethnographica Hungarica could represent not only the
best Hungarian but the best international anti-proverb research as well: Wolfgang
Mieder (Mieder, 2007) provided an essay on anti-proverbs and mass communication;
Harry Walter and V. M. Mokienko submitted a contribution on Russian anti-proverbs
and their lexicographic description (Walter & Mokienko, 2007); Stanisław Prędota
o ered an exploration of Dutch anti-proverbs from the Internet (Prędota, 2007), and
Fionnuala Carson Williams contributed a study on proverbs in wellerisms (Carson
Williams, 2007).
200 Each participant in the survey received a questionnaire containing 30 questions.
The task of the informants was to respond to 14 questions concerning the use of
proverbs and ten touching upon antiproverbs. Additionally, the questionnaire
contained questions concerning respondents’ gender, age, educational level,
profession, place of residence (county), and type of residence (city/town, village) at
birth and at present. This survey focused on three major questions. First, the authors’
aim was to establish the lists of the proverbs most popular for variation. Their second
goal was to discover our subjects’ thoughts about the use of anti-proverbs, as well as
about their views of the people who use them. Thirdly, they compared what people
say about their own usage of anti-proverbs against what they think about the ways in
which other people use them (for more, see T. Litovkina & Vargha 2009; T. Litovkina,
Vargha & Boronkai, 2012; Vargha & T. Litovkina, 2007a).
201 Each participant in the survey received a list of anti-proverbs (which were
identi ed as “proverb transformations” in English, or “közmondás-paródiák”
[proverb parodies] in Hungarian).The task of respondents was to read the anti-
proverbs and to evaluate each item according to its “rate of funniness,” from 0 to 10
(0 = the least funny, 10 = the most funny). Additionally, participants were asked to
provide minimal personal background information: their sex, age, etc. The survey
focused on three major questions. First, how do sex and age (in Hungarian survey
one more variable was added, educational level) in uence the overall response to the
questionnaires? The second goal was to consider the ways in which di erences of the
variables discussed in the survey in uenced responses to the thematic categories
treated in the anti-proverbs, particularly sexuality, obscenity, males, females, and
family. Finally, the aim of the authors was also to establish and analyze the lists of
the most funny and least funny anti-proverbs (for more, see Boronkai & T. Litovkina,
2007, 2009, 2010; T. Litovkina & Boronkai, 2009; T. Litovkina, Vargha & Boronkai,
2012).
202 Thus, for Anglo-American sexual anti-proverbs, see Tóthné Litovkina, 1999a,
1999b; T. Litovkina, 2005: 87–99, 2011c; for Anglo-American anti-proverbs about
women, see T. Litovkina 2005: 100–106, 2011b; for Anglo-American anti-proverbs
about di erent professions and occupations, see T. Litovkina 2005: 107–114; 2011a,
2013; for French anti-proverbs about food and drinks, see Barta, 2007a; for Russian
anti-proverbs about women, see Walter, 2004a, 2004b.
Glossary of Key Terms Appearing in the
Book
Anti-proverb: An intentionally changed (distorted, twisted, parodied)
proverb with a new meaning and o en a humorous or satirical e ect,
including the possibility of becoming a new proverb.
Aphorism: A literary form like the proverb in its straightforward
memorable formulation as in Art is long, life short.
Asyndetic coordination: The linking of conjoins without the use of
coordinators.
Binomial: Fixed combination of two words linked by a conjunction,
usually by and, and occasionally by or (e.g. law and order, sooner or
later, live and learn, sink or swim, by and by.); the combination of
three words (trinominals) can also be found (e.g. Tom, Dick and Harry;
lock, stock, and barrel).
Catch-phrase: (also called ‘winged words’) Popular phrase that is
connected with a person (for example, a politician, entertainer, literary
character) who used it and made it famous (e.g. Speak so ly and carry
a big stick –Theodore Roosevelt).
Categorization: Categorization is a bit more than mechanical
classi cation according to di erent themes. Proverbs can be classi ed
in many ways and ordering things tells always about your preferences.
Categorization refers to a more scienti c approach than classi cation
for popular proverb collections. It means that the one who categorizes
proverbs has deep knowledge of this genre of folklore and language.
These professionals have generally massive material to categorize and
basic concepts and/or a theory structuring their plan. Categorization is
based on (ethnologic, linguistic, social psychological) concepts and
knowledge in advance of the material to be categorized.
Citation: A larger text sample that contains the search word.
Classical theory of features: The members of the category all share
the same features; all category members have an equal status, and
sharp and rigid boundaries, in terms of necessary and su cient
conditions. Applying it to proverbs, all proverbs have the same
features.
Cle ing: Re-arranging the basic word order of an unmarked sentence,
and fronting constituents, such as nouns, adverbs, and adjectives, to
sentence initial position.
Cliché: Sentence like proverb in terms of forming a complete
utterance, but lacking its traditionality and imagery: The cliché
expresses a trite observation as in Boys will be boys. In paremiology,
analytical clichés, which can have only a concrete and direct overall
meaning (regardless of the possible presence of gures and tropes on
the lexical level) and which do not ask for some extended
interpretation, are distinguished from synthetic clichés, which are
assumed to have an extended (transferred, gurative) overall meaning.
Cognitive Concept: Cognitive concepts are the cognitive (mental)
structures in the mind which represent the outer world mentally and
therefore structure our thoughts (and linguistic actions).
Collocation: The frequent and habitual co-occurrence of words in a
language (e.g. a hard frost [*a strong frost], gain experience [*make
experience]).
Collocation analysis: Automatic method that calculates which words
co-occur more o en than would be expected by chance. There are
several di erent algorithms for collocation analysis.
Comparative approach: This approach aims at showing and
discussing the similarities between pairs of proverbs or groups of
proverb texts in one language, but more o en in two or more
languages. In the latter case it is o en used interchangeably with the
term crosscultural study of proverbs.
Conceptual Metaphor Theory: Revolutionary thesis by George Lako
and Mark Johnson (see Metaphors we live by). Due to this thesis
“metaphor is pervasive in everyday life, not just in language but in
thought and action. Our ordinary conceptual system […] is
fundamentally metaphorical in nature” (Lako & Johnson, 1992:
3;.)203. This new cognitivist approach is centred on the “metaphorical
concept“, usually abbreviated as MC.
Concordance: List of words used in a text, with their immediate
contexts. A concordance can be used to show language patterns.
Connotation: Connotation or connotative meaning is additional, or
secondary, meaning of a word or an expression, which accompanies its
basic (denotative, referential) meaning and adds personal or
emotional associations like for instance appraisal or assessment. The
connotative meaning of a language utterance is only explicable in
context.
Contrastive approach: Comparing proverbs in two or more languages
synchronically or panchronically. This approach aims at explicating
the di erences between a pair of proverbs, or a selection of proverb
texts in two or more languages in relation to a common frame of
reference or agreed-upon criterion (tertium comparationis).
Core set of proverbs: Sample of proverbs which is designated for
paremiological experiments and is based on the expert’s analysis of
dictionaries, proverb collections, texts and direct long term
observation of spoken communication.
Corpus: A collection of written or spoken texts; the corpus data is
digitalized i.e. machine readable and saved on a computer. In addition
to the text data itself, corpora can also contain metadata, which
describe the data, and linguistic annotations (see Lemnitzer &
Zinsmeister, 2010: 8)204.
Counter-proverb: An overt negation or sententious-sounding rebuttal
of a proverb, and explicit denial of the proverb’s asserted truth, with
the chance of becoming a proverb in its own right, like e.g. Flattery will
get you everywhere (versus the older Flattery will get you nowhere.).
Cultureme: An axiologically marked entity or content, explicated
through a semantic transformation of the question-answer kind, e.g.:
What does this linguistic item a rm (i.e., praise, recommend, approve
of, justify, etc.) / deny (i.e., condemn, criticise, disapprove of, ridicule,
etc.)? A cultureme is represented by a noun or a noun phrase.
Concerning proverbs, simple examples of culturemes are knowledge
(+) for the proverb Knowledge is power and haste (–) for Haste makes
waste.
Elocutio: The term has originally been used in classical rhetoric for
describing the style or manner of speaking, especially in public. In
linguistics, elocution refers to the manner of composing a text
according to the intention and situation.
Empirical paremiology: Research of knowledge and familiarity of
proverbs based on demographic research, psycholinguistic
experiments and an extensive analysis of huge corpora. Whereas
earlier research in this direction focused predominantly on the
question of proverb minima, i.e. on the question which proverbs are
known by “all” members of a given culture or society, contemporary
empirical paremiology, in a broader understanding of this concept,
studies which proverbs of a given culture are known in which verbal
form(s) by which members of the given society, and which collective
overlaps and intersections exist with regard to proverb knowledge and
familiarity.
Entailment relationships between metaphors: “The metaphorical
concepts Time is money, Time is a resource, and Time is a valuable
commodity form a single system based on subcategorization, since in
our society money is a limited resource and limited resources are
valuable commodities (…). Time is money entails that Time is a limited
resource, which entails that Time is a valuable commodity” (Lako &
Johnson, 1992: 9, )205.
Epigram: A short poem, o en featuring some ironic or surprising turn
(a wasp with a sting). Typically, as the term implies, an epigram is
imagined by the reader to be written – in contrast to a lyric poem,
imagined to be sung (as to the accompaniment of a lyre).
Epistemology: The theory of knowledge, especially with regard to its
methods, validity, and scope, and the distinction between justi ed
belief and opinion (Oxford Dictionary)206.
False friend: Words and expressions that seem similar in two
languages, but have di erent meanings.
Formula (also called routine formula): Conventionalized utterance
used in recurrent situations (e.g. Many happy returns of the day; Fair
nough).
Generalised proverb type: Some group titles in Matti Kuusi’s
international typesystem of proverbs are like proverbs themselves.
Generalised proverb types can also be called moulds of proverbs. The
word ‘mould’ refers to the process of creating new proverbs or anti-
proverbs. The question is about an attractive and e ective structure or
pair of words that produces several new innovations. This is not a new
phenomenon but a central way for people to develop expressions.
Hapax/nonce proverb: A modi ed proverb that is context bound
and/or o en lacks imagery and has little aesthetic value and impact
potential.
Homonyms: Words having identical graphemic and phonemic
representation, but have di erent meanings, e.g. cut (to separate with
or as if with an instrument) and cut (a wound made by cutting).
Illocutionary act: In pragmatics, the term stands for the actual
purpose of a speech act or in other words, for the intention of the
speaker to perform a communicative e ect on the reader/listener.
Incongruity: Violation of expectation.
KWIC (Key Word In Context): One line of a computer-generated
concordance. The search word is in the centre and some context words
are shown le and right.
L1 (First Language / Language 1): A person’s native language.
L2 (Second Language / Language 2): A person’s second language.
Lingua franca: Any language that is widely used as a means of
communication among speakers of other languages, for example,
Latin in the Middle Ages, Russian in Eastern Europe, or English
throughout the world today.
Linguistic concept: A discrete unit of cognition and the mental
lexicon, expressed in the lexemes and gramemes of the natural
languages. When human beings think, they use concepts. Concepts
underlie notions.
Linguocultural concept: A unit of knowledge and conscience shared
by a large group of people who speak the same language, which has a
xed linguistic form (expression) and is marked by distinct
ethnocultural speci cs.
Loan translation: The direct translation of a word or expression like a
proverb and its acceptance from the original language into the target
language.
Logeme: The summarized, generalized basic meaning of a group of
similar, thematically close proverbs. For example, the English proverbs
Actions speak louder than words, An ounce of practice is worth a pound
of precept, Example is better than precept, and Deeds will show
themselves, and words will pass away are subsumed under the single
logeme Speaking is less e cient than doing.
Maxim: Like the proverb in forming a complete utterance, but lacking
its traditionality and imagery. The maxim states a rule for conduct as
in Never put o till tomorrow what you can do today.
Metacommunication: Communication about communication; the use
of words and wordgroups (e.g. proverbial; so to speak) or typographic
means (e.g. inverted commas; italics) to mark or introduce linguistic
units (such as proverbs) in order to guarantee communicative
adequacy.
Meta-language: Language about language, the language which is
spoken about being called an ‘object language’. Meta-language is an
important issue for paremiology, particularly when a proverb’s
meaning is to be described.
Ornatus: Ornatus is a technical rhetorical term, meaning rhetorical
decoration. It refers to the intentional deviation from the
(conventional) norms by using rhetorical gures and tropes.
Outer access structure: Structure speci ed for accessing the
dictionary articles in a word (lemma) list, with regard to proverb
dictionaries, to nd a proverb or keyword article in the proverb or
keyword list of a dictionary depending on the arrangement of
proverbs.
Parataxis: This term refers to the linking of constructions of the same
grammatical and semantic level through juxtaposition or punctuation,
instead of using formal, either coordinating conjunctions (for, and,
nor, but, or, yet, so) or subordinating conjunctions (although, because,
since, unless).
Paremiological competence: The active and the passive knowledge
of proverbs by an individual in a paremiological experiment.
Paremiological experiment: Prescriptive (passive) or descriptive
(active) test to examine the paremiological competence of informants.
Paremiological minimum: 1. A set of proverbs that all members of
society know; 2. A set of proverbs that an average adult is expected to
know or is to be familiar with; 3. A set of proverbs based on empirical
sociolinguistic research that a speci c group of informants knows or is
familiar with.
Paremiological optimum: A correlated set of the best known
proverbs among speakers and the most frequent proverbs in huge
corpora.
Paremiological performance: The active and the passive overall
knowledge of proverbs by all informants who took part in a
paremiological experiment.
Paremiology: The study of proverbs.
Perlocutionary act: In pragmatics, the term stands for obtaining an
e ect, which goes beyond the illocutionary act, e.g. persuasion,
making angry or insecure, hurting, consoling, praising etc.
Phrasal verb: A combination of a verb and (particle(s) or
preposition(s). It forms a single unit of meaning (e.g. put up with =
‘tolerate’).
Phraseodidactics: Discipline dealing with the teaching of
phraseological units in language instruction.
Phraseology: (1) Set of phraseological units (phrasicon); (2) Field of
study investigating these units.
Phrasicon: The set of phraseological units in the lexicon of a language
community.
Polygenesis: Assumption that expressions have not only one, but
multiple origins. More precisely, that at least a few proverbs might
have originated independently from each other in a number of
languages at di erent times and places.
Pragmatics: Sub eld of linguistics that examines the usage of
utterances in concrete communicative situations and describes which
kinds of speech acts are performed by a speaker. As a semiotic
dimension pragmatics focuses on the relation of signs to interpreters.
More speci cally, pragmatics is that portion of semiotic which deals
with the origin, uses, and e ects of signs within the behavior in which
they occur.
Polysemous word: A word having two or more meanings.
Prototype theory: Members of the category are di erent, with fuzzy
boundaries, better and worse examples, and prototype e ects. Applied
to proverbs, not all proverbs share the same features, there are better
and worse examples for proverbs.
Proverb citation: One type of lexicographic examples, authentic
excerpted text extracts containing proverbs, exemplifying their
meaning and usage, supplied with an abbreviation of the citation
source.
Proverb clustering: Insertion of two or more proverbs (standard or
modi ed) into a non-proverb context, resulting in a blend of proverb
and non-proverb texts.
Proverb collage: An entire text or its structural part(s) composed of
proverbs (standard or modi ed) and/or sometimes other easily
recognized elements, like familiar quotations, proper names,
phraseologisms.
Proverb concept (usually abbreviated as PC): According to
Lewandowska (Lewandowska, 2008)207 proverb concepts are cognitive
concepts, comparable to Lako & Johnson’s metaphorical concepts.
These PCs not only pre-structure our thoughts and actions like
metaphors do, but at the same time they put linguistically catchy
words into our mouth.
Proverb equivalence: Sameness of the lexis, structure and meaning
of pairs or groups of proverbs in two or more languages, e.g., Hurry
slowly (English), Eile mit Weile [Hurry slowly] (German), Festina lente
[Hurry slowly] (Latin).
Proverb keyword: First or most meaningful component of proverbs,
generally the rst noun, adjective or adverb.
Proverb modi cation: Creative deformation of a proverb a ecting its
structure and/or semantics.
Proverb-poem: A poem that has as a principal focus on one or more
proverbs, quoted or alluded to, which the reader is assumed to be
familiar with.
Proverb system: The entire body of proverbs in a language. As
members of a system the proverbs in a language display systemic
relations, e.g., syntagmatic, paradigmatic, synonymy, antonymy, etc.
Proverb type: The concept referring to the Matti Kuusi international
classi cation of proverbs, where it presupposes a concrete proverb title
or a cluster of proverbs having the common idea, and including
proverb variants.
Proverbial comparison: Fixed traditional phrase with as, like or than,
e.g. as brown as a berry, like a house a re and older than the hills.
Proverbial phrase: A traditional, characteristically gurative form,
which cannot stand on its own, for example to kick over the traces,
which lacks a subject.
Proverbial simile: see Simile
Proverbiality: Having the necessary characteristics of a proverb, that
is, currency and traditionality, as well as numerous structural
(formula, parallelism) and poetic (alliteration, rhyme) markers.
Pseudo-proverb: A proverb-like statement invented to resemble a
proverb (having traditional stylistic markers and based on a paremic
structural-semantic model) that may, if repeated over time, become a
new proverb.
Semantics: A semiotic dimension which concentrates on the relations
of signs to the objects to which the signs are applicable, dealing with
the signi cation of signs in all modes of signifying. Paremiological
semantics focuses on the study of how proverb meaning is generated
and how it can be described.
Semiotics: A branch of science which studies signs, or sign systems,
and the processes of sign generation (semiosis) and usage. The
discipline of semiotics is usually subdivided into the three semiotic
dimensions of pragmatics, syntactics, and semantics. Semiotic
paremiology studies the proverb in (at least one of) these aspects from
a semiotic perspective, in its semiotic aspects.
Sign: The representation of an object, or a notion (concept), that
implies a connection between itself and that object. A sign tends to be
regarded either as being part of a sign system, in which a sign is
di erent in at least one aspect from all other signs of that system, or as
the result of some sign generating process. In addition to simple signs,
one also speaks of super-signs, i.e. complex signs, or sign complexes.
In addition to the denotative function of a sign it may also be seen to
include/generate (additional) connotative meaning structures. In
paremiology, a proverb may be seen to be a super-sign, generated on
the basis of more than one simple sign, and it may also be seen as one
complex sign.
Simile (also called stereotyped comparison): Set phrase that compares
something to something else, using the words like or and (e.g. as clear
as crystal, sleep like a log).
Slogan: Non-traditional formulaic unit created to promote a product or
idea as in Nike’s advertising slogan Just do it or Obama’s campaign
slogan Yes, we can.
Speech act: An utterance which has some performative function in
language and communication. O en, a distinction is made between
direct speech acts, when a speaker utters a sentence and means
exactly and literally what s/he says, and indirect speech acts, when a
speaker also utters a sentence, and means what s/he says, but
additionally means something more, or something di erent instead.
More precisely, it is when the speaker communicates to the hearer
more than he actually says by way of relying on their mutually shared
background information, both linguistic and nonlinguistic, together
with the general powers of rationality and inference on the part of the
hearer.
Standard use of proverbs: Application of a proverb in its dictionary
form.
Stylistics: Sub eld of linguistics, the study of linguistic styles, the way
of writing/speaking and the conventions of language use. The
contemporary stylistics describes style as a function- and situation
oriented language use.
Syndetic coordination: The explicit linking of conjoins using
coordinators such as and, or, and but.
Syntactics: A semiotic dimension which is directed towards the formal
relations of signs to one another and which studies the way in which
signs of various classes are combined to form compound signs.
Syntactics thus is broader than the linguistic study of syntax, and it
may concentrate both on the formation of complex super signs and on
the combination of a given sign with other signs. Paremiological
syntactics may comprise both the study of the syntactical formation of
proverbs as super signs from individual signs, or of the relation of
proverbs as (super) signs with other (proverbial) signs.
Syntactic parallelism: A rhetorical device used for the purpose of
emphasis or foregrounding. It involves the contiguous juxtaposition of
syntactically parallel elements of the proverb text – individual lexical
items, phrases, clauses, or sentences – for the purpose of suggesting
analogical relationships or comparisons.
Tertium comparationis: A common, invariable frame of reference or
agreed-upon criterion in relation to which linguistic items are
compared or contrasted, e.g., syntactic pattern, logical type, image,
main idea, proverb meaning, general concept, logeme, cultureme, etc.
Topicalisation: Cle ing a constituent element into sentence initial
position, leaving a gap in the main clause, that it is interpreted as
 lling (Gregory & Michaelis 2001:1665)208.
Traditionality: Having achieved the status of being known and used
over a period of time, usually in variants and di erent contexts.
Variants of proverbs: Speci c verbal variations, belonging to one and
the same given proverb type.
Wellerism: A type of proverb–international in its occurrence and
many centuries old – that consists of a very short saying (a cliché,
proverb, or other brief quotation) followed by the designation of a
gure to whom the saying is speciously attributed (o en the old woman
or the devil or the monkey) and then, frequently, by a brief statement of
an action or circumstance in which the designated speaker utters the
attributed saying. A wellerism is usually intended humorously.
Example: “Two heads are better than one,” as the cabbage-head said to
the lawyer. The name derives from the character Sam Weller in Charles
Dickens’ novel The Pickwick Papers.
Winged word: see Catch phrase.

203 Lako , G. & Johnson, M. (1992). Metaphors We Live By. Edition 9 [print.]. Chicago
[u.a.]: Univ. of Chicago Press.
204 Lemnitzer, L. & Zinsmeister, H. (2010). Korpuslinguistik: Eine Einführung. 2.
durchges. und aktualisierte Au . (Narr Studienbücher). Tübingen: Narr.
205 Lako , G. & Johnson, M. (1992). Metaphors We Live By. Edition 9 [print]. Chicago
[u.a.]: Univ. of Chicago Press.
206 http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/de nition/english/epistemology.
207 Lewandowska, A. (2008). Sprichwort-Gebrauch heute. Ein interkulturell-
kontrastiver Vergleich von Sprichwörtern anhand polnischer und deutscher
Printmedien. Bern: Peter Lang.
208 Gregory, M. L. and Michaelis, L.A. (2001). Topicalization and Le Dislocation: A
Functional Opposition Revisited. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 1665-1706.
List of Tables
Table 3.1: G. L. Permyakov’s (1979: 180–195) logico-semiotic arch-invariants
represented by logico-thematic groups and subgroups A–C. (The
subclasses and oriental proverb variants are not presented in this
table.)
Table 4.1: Text and component properties of proverbs
Table 14.1: Correct paraphrases (%) of proverbs (presented in the given form [V-VIII]
or in pictures – Appendix 2 – [I-IV])
List of Figures
Figure 4.1: Bilateral sign concept
Figure 4.2: Simultaneous representation of both levels of sign
Figure 4.3: Application of Čerkasskij’s and Crépeau’s ideas to the concept of
connotative semiotics
Figure 4.4: Basic distinction of three types of situation involved in proverb usage
Figure 4.5: Double analogy in proverb usage
Figure 4.6: Additional distinctions of proverbial situation types
Figure 4.7: Genesis of proverb meaning – integration of heterogeneity,
polyfunctionalilty, and polysemanticity
Figure 9.1: Chronological list of Wer zu spät kommt, den bestra das Leben
Figure 9.2: Clipping from the collocation pro le of bekanntlich
Figure 9.3: Clippings from the collocation pro le of Ratten–verlassen–Schi
Figure 9.4: Clipping from the collocation pro le of the pattern Wer GAP OF ONE
WORD, der
Figure 10.1: Variants of the English proverb A new broom sweeps clean in Mieder,
Kingsbury & Harder 1992
Figure 10.2: Information on the meaning of the English proverb A rolling stone
gathers no moss in Spears (1987)
Figure 10.3: Entry for the German proverb Viele Köche verderben den Brei in Scholze-
Stubenrecht (2013)
Figure 10.4: Entry for the German proverb Den letzten beißen die Hunde in Schemann
(1993)
Figure 10.5: A matching exercise on German proverbs in Frey, Herzog, Michel et al.
(1973)
Figure 10.6: Entry for the German proverb Stille Wasser sind tief in Wander (2001)
Figure 10.7: Outer access structure for proverbs in Sprichwortplattform
Figure 10.8: Variants of the German proverb Gebranntes Kind scheut das Feuer in
Sprichwortplattform
Figure 10.9: Information based on corpus excerpts for the German proverb Nachts
sind alle Katzen grau in Sprichwortplattform
Figure 10.10: Pragmatic restrictions on the German proverb Lege nicht alle Eier in
einen Korb in Sprichwortplattform
Figure 10.11: A multiple choice exercise on the proverb feature sentence in German
proverbs in Sprichwortplattform
Figure 14.1: Correct paraphrases (context-isolated and embedded)
Index
analogy 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13
anti-proverb 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,
20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37,
38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46
antiquity 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
autonomous learning 1
binomial 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
cle ing 1
cliché 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
clichéized texts 1
cognitive concepts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
coherence 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
cohesion 1, 2, 3, 4
collocation 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
comparison 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,
20, 21
componential analysis 1, 2
connotation 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
context 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38,
39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56,
57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73,
74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90,
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105
contrastive approach 1, 2
core set of proverbs 1, 2
corpus 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21,
22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38,
39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56,
57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
co-text 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
counter-proverb 1
culture 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21,
22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38,
39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44
cultureme 1, 2, 3, 4
denotation 1, 2, 3
discourse 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38,
39, 40, 41
double entendre 1, 2
drama 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
electronic proverb collection 1, 2, 3
elocutio 1
empirical paremiology 1, 2, 3
epic 1
epigram 1, 2
equivalent 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
expressivity 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
false friends 1
feature interview 1
gurative 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38
xedness 1, 2, 3, 4
formulaicity 1
frequency 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,
21, 22
generalised proverb type 1
global proverb type 1, 2, 3
heterosituativity 1
holism 1, 2, 3, 4
humour 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
imagery 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19
interaction situation 1, 2, 3
introductory formula 1, 2, 3, 4
invariant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
language play 1, 2
lingua franca 1, 2
literal meaning 1, 2, 3, 4
loan translation 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
markers of proverbiality 1, 2, 3, 4
mass media 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,
20, 21
meaning of proverbs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
meta-language 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
metaphor 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38,
39, 40, 41, 42
metonymy 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
model situation 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
modernity 1, 2
modi cations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
monogenesis 1
non-literal meaning 1
novel 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
online proverb collection 1
oral tradition 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
origin 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21
ornatus 1
parataxis 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
paremiological competence 1, 2, 3, 4
paremiological experiment 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
paremiological minimum 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
paremiological optimum 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
paremiological performance 1
phraseology 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,
20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33
polyfunctionality 1, 2
polygenesis 1, 2
polysemanticity 1, 2
popular songs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
pragmatics 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
printed proverb collection 1
proverb dictionary 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,
18, 19, 20
proverbe dramatique 1
proverb equivalence 1, 2
proverb exercises 1
proverb function 1
proverbial comparison 1, 2, 3, 4
proverbiality 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
proverbial phrase 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18,
19, 20, 21
proverbial simile 1, 2, 3
proverb minimum 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
proverb-poem 1, 2
proverb situation 1, 2, 3, 4
proverb system 1, 2, 3, 4
proverb type 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
proverb variant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
proverb variants 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
pseudo-proverb 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
pun 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13
reference situation 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
rhetorical device 1, 2, 3, 4
semantic classi cation 1, 2
semantic density of a proverb / class of proverbs 1, 2
semantic parallelism 1, 2, 3
semantics 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,
21, 22, 23
semiosis 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
semiotics 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
short story 1, 2
sign 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21,
22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35
situation model 1, 2, 3, 4
sonnet 1, 2
speech act 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,
20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
stext type 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
stylistic colouring 1, 2, 3
stylistic label 1, 2, 3
stylistics 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
supra-summativity 1, 2, 3
synonymous proverbs 1, 2, 3
syntactic parallelism 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
syntactics 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
systematic categorization 1
text type 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
thematic classi cation 1, 2, 3
topicalisation 1
topos, topoi 1, 2, 3, 4
traditionality 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
transposability 1, 2
type-system of proverbs 1, 2, 3, 4
universal proverbs 1, 2
variance 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
variant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21,
22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36
variation 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38,
39, 40
wellerism 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14