Considerations on the meaning and translation of English heart idioms. Integrating the cognitive linguistic approach

2.1 The cognitive linguistic approach to idioms

According to the traditional view, the meaning of an idiom cannot be revealed on the basis of the meanings of its component parts. In this regard, the representatives of Cognitive Linguistics have a different approach by attempting to prove that there are numerous idiomatic expressions whose meanings can be conceptually motivated to a certain extent. As Kövecses and Szabó (1996, 330) point out, “an idiom is not just an expression that has meaning that is somehow special in relation to the meanings of its constituent parts, but it arises from our more general knowledge of the world (embodied in our conceptual system). In other words, idioms (or, at least, the majority of them) are conceptual, and not linguistic, in nature.”

The conceptual motivation of idioms can be achieved by means of cognitive mechanisms, such as conventional knowledge, metaphor and metonymy, which can account for the links between the proper and figurative meanings of idioms. People that belong to the same culture possess common information about various conceptual fields which is mainly known in cognitive terminology as conventional knowledge. Likewise, abstract entities can be conceptualized on the basis of concrete ones by means of conceptual metaphors and metonymies which play an important part in motivating the meanings of numerous idioms.

According to Kövecses and Szabó (ibid., 331), metaphor and metonymy are “cognitive mechanisms that relate a domain (or domains) of knowledge to an idiomatic meaning in an indirect way.” Metonymy operates within only one conceptual field involving a “stand for” relationship between two entities, whereas metaphor establishes a relationship based on “is” or “is understood as” between two conceptual fields (ibid., 338). Radden and Kövecses (1999, 3) provide the following definition: “metonymy is a cognitive process in which one conceptual entity, the vehicle, provides mental access to another conceptual entity, the target, within the same idealized cognitive model.” It belongs to people’s everyday way of thinking, revealing itself in the structure of categories, it enables mental access between the reference-point entity and the intended entity, and it operates within an idealized cognitive model (Lakoff 1987) that is a structure by means of which people organize knowledge.

Cognitive Semantics is based on the assumption that metaphor is essential to the process of thinking. Metaphor as a linguistic expression is possible because our conceptual system is metaphorically structured. Lakoff and Johnson (1980) classify conceptual metaphors according to their cognitive role. Orientational or spatial metaphors give spatial orientation (up-down, in-out, front-back, on-off, deep-shallow and central-peripheral) to abstract concepts and “have a basis in our physical and cultural experience” (ibid., 14), for example HAPPY IS UP/SAD IS DOWN. By means of ontological metaphors, events, actions, states, activities, emotions and ideas are seen as entities, objects, substances and containers, such as THE MIND IS A MACHINE or THE MIND IS A BRITTLE OBJECT. Structural metaphors involve cases in which “one concept is metaphorically structured in terms of another” (ibid.), for example ARGUMENT IS WAR.

As regards metonymy, Lakoff and Johnson (1980, 35–40) explain that it has a referential function, since one entity is used to refer to another one that is associated with it. However, it also provides understanding, like metaphor does, and enables “us to focus more specifically on certain aspects of what is being referred to.” Moreover, metonymic concepts can be traced in the way people think, act or talk and, just like metaphoric concepts, they are systematic and grounded in our experience (e.g. THE PART FOR THE WHOLE, PRODUCER FOR PRODUCT, OBJECT USED FOR USER, etc.). There are also special cases of metonymies such as symbolic ones (e.g. DOVE FOR HOLY SPIRIT), which play an important role in understanding religious and cultural concepts.

There are cases in which both metaphor and metonymy contribute to the motivation of the idiomatic meaning. Thus, we deal with metaphorical metonymies whenever conceptual metonymies underlie conceptual metaphors (Kövecses and Szabó 1996, 338). Furthermore, Goossens (2003, 361–5) uses the term metaphtonymy when referring to the interaction between the two cognitive processes. In this respect, he discusses four cases: “metaphor from metonymy,” “metonymy within metaphor,” “demetonymization inside a metaphor” and “metaphor within metonymy.” Additionally, de Mendoza Ibáñez and Masegosa (2011, 10–3) offer a different interpretation of the way the two interact by providing the following patterns: “metonymic expansion/reduction of a metaphoric source” and “metonymic expansion/reduction of a metaphoric target.”

Considering the fact that culturemes are “extra-linguistic cultural symbols, which behave like metaphorical models, motivating figurative expressions in language (lexical and phraseological)” (Pamies 2017, 100), the meanings of some idioms stem from culture-specific aspects. A revealing example is the Spanish idiom cortarse la coleta [to cut one’s ponytail], which means to ‘retire from a profession’ and whose underlying cultureme is represented by the corrida [bullfighting], since bullfighters cut the small ponytail of their outfit when they retire (ibid., 102). As regards the idioms in our corpus, only one might reveal the existence of a cultureme, namely wear one’s heart on one’s sleeve, which seems to be motivated by the medieval knights’ habit of wearing an item offered by a lady during jousting competitions.

2.2 Translating Idioms

Baker (1992) tackles various aspects of translating idioms when discussing equivalence above word level. As she points out, unlike collocations, idioms and fixed expressions lack flexibility of patterning and transparency of meaning since “they allow little or no variation in form and, in the case of idioms, often carry meanings which cannot be deduced from their individual components” (ibid., 63). Yet, at times, certain idioms can allow for a certain degree of flexibility in form (“to pass the buck” could be repatterned as “buck passing”). This, of course, can be done only by native speakers as translators do not possess the same sensitivity necessary in order to decide “when and how an idiom can be manipulated” (ibid., 64).

The translation of idioms and fixed expressions involves two main aspects: recognizing and correctly interpreting an idiom and dealing with the difficulties associated with rendering its meaning into the TL. As Baker (1992) explains, idioms which can be easily recognized comprise, in general, expressions which do not make much sense in a given context. They can be expressions which contravene truth conditions, those that do not conform to the rules of the language, expressions that start with like and expressions that have individual collocational patterns. Furthermore, translators can easily misinterpret idioms since some of them can be misleading having both a literal and an idiomatic meaning, whereas others may have a close counterpart in the TL which looks the same but has a different meaning. After recognizing and correctly interpreting an idiom, the translator is faced with several other difficulties such as the lack of an equivalent in the TL, the difference in the contexts of use as regards the SL idiom and its TL counterpart (connotation and pragmatic transferability-related issues), the simultaneous use of both the literal and the idiomatic meanings of an idiom in the same source text (ST), differences in the conventions and frequency of use, as well as the contexts in which they occur in written discourse.

There are many factors that influence how an idiom can be rendered into another language such as the existence of an idiom having a similar meaning in the TL, whether the lexical items forming the idiom are manipulated in other parts of the ST, the (in)appropriateness of using idiomatic expressions in a certain TL register, as well as the style and rhetorical effect. Therefore, Baker (ibid., 72–8) suggests six strategies that can be implemented when translating idioms:

1. using an idiom of similar meaning and form (the TL idiom needs to express approximately the same meaning as that of the SL idiom and also be made up of equivalent lexical items). In terms of heart idioms and with reference to our analysis, one example that can illustrate this strategy is the English idiom have a heart of gold which has the Romanian counterpart a avea inimă de aur [literal translation: have (a) heart of gold];

2. using an idiom of similar meaning but dissimilar form (the TL idiom has a meaning resembling that of the SL idiom, but it is made up of different lexical items). For example, the English idiom break someone’s heart can be rendered by the Romanian idiom a sfâșia cuiva inima [literal translation: tear someone’s heart];

3. using a paraphrase (this strategy can be used when there is no TL counterpart or whenever idiomatic language cannot be used in the target text [TT] by reason of different stylistic preferences). We can consider the example of the English idiom one’s heart is in the right place which does not have a Romanian equivalent idiom and, thus, might be paraphrased as a avea o inimă bună, contrar aparențelor [literal translation: have a good heart, contrary to appearances];

4. translation by omission (in this case the idiom is not rendered at all in the TT as a result of not having any TL “close match,” because it is hard to be paraphrased or just for reasons of stylistics). In order to illustrate this strategy, Baker (ibid., 77–8) gives an example in which the English expression for good measure is omitted in the Arabic translation;

5. translation by compensation (this strategy involves omitting or playing down on idiomaticity exactly where it appears in the ST and introducing it in some other part of the TT). As Baker (ibid., 78) points out, an example that could appropriately illustrate this strategy would need a lot of space; therefore, we refer to one particular case explained by Mason (1982, 29) and quoted by Baker (ibid.) in which the strategy of compensation was useful to handle idiomaticity: the translators of Astérix had to insert English puns in different parts of the cartoon in order to make up for the French puns that could not be rendered in the TT exactly where they appeared in the ST.

Newmark (1988, 104) considers that “whilst the central problem of translation is the overall choice of a translation method for a text, the most important particular problem is the translation of metaphor.” He uses the term metaphor to refer to any figurative expression. Also, he tackles six types of metaphors (dead, cliché, stock, adapted, recent and original) on the basis of contextual factors and translation procedures.

Kvetko (2009, 51) distinguishes between systemic and translation equivalents. He considers that, when comparing idioms in two languages, there are two possible approaches: the contrastive one (based on the systemic linguistic point of view) and the translation one (centred on the translation of idioms in literary texts). On the one hand, the systemic equivalent “reflects the equivalence of a particular idiom in a language as a system,” depending on “the existence or non-existence of idioms with the same (very close) content – containing the same/different lexical components” (ibid., 52). In this regard, Kvetko (ibid., 53–5) attempts to classify systemic equivalents into three categories: absolute equivalents, relative equivalents and deceptive equivalents. The first category includes absolute equivalents proper (the idioms in the two languages are considered to be identical taking into account the lexical and grammatical structures, symbolism and imagery, e.g. blue blood  – sânge albastru [blue blood]) and similar equivalents (the idioms differ only in form due to the lexical or syntactic rules of each language). The second category comprises relative equivalents proper (the lexical items, symbols and imagery of the idioms in the two languages are different, e.g. a piece of cake – floare la ureche [flower at the ear]) and partially different equivalents (the idioms in the two languages contain at least one common lexical item and are based on different symbolism and imagery, e.g. the last straw – ultima picătură [the last drop]). Being the smallest one, the third category contains idioms which are made up of “formally literally equal lexical components” but whose meanings on the whole are different (e.g. false friends, interlingual homonyms and paronyms). For this last category, Kvetko (ibid., 55) provides the example of the English idiom lead somebody by the nose, meaning ‘to control somebody completely’, which has a deceptive Slovak equivalent that means ‘to deceive somebody’. In Romanian, the same idiom a duce pe cineva de nas [lead somebody by the nose] conveys both meanings, namely ‘to control and to deceive somebody’.

On the other hand, the translation (functional) equivalent does not have to be identical with the systemic equivalent that is usually given in dictionaries. Since the translator needs to render the stylistic effect of the ST idiom into the TT, the translation (functional) equivalent can take the form of “an idiom (absolute or relative equivalent), a synonymous word/word group, metaphoric expression or, rarely, description” (ibid., 59). Also, it depends on the type of the text, the translator’s competence and interpretation of the text, the principles of translation and readership. Likewise, translation equivalents are triggered by functional shifts that can be divided into systemic shifts and individual shifts. Systemic shifts are further analysed as constitutive (linguistic) shifts which are influenced by the differences between the two language systems, and thematic shifts which are determined by the differences between the extralinguistic realities or traditions of the two languages. Additionally, Kvetko (ibid., 60–1) presents individual shifts which are governed by subjective factors. They may be positive shifts that involve compensation and negative shifts that are brought about by deceptive idiomatic equivalents, misinterpretations, literal translation or by the loss of the original connotations.

3.1 Using an idiom of similar meaning and form

The Romanian idioms under discussion are similar equivalents (Kvetko 2009) of the English ones since the lexical and syntactic rules of the two languages influence their form. Actually, it is generally hard to find absolute equivalents proper whose lexical and grammatical structures are identical.

The English idiom with one’s hand on one’s heart which is used when referring to someone “speaking very honestly and telling the truth” (OID 2003, 154) has the Romanian equivalent idiom cu mâna pe inimă [with the/one’s hand on the/one’s heart] meaning “cu conștiința curată, cu convingerea că e adevărat” (DEX 1998, 612) [“with a clear conscience, having the conviction that something is true”]. From a cognitive point of view, we notice that both idioms are conceptually motivated by conventional knowledge as people sometimes make this gesture in order to reinforce the truthfulness of their words. Additionally, another cognitive mechanism which plays an important part in accounting for the meaning of the two idioms is the metonymy THE HEART STANDS FOR SINCERITY (Trantescu 2016, 221).

The idiom with all one’s heart can be rendered into Romanian by the idiom cu toată inima [with all the/one’s heart]. They basically convey the same idea: the former means “with the utmost sincerity, with all best wishes” (DEI 2002, 115) and the latter expresses that something is done “cu tot sufletul, bucuros, cu mare plăcere” (DERC (D-N) 2016, 212) [“with all one’s soul, gladly, with great pleasure”]. Another Romanian idiom that can be used as an equivalent to the English one is cu dragă inimă [with (a) dear heart], which corresponds to the strategy of using an idiom of similar meaning but dissimilar form. We can notice the conceptual metaphor THE HEART IS THE SEAT OF JOYS, WISHES, PLEASURES and the metonymy THE HEART STANDS FOR SINCERITY, which underlie the meaning of these idiomatic expressions.

The Romanian idiom cu inima ușoară [with (the) light heart], that is “fără griji, bine dispus; cu conștiința împăcată” (DERC (D-N) 2016, 212) [carefree, in good mood, with a clear conscience], is used as the counterpart of the English idiom with a light heart that means “with a feeling of happiness or relief” (OID 2003, 213). In both cases, we can notice the conceptual metaphors THE HEART IS THE SEAT OF JOYS and THE HEART IS A RECIPIENT/CONTAINER. Also, the orientational metaphor HAPPINESS IS UP comes into play and links the literal meaning with the figurative one.

The next two pairs of idioms are based on the conceptual metaphors THE HEART IS A VALUABLE OBJECT and THE HEART IS THE SEAT OF LOVE. Thus, the idiom win somebody’s heart (“make somebody love you,” OID 2003, 446) has the Romanian equivalent idiom of similar meaning and form a câștiga inima cuiva [win somebody’s heart/win the heart of somebody], which is used when gaining someone’s love or winning someone over (DEX 1998, 156; 245) and the idiom steal somebody’s heart (“make somebody fall in love with you,” OID 2003, 374) can be translated by the Romanian idiom a fura inima cuiva [steal somebody’s heart/steal the heart of somebody], which means “a fermeca, a încânta pe cineva” (DEX 1998, 405) [to charm, attract someone].

The two opposite idioms have a heart of gold (“used about someone who is very kind, especially when they do not seem to be kind,” LID 1998, 164) and have a heart of stone (“to be very unkind and unsympathetic,” ibid.) have similar Romanian counterparts, namely a avea inimă de aur [have (a) heart of gold] (“a fi bun, milos, înțelegător, darnic,” DEX 1998, 492) [to be kind, compassionate, understanding, generous] and a avea inimă de piatră [have (a) heart of stone] (“a fi nesimțitor, rău, fără suflet, rece,” DEX 1998, 492) [to be insensitive, evil, soulless, cold], respectively. We can notice the metonymies THE HEART STANDS FOR KINDNESS and THE HEART STANDS FOR WICKEDNESS, which can account for the meanings of these idioms.

Moreover, the previously two English idioms can also be translated by means of Romanian idioms of similar meaning but dissimilar form such as a avea inimă bună [have (a) good heart] /a fi bun la inimă [be good at heart] and a avea inimă împietrită [have (a) petrified heart]. Heavy, hard materials are metaphorically linked to a rigid or harsh attitude, to a bad character. Thus, the heart, which actually stands for the person, is not easy to reach or impress. However, gold as in have a heart of gold has a positive connotation despite the hard material as its value is the dominant feature in this case (Trantescu 2016, 232).

The conceptual metonymy THE HEART STANDS FOR COURAGE underlies the English idiom lose heart (“to lose courage, to despair,” DEI 2002, 115) and its Romanian counterpart a-(și) pierde inima [lose one’s heart] (“a-și pierde curajul, speranța, a se descuraja,” DEX 1998, 492) [to lose courage, hope, to feel discouraged]. Furthermore, the idiom take heart which has an opposite meaning (“to be encouraged,” DEI 2002, 115) can be translated into Romanian by the two following idioms having a similar meaning but dissimilar form: a prinde inimă [catch heart] (“a căpăta din nou putere, curaj, a nu-i mai fi teamă,” DEX 1998, 492) [to regain strength, courage, not to be afraid anymore] or a-și lua inima în dinți [take one’s heart in one’s teeth] (“a se îmbărbăta, a-și face curaj,” DERC (D-N) 2016, 45) [pluck up courage], depending on the context.

Table 1 presents the English heart idioms and their Romanian equivalents of similar meaning and form that we discussed in this section of the article, together with the common cognitive mechanisms that we identified.

3.2 Using an idiom of similar meaning but dissimilar form

In order to meet the purpose of our study and identify common English and Romanian conceptualization of the heart, we will consider Romanian equivalent idioms containing the lexeme inimă [heart] or suflet [soul], since sometimes they can both be used alternatively to refer the seat of feelings or emotions. Trantescu (2016, 223) explains that this is probably due to the fact that the Romanian inimă [heart] comes from the Latin noun anima [soul].

The meaning of the English idiom one’s heart skipped/missed a beat (“used in order to say that you were very excited, surprised or frightened,” LID 1998, 165) springs from conventional knowledge, since whenever one is emotional or anxious, he or she has the feeling that his/her heart suddenly stops beating or that it does not work properly anymore (Trantescu 2016, 221). Although it is not listed in Romanian dictionaries, the idiom a-i sta inima (în loc) [one’s heart stands still], which is quite commonly used by natives, is a suitable equivalent as it conveys the same meaning and it is motivated by the same cognitive mechanism. Additionally, another Romanian idiomatic expression which is formed when the verbs a tresări or a sări collocate with the lexeme inimă, a-i tresări inima [one’s heart flinches] or a-i sări inima din loc [one’s heart jumps off], basically expresses the same meaning by focusing on the opposite reaction (“a tresări – (despre inimă) a-și accelera și intensifica bătăile din pricina unei emoții,” DEX 1998, 1111) [to flinch – (about the heart) beating faster because of emotions], (“a simți brusc o mare frică sau o emoție intensă,” DERC (S-Z) 2021, 21) [to suddenly feel great fear or intense emotion].

The meaning of the English idiom from the bottom of one’s heart (“with the utmost sincerity, most deeply,” DEI 2002, 115) can be rendered into Romanian by means of the idioms din adâncul inimii [from the depth of the/one’s heart] /din toată inima [from all the/one’s heart]/ cu dragă inimă [with dear heart] (“cu toată puterea, din tot sufletul,” “cu foarte mare și sinceră plăcere,” DELR 1985, 292) [with all your heart, with great and sincere pleasure] and din adâncul sufletului [from the depth of the/one’s soul] /din tot sufletul [from all the/one’s soul] (“cu pasiune, cu convingere, foarte mult,” DELR 1985, 677). From a cognitive perspective, we can identify the conceptual metaphor THE HEART (SOUL) IS A RECIPIENT/CONTAINER where people preserve their feelings and emotional experiences.

As Trantescu (2016, 223) points out, the recipient or container is often seen as open or closed. Whenever one opens it, the others get access to that person’s feelings. Thus, the previously mentioned conceptual metaphor also motivates the following English idioms and their Romanian corresponding idioms: open one’s heart (“tell somebody about your feelings, problems or worries,” OID 2003, 267) can be translated either by the idiom a-și deschide sufletul [open one’s soul] or by the idiom of similar meaning and form a-și deschide inima [open one’s heart] (“a face destăinuiri, a se confesa,” DEX 1998, 284) [to open up to someone, to confess]; pour out one’s heart (“tell someone everything that you are thinking or feeling,” LID 1998, 164) can be rendered by the Romanian idioms a-și descărca conștiința [unload one’s consciousness], a-și descărca inima [unload one’s heart] (“a-și ușura conștiința, făcând confidențe cuiva,” DEX 1998, 283) [ease one’s conscience by confiding in someone]; take (something) to heart (“to take something badly, to be very much hurt by,” DEI 2002, 115) has the Romanian counterpart a pune ceva la inimă [put something to heart] (“a se supăra pentru ceva mai mult decât merită,” DELR 1985, 293) [to get too upset over something that it is not worth it].

The conceptual metaphor THE HEART IS A BRITTLE OBJECT is the underlying mechanism, which motivates the English idiom break someone’s heart that can be generally used in relation to an event or situation that makes someone “very sad or upset” or when one makes “someone very unhappy by ending a marriage or romantic relationship” (LID 1998, 163). The same cognitive mechanism can be identified in the case of the Romanian idioms a sfâșia cuiva inima [tear someone’s heart], which means “a produce o mare durere” (DEX 1998, 981) [cause great suffering] and a frânge cuiva inima [snap one’s heart] (“a întrista peste măsură, a înduioșa până la lacrimi,” DERC (D-N) 2016, 130) [to cause someone extreme distress, to move someone to tears]. The latter is more frequently used as an equivalent of the English idiom when referring to disappointment in love.

The metaphors THE HEART IS THE SEAT OF JOYS, WISHES, PLEASURES and THE HEART IS A LIVING ORGANISM are reflected in the idiom one’s heart leaps , which refers to “a sudden feeling of happiness or excitement” (OID 2003, 163). There are several Romanian idiomatic expressions motivated by the same metaphor, which can be used as translations of the English idiom, depending on the context: a-i sălta inima (de bucurie) [one’s heart leaps (for joy)] which is an idiom of similar meaning and form meaning “a tresări de bucurie, a se bucura mult” (DEX 1998, 950) [to jump for joy, to rejoice]; a-i zburda inima [one’s heart skips] (“a fi foarte vesel,” DERC (S-Z) 2021, 415) [to be very cheerful]; a i se bucura inima [one’s heart rejoices] (“în legătură cu bucurii, plăceri,” DEX 1998, 492) [referring to joys, pleasures]; a-i râde cuiva inima [one’s heart laughs] (“a se simți foarte bine, a se bucura,” DERC (D-N) 2016, 210) [to feel very good, happy].

The Romanian idioms după/pe voia inimii [after/on (the) heart’s willingness] or după/pe pofta inimii [after/on (the) heart’s desire] which mean “după plac, nestingherit, cum îi e dorința” (DEX 1998, 492) [as one pleases/wishes, not hindered] are the equivalents of the English idiom to one’s heart’s content (“to one’s complete satisfaction,” DEI 2002, 116). They are all motivated by the conceptual metaphor THE HEART IS THE SEAT OF JOYS, WISHES, PLEASURES and the metonymy THE HEART STANDS FOR THE PERSON.

The metonymy THE HEART (SOUL) STANDS FOR KINDNESS is well illustrated by the idiom have a heart! , which is commonly used in spoken English “to ask someone not to be strict or unkind” (LID 1998, 164). The following Romanian idiomatic expressions are motivated by the same cognitive mechanism: a fi om de inimă [be a man of heart] (“a fi om bun, săritor,” DELR 1985, 292) [to be kind, warmhearted], (a fi om) cu inimă/suflet [(be a man) with (a) heart/soul] (“bun, milos, înțelegător, uman”/“trăsătură de caracter bună,” DEX 1998, 492; 1038) [kind, compassionate, understanding, humane/a trait of good character].

The idiom be close/dear/near to one’s heart which is used to talk about “a person or thing that somebody is very fond of, concerned about, interested in” (OID 2003, 163) has the Romanian counterpart a avea (pe cineva) în/la inimă [have (someone) in/at (one’s) heart] (“a îndrăgi sau a simpatiza pe cineva,” DERC (D-N) 2016, 208) [to like someone, to hold someone dear]. We can notice that the conceptual metaphor THE HEART IS THE SEAT OF LOVE AND AFFECTION lies behind the meaning of both idioms.

Although the Romanian idiomatic expression a ajunge la inima cuiva [get to/arrive at someone’s heart] is not mentioned in dictionaries, it is often encountered in spoken and written Romanian and it can be used as an equivalent of the English idiom the way to somebody’s heart (“the way to make somebody like or love you,” OID 2003, 437), both being motivated by the metaphor THE HEART IS THE SEAT OF LOVE AND AFFECTION and the structural metaphor LOVE IS A JOURNEY. Likewise, the literal translation of the English idiom (calea către/spre inima cuiva [the way to/towards somebody’s heart]) has increasingly been used lately.

Another conceptual metaphor which can shed some light upon the meaning of the idiom sick at heart (“very sad or upset about something,” LID 1998, 164) is THE HEART IS THE SEAT OF SUFFERING, PAIN, TROUBLE. The same cognitive mechanisms can be identified in the case of its Romanian counterparts a durea (pe cineva) la inimă [someone’s heart aches] and a-și face (a-i face cuiva) inimă rea [make oneself (a) bad heart/make one’s heart bad] (“a se mâhni sau a mâhni pe cineva,” DELR 1985, 590) [to grieve about something or to sadden someone].

The English idiom one’s heart sinks (“used to say that you suddenly feel sad or depressed about something,” OID 2003, 163) has the Romanian equivalent idiom of similar meaning but dissimilar form a i se îneca cuiva corăbiile [one’s ships sink] (“a fi trist, fără chef,” DERC (A-C) 2015, 268) [to be sad, not feel like doing anything] which does not contain the lexeme inimă (heart), but which is motivated by the same orientational metaphor SADNESS IS DOWN.

The English heart idioms and their Romanian equivalents of similar meaning but dissimilar form, along with the common cognitive mechanisms motivating their meaning, are summarized in Table 2.

3.3 Translation by paraphrase

Considering that this strategy involves the lack of a TL counterpart, we will point out the cognitive mechanisms that come into play in the case of English idioms and we will also try to find suitable Romanian paraphrases, which can reflect such mechanisms to a certain extent. We believe that, in some cases, the identification of cognitive mechanisms might contribute to better capturing the meanings of the SL idioms in the TL paraphrases.

The English idiom wear one’s heart on one’s sleeve which means “to show your true feelings openly” comes from an old custom whereby a man used to wear something on his sleeve which he received from his lady (LID 1998, 165). It is thus motivated by conventional knowledge and also by a cultureme which reminds us of a medieval tradition during jousting competitions. It could be translated into Romanian by means of the paraphrase a-ți arăta adevăratele sentimente/dragostea față de cineva [show one’s true feelings/love to someone].

The conceptual metaphors THE HEART IS THE SEAT OF SUFFERING, PAIN, TROUBLE and THE HEART IS A RECIPIENT/CONTAINER account for the meaning of the idiom sob one’s heart out (“cry noisily for a long time because you are very sad,” OID 2003, 363). A suitable Romanian paraphrase is a plânge în hohote vârsându-și tot amarul (din inimă/suflet) [cry out loud pouring out (of one’s heart/soul) all the bitterness], which can mirror the same metaphors.

The saying absence makes the heart grow fonder is based on the metaphor THE HEART IS THE SEAT OF LOVE AND AFFECTION and the metonymy THE HEART STANDS FOR THE PERSON, being “used in order to say that being away from someone you love makes you love them more” (LID 1998, 1). It can be rendered into Romanian by the paraphrase absența persoanei iubite face ca inima să iubească mai tare [the absence of the loved one makes the heart love harder] in which we can identify the same conceptual metonymy since the heart is personified.

The conceptual metonymy THE HEART STANDS FOR KINDNESS motivates the English idiom one’s heart is in the right place which refers to someone who is “kind and well-meaning” is “almost always used when appearances are to the contrary” (DEI 2002, 116). In Romanian, we can preserve the lexeme inimă in the paraphrase a avea o inimă bună, contrar aparențelor [have a good heart, contrary to appearances] or a avea suflet, contrar aparențelor [have soul, contrary to appearances] in which case the metonymy THE SOUL STANDS FOR KINDNESS comes into play.

The English idiom set one’s heart on (doing) something (“want something very much; want to do or achieve something very much,” OID 2003, 342) is based on the conceptual metonymy THE HEART STANDS FOR WILLINGNESS and can be translated as a-și dori (să obțină) ceva din toată inima [wish for something/to get something from all one’s heart] or a-și pune ceva în gând/a-și pune în gând să facă ceva [put one’s mind on something/have it in mind to do something]. The first paraphrase focuses on the heart as the set of one’s willingness to do something, whereas the other two place one’s heart [inimă] and thought [gând] in an interlinguistic equivalence relation.

Table 3 comprises a summary of the English heart idioms, along with the cognitive mechanisms that we identified, and their possible Romanian translations by paraphrase.