Idioms in Syrian Arabic: a semantic and grammatical approach to the verb
-
Carmen Berlinches Ramos
Abstract
This contribution deals with idioms in vernacular Syrian Arabic, focusing on the verbal component, as well as their semantic and grammatical particularities. The corpus of 151 idioms is extracted from seven popular TV series, 91 of these are presented in the paper along with a literal and idiomatic translation. The idiomatic meaning of the most frequently attested verbs is discussed first. This is followed by a grammatical discussion regarding word order, verbal inflection, morphological variation and lexical variation. The paper demonstrates the scarcity of idioms in some of the most important sources of Syrian Arabic. It further reveals grammatical parallels with idioms in other Arabic varieties, as well as in Western languages. The findings provide the field with new data, and will lead to a better understanding of both Arabic idioms in general, and Syrian Arabic in particular.
1 Introduction
Despite their common usage in daily life, Syrian Arabic[1] idioms are inadequately explored. This paper aims to fill this scholarly gap, specifically with regard to verbal components in the idioms. This is complementary to my recent treatment of nouns in the same variety of Arabic.[2] Three main questions are at the core of this study: (1) What are the most commonly used verbs in the corpus? (2) What do they idiomatically denote? (3) What are the most striking features of the grammatical behavior of the idioms?[3]
The analysis below consists of two parts. In the first part, which focuses on semantics, the most frequently attested verbs are listed, and each is presented with the literal meaning of the node and the collocates,[4]as well as the idiomatic meaning of the phrase and figures of speech, such as metaphors and metonymies. The second part deals with grammatical issues: Word order, verbal inflection, morphological variation and lexical variation.
My corpus includes 151[5] idioms, 91 of which are presented below together with their literal and idiomatic translation. The idioms were extrapolated from the following seven popular TV series – three Syrian and four Turkish (dubbed):
Tv series
| Title | Year | Country | Episodes | |
| 1. | الفصول الأربعة | 1999 | Syria | 74 |
| 2. | قلة ذوق وكثرة غلبة | 2002 | Syria | 40 |
| 3. | ميرنا وخليل | 2009 | Turkey | 72 |
| 4. | صبايا | 2009 | Syria | 150 |
| 5. | العشق الممنوع | 2010 | Turkey | 165 |
| 6. | فاطمة | 2010 | Turkey | 189 |
| 7. | عودة مهند | 2012 | Turkey | 214 |
All these series can be accessed online.[6] The episodes are around 40 minutes each, except for الفصول الأربعة (no. 1 above), of which some episodes can last up to an hour. The three Syrian series selected for this study are set in the capital city, hence they mainly use the typical dialect of Damascus. However, characters coming from other regions of the country may use their own vernacular. The dubbed (Turkish) series have a somewhat standardized or neutral character. These are dubbed by Syrian actors who use the dialectal variety of Damascus, yet with clear signs of standardization, namely the reduction of variables, the decline or disappearance of stigmatized features and reduction of differences among different communities or collectives.[7] This is due to the fact that these series are broadcast in different Arabic-speaking countries, including those in the Maghreb, whose dialectal varieties differ substantially from those spoken in the Levant. Nonetheless, the variety used for the dubbed series is clearly recognized by non-Syrian Arabic speakers as a typical Syrian Arabic variety.
While these Syrian idioms were never properly treated in previous scholarship, a few are included in the main dictionaries concentrating on the region. Barthélemy’s dictionary (1935–1954) records 17 of the idioms discussed in this paper, and three may be found in Al-Dāya (2002); these are indicated below.
The term “idiom” is regarded as ambiguous (Moon 1998: 3). Cruse (1986: 37) defines it as “an expression consisting in more than one lexical component whose meaning cannot be accounted for as a compositional function of the meaning its parts have when they are not parts of idioms.” Among the semantic properties of idioms indicated by Nunberg et al. (1994: 492–493), I highlight the following:
Conventionality: The idiom’s meaning and use cannot be (entirely) predicted on the basis of knowledge of the independent conventions that determine the use of their constituents when they appear in isolation from one another.
Inflexibility: Idioms appear only in a limited number of syntactic frames or constructions.
Opacity: The idiom’s meaning is not fully transparent.[8]
Figuration: The idiomatic meaning acquired by the components is generally founded on metaphoric and metonymic patterns.
Regarding the latter, metaphors are based on a relationship of similarity between two concepts that belong to two different domains of human experience (cf. Abdou 2012: 43). In other words, the essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another (cf. Lakoff and Johnson 2003: 5). For example, ʕam tǝlʕab bǝn-nār,[9] Which literally means ‘you (m.) are playing with fire,’ and idiomatically ‘you are putting yourself in a dangerous situation,’ as the fire is similar to something dangerous, or that might hurt. Such idioms are mostly isomorphic, as their global meaning is related to a consistent one-to-one mapping of their components (cf. Geeraerts 2003: 441, Abdou 2012: 67); e.g., yәlʕab ‘play’ can be linked to performing an action, and nār ‘fire’ to danger. On the other hand, in metonymy the semantic link between the literal and figurative senses of a component is based on a relationship of contiguity between the referents of the expressions in each of those senses (Geeraerts 1994: 2477). For example, šu ṭāleʕ bi-ʔīdna? literally means ‘What comes in our hand?’ Since the ʔīd, ‘hand’, is the body part generally used for doing things, the idiomatic meaning alludes to the capability of doing something, the idiom should therefore be translated as ‘What can we do?’
Lastly, it is important to stress that idioms are only idioms when they occur in their respective collocations (cf. Ritt-Benmimoun et al. 2017: 645). Hence, their idiomatic meaning may be lost if the components are altered.
2 Semantic approach
This section deals with the semantic particularities of the most recurrent verbs in the corpus, based on the other components of the idioms in which they occur. This co-occurrence is semantic in nature, namely, it attends to semantic reasons (cf. Nunberg et al. 1994: 505).
The verbal processes identified in this study are in line with Moon (1998: 208),[10] and include the following: Material (events and actions), mental (affection, cognition and perception), relational (attributive and identifying), behavioral, verbal and existential.[11] Material and mental processes are by far the most numerous in the data, followed by behavioral. On the other hand, the number of relational, verbal and existential processes is very low. These results slightly differ from Moon (1998), whose data show, first and foremost, material processes, followed by relational attributive processes.[12] Arabic does not show a verb in nominal attributive sentences in the present tense, which may explain the scarcity of relational processes in my data. Additionally, the relatively high number of behavioral idioms in the corpus must be due to the numerous imperative forms included, which are intended to correct misbehaviors.
The type of evaluations expressed by the idioms are negative, neutral, or positive. The first two prevail in the corpus nearly to the same degree. The prevalence of negative evaluations in phraseology has been identified before,[13] and Abdou (2012: 88) relates it to the idiom’s property of indirectness for communicating its meaning, adding that users need tactful ways to express negative evaluations more than positive ones.
Furthermore, verbs tend to occur in specific semantic environments,[14] for example, ʔakal, byākol ‘to eat,’ ʕǝmel, byǝʕmel ‘to do, to make,’ and sakkar, bisakker ‘to close,’ show negative or neutral evaluations. Other verbs, such as ʕaṭa, byaʕṭi ‘to give’ and tarak, byǝtrok ‘to leave,’ only show negative evaluations, while rafaʕ, byǝrfaʕ ‘to raise,’ ṭār, biṭīr ‘to fly,’ and fataḥ, byǝftaḥ ‘to open’ show only positive. Although the exact meaning is determined by the collocate(s), the data does not show any example of a verb expressing both positive and negative evaluations.
Finally, the semantic productivity of the verbs depends on each particular case. Some always co-occur with the same set of lexemes,[15] while others can occur with different sets. The latter produce different idioms, the meanings of which do not have to be related. The most productive verbs in the data are: ʔakal, byākol ‘to eat,’ ʔǝža, byǝži ‘to come,’ ḥaṭṭ, biḥǝṭṭ ‘to put,’ sakkar, bisakker ‘to close,’ and ʕǝmel, byǝʕmel ‘to do, to make’. On the other hand, the verbs dabbar, bidabber ‘to manage,’ dār, bidīr ‘to turn,’ and ʕazzab, biʕazzeb ‘to torment’show a very restricted range of collocation, therefore they are not productive on the semantic level. It should also be noted that the semantic productivity of a verb is not connected to its frequency of use. Some verbs only appear in one idiom, yet are frequently used, while others appear in several idioms, but are seldom used.
List of verbs:
2.1 ʔǝža, byǝži ‘to come’
This verb is semantically very productive, expressing behavioral, relational, attributive, material, or existential processes. It metaphorically denotes the action of receiving something, but the exact meaning depends on the collocates.
In collocation with noun nōm ‘sleep,’ it denotes a behavioral process:
ma ʕam bīžīni nōm[16]
‘Is not coming to me sleep.’ = I am not able to sleep.
In collocation with noun xabar ‘news,’ or the phrase mən taḥət rās- (+ suf. pron.), it denotes a relational attributive process:
ʔəžāki xabar?[17]
‘Did come to you (f. sg.) news?’ = Do you have news?
əl-mašākel ʔəžet mən taḥət rāsak
‘The problems came from below your (m. sg.) head.’ = You are the one responsible for the problems.
In collocation with noun naṣīb ‘fate,’ it denotes a material process:
ləssa ma ʔəža naṣībi
‘Still did not come my fate.’ = I have not found the one yet.
“Fate” metaphorically represents the right person to marry.
In collocation with noun tēlēfōn ‘telephone,’ it denotes an existential process:
ʔəža tēlēfōn
‘Came a telephone.’ = There was a call.
“Telephone” metonymically stands for a telephone call.
2.2 ʔakal, byākol ‘to eat’
This verb is semantically very productive; it may express material, mental, behavioral or verbal processes.
It metaphorically stands for the action of receiving something, thus denoting a material process. In all the examples, the thing received is negative:
ʔakalət ʔatle[18]
‘I ate a hit.’ = I was slapped / hit.
ʔakal boks
‘He ate a punch.’ = He was punched.
bākol əkfūf
‘I eat palms (of a hand).’ = I am slapped (several times).
ʔakal bahdale
‘He ate an insult / humiliation.’ = He was insulted / humiliated.
This idiom may be regarded as a verbal process as well.
kōl hawa!
‘Eat air!’ = Go to hell!
This is actually a curse.[19]
In collocation with noun hamm ‘concern, worry,’ it metaphorically denotes a mental process related to perception:
la tākol hamm
‘Don’t eat (you m.) concern / worry’ = You have nothing to worry about.
In collocation with the phrase bi-ʕaʔli ḥalāwe ‘in / with my mind sweets,’ it denotes a verbal process:
la tākol bi-ʕaʔli ḥalāwe
‘Don’t eat (m. sg.) in / with my mind sweets!’ = Don’t fool me! / Stop messing with me!
2.3 tarak, byǝtrok ‘to leave’
This verb denotes mental processes and usually has negative connotations:
la tətrəkni ʕa-nār!
‘Don’t leave (m. sg.) me on fire!’ = Don’t leave me in this state of anxiety!
trǝkūni bi-rāḥti!
‘Leave (pl.) me in my comfort!’ = Leave me alone / in peace!
2.4 ḥaṭṭ, biḥǝṭṭ ‘to put’
This verb expresses material or mental processes. It is semantically very productive and usually collocates with parts of the body and prepositional phrases.
Material processes denote actions:
ḥǝṭṭ rāsak w nām!
‘Put your (m. sg.) head and sleep!’ = Go to sleep![22]
la tḥəṭṭi rāsek əb-rās muhannad!
‘Don’t put your (f. sg.) head next to Muhannad’s head!’ = Don’t challenge Muhannad!
Note that although the two idioms above share the components yḥəṭṭ (vb.) and rās (n.), the other collocates completely change the meaning.
ʕam yḥəṭṭ əl-ḥaʔʔ ʕalēna
‘He is putting the truth against us.’ = He is blaming us.
The meaning of this idiom may be regarded as a verbal process as well.
Mental processes are related to the cognition or the perception:
ʔǝnte ḥaṭṭet ʕēnak ʕala ʔǝxto la-karīm
‘You put your (m. sg.) eye on the sister of Karīm.’ = You want a relationship with Karīm’s sister / You want to marry Karīm’s sister.
ḥǝṭṭi ʕaʔlek bi-rāsek!
‘Put your (f. sg.) mind in your head!’ = Think clearly!
2.5 ḥamal, byǝḥmel ‘to carry’
This verb expresses material or relational processes.
Its combination with the noun ḥāl- (+ pron. suf., with a reflexive sense) denotes an action, and has an inchoative sense. It is frequently followed by a second verb denoting movement (e.g., rāḥ, birūḥ ‘to go,’ məši, byəmši ‘to walk’):
ḥamalt ḥāli w-ʔǝžīt[23]
‘I carried myself and I came.’ = I (just) came.
Its combination with noun masʔuliyye ‘responsibility’ is quite common, denoting a relational identifying process:
huwwe byǝḥmel ǝl-masʔuliyye[24]
‘He carries the responsibility.’ = He is responsible.
2.6 xalla, bixalli ‘to keep’[25]
This verb may express mental processes, but it also appears in begging formulas:
In collocation with noun ʕēn ‘eye,’ the organ of sight, it metonymically denotes a mental, cognitive process:
xalli ʕēnek ʕalēha
‘Keep your (f. sg.) eye on her!’ = Watch her closely! / Keep an eye on her!
2.7 sakkar, bisakker ‘to close’
This verb expresses material or mental processes, and it is semantically very productive.
Material processes are related to the cessation of an activity, literal or metaphorical:
sakker hal-mawḍūʕ
‘Close (m. sg.) this subject!’ = Stop talking about this subject!
In collocation with the phrase b-wǝšš- ‘in (someone’s) face’, the cessation is abrupt, and has negative connotations:
sakkar əb-wǝšši
‘He closed in my face.’ = He hung up (the phone) while I was talking.[28]
In collocation with nouns daftar ‘notebook,’ or ṣafḥa ‘page,’ it metaphorically denotes putting an end to a period of life:
nǝḥna mažbūrīn ənsakker ǝd-dafāter ǝl-ʔadīme
‘We are obliged to close the old notebooks.’ = We are obliged to put an end to old episodes of our lives.
sakkar hadāk ǝd-daftar mǝn zamān
‘He closed that notebook a long time ago.’ = That period of his life is far behind him.
ʔǝnte kamān sakker haṣ-ṣafḥa
‘You (m. sg.) also, close this page!’ = You too, put this episode behind you!
In collocation with noun ʔəṣṣa ‘story,’ it is something that finishes:
mən zamān nəḥna sakkarna hal-ʔəṣṣa
‘A long time ago we closed this story’ = This matter is far behind us.
In collocation with mǝxx ‘brain,’ it denotes a mental, cognitive process, since the brain is the center of cognition and perception:
sakkar mǝxxi
‘My brain closed.’ = I am not able to think.
2.8 dabbar, bidabber ‘to manage’
This verb expresses a mental process, and only collocates with noun rās- ‘head’ (+ pron. suf.) or the noun ḥāl- ‘state’ (+ pron. suf.), with the same idiomatic meaning:
mǝndabber rāsna / ḥālna[29]
‘We manage our head / our state.’ = We will get by / We can deal with the situation.[30]
2.9 dār, bidīr ‘to turn’
This verb only collocates with noun bāl ‘mind,’ the faculty of cognition and perception, metonymically expressing a mental perceptive process:
dīr bālak![31]
‘Turn your (m. sg.) mind!’ = Take care! / Be careful!
2.10 rafaʕ, byǝrfaʕ ‘to raise’
This verb expresses material or mental processes. It metaphorically represents a physical movement of an individual, and the idioms in which it appears have positive connotations.
Material processes denote actions:
byǝrfaʕ kās
‘He raises a glass.’ = He proposes a toast (to sb.).
“Glass” metonymically stands for a toast.
Mental processes are related to perception:
bərfaʕ rāsi fīki
‘I raise my head on you (f. sg.).’ = I am proud of you.
2.11 ṭaʔʔ, biṭǝʔʔ ‘to click, to explode’
This verb expresses mental or verbal processes, and frequently collocates with parts of the body.
In combination with noun mǝxx ‘brain,’ it denotes an emotional state, thus a mental, perceptive process:
mǝxxi raḥ yṭǝʔʔ
‘My brain is going to explode.’ = I am very stressed.
In combination with ḥanak ‘jaw,’ it metonymically denotes the act of talking, thus a verbal process:
ʕam ənṭəʔʔ ḥanak
‘We are clicking the jaw.’ = We are talking for the sake of talking.
2.12 ṭəleʕ, byəṭlaʕ ‘to come out, to lift’
This verb expresses material or relational processes.
In collocation with noun ʔīd ‘hand,’ a body part responsible for doing things, it metonymically denotes capability, thus a material process:
nəʕmel yəlli byəṭlaʕ bi-ʔīdna[32]
‘We do what comes to our hand.’ = We do what we can.
In collocation with preposition la- and a noun denoting an individual, it qualifies him or her, thus being a relational attributive process:
ʔana ṭləʕet la-ʔǝmmi[33]
‘I came out like my mother.’ = I resemble my mother.
2.13 ṭawwal, biṭawwel ‘to enlarge’
This verb expresses material or mental processes.
In combination with noun bāl ‘mind,’ it denotes an emotional state, thus a mental perceptual process:
ṭawwel bālak![34]
‘Extend your (m. sg.) mind!’ = Calm down!
In combination with noun ġēbe ‘absence,’ it denotes an action, thus a material process:
la ṭawwli l-ġēbe!
‘Don’t extend (f. sg.) the absence!’ = Come back soon!
2.14 ṭār, biṭīr ‘to fly’
This verb expresses mental processes, related to perception. It mostly denotes positive evaluations, by metaphorical extension:
raḥ yṭīr mǝn ǝl-faraḥ
‘He will fly from happiness.’ = He is extremely happy.
biṭīr ʕaʔli mǝn ǝl-farḥa[35]
‘My mind flies from joy.’ = I am extremely happy.
ḥāses ḥāli raḥ ṭīr ʔadd mu farhān
‘I myself feel I am going to fly, (that’s) how happy I am.’ = I am extremely happy.
2.15 ṭayyar, biṭayyer ‘to make (someone) fly’
This verb expresses relational or behavioral processes.
Relational processes are attributive and have positive connotations:
biṭayyer ǝl-ʕaʔəl[36]
‘It makes the mind fly.’ = It is wonderful / amazing.
In collocation with nōm ‘sleep,’ it metaphorically denotes a behavioral process:
ṭayyaret ǝn-nōm mǝn əʕyūno
‘(She) made the sleep fly from his eyes.’ = She kept him awake (at night).
2.16 ʕazzab, biʕazzeb ‘to torment’
This verb expresses a mental, perceptive process, and only collocates with the noun ḍamīr ‘conscience’:
ḍamīro ʕam yʕazzbo
‘His conscience is tormenting him.’ = He has a guilty conscience.
2.17 ʕaṭa, byaʕṭi ‘to give’
This verb expresses mental or behavioral processes. All idioms in the data in which this verb features have negative connotations.
In combination with parts of the body denoting attention (i.e., ‘face’ or ‘ear’), it metonymically denotes mental processes related to cognition and perception:
la ṭaʕtī wǝšš[37]
‘Don’t give him a face!’ = Don’t pay heed to him!
ʕaṭēton ʔǝdni
‘I gave them my ear.’ = I listened to them.
In combination with noun dars ‘lesson,’ it metaphorically denotes a behavioral process:
bǝddi ʔaʕṭī dars əmrattab
‘I want to give him an organized lesson.’ = I want to teach him a hard lesson.[38]
2.18 ʕǝmel, byǝʕmel ‘to do, to make’
This verb expresses material or behavioral processes.
In material processes, the verb is semantically depleted, and used as support.[39] The meaning is thus given by the collocates. These idioms show a lower degree of opacity:
ʕam bəʕmel dūš
‘I am making a shower.’ = I am taking a shower.
bəʕmel ḥammām
‘I make a bath.’ = I bathe / I take a bath.
(hiyye) ʕam təʔmel relax
‘(She) is making relaxation.’ = She is relaxing.
In combination with certain nouns including ḥāl- ‘state’ (+ pron. suf., with a reflexive sense), it denotes behavioral processes, and has negative connotations:
la təʕməl-lna ʔəṣaṣ!
‘Don’t make (m. sg.) for us stories.’ = Don’t cause us problems![40]
la təʕəmli ʔaflām!
‘Don’t make (f. sg.) films!’ = Don’t make up stories!
ʔmǝli masraḥiyye hallaʔ!
‘Make (f. sg.) theatre now!’ = Fake now! / Exaggerate now![41]
bəʕmel ḥāli māli daryān
‘I myself make like I don’t know.’ = I pretend not to know.
la təʕmel ḥālak mu faḥmān![42]
‘Don’t make (m. sg.) like you don’t understand!’ = Don’t pretend not to understand!
2.19 fataḥ, byǝftaḥ ‘to open’
This verb expresses material processes:
(ʔənte) ʕam təftaḥ mawḍūʕ
‘You (m. sg) are opening a subject.’ = You start talking about a subject.[43]
raḥ yəftaḥli ktīr əbwāb
‘It will open for me many doors.’ = It will give me many opportunities.[44]
2.20 fattaḥ, bifatteḥ ‘to open (sth.)’
This verb expresses mental processes, in collocation with parts of the body representing the center of cognition and perception:
fatteḥ mǝxxak!
‘Open your (m. sg.) brain!’= Think![45]
2.21 kabbar, bikabber ‘to enlarge’
This verb expresses mental or behavioral processes, and has an augmentative sense.[46]
Mental processes occur in collocation with parts of the body (which represent the center of cognition and perception), but they may be considered behavioral processes as well:
kabber ʕaʔlak![47]
‘Enlarge your (m. sg.) mind!’ = Think clearly! / Don’t behave in a childish way!
kabbri məxxek!
‘Enlarge your (f. sg.) brain!’ = Think clearly! / Don’t behave in a childish way!
The two idioms above are synonymous.
In collocation with noun mawḍūʕ ‘subject,’ it denotes behavioral processes:
ʕam ənkabber əl-mawḍūʕ zyāde ʕan ḥažmo
‘We are enlarging the matter more than its size.’ = We are making the problem bigger than it is.
2.22 kall, bikǝll ‘to tire, to be tired’
It expresses a material process:
ʔǝnti la bǝtkǝlli w-la bǝtmǝlli[48]
‘You (f. sg.) neither get tired nor bored.’ = You are indefatigable.
It can also be regarded as a relational, attributive process.
2.23 kān, bikūn ‘to be’
The imperfective bikəll- (+ suf. pron.) is the result of the assimilation n + l > ll: bikūn + (ʔǝl- >) la- > bikǝll-, denoting existence.[49] In combination with noun fəkər ‘thought,’ it expresses a mental perceptive process:
la ykəllak fəkər
‘Don’t have (m. sg.) a thought’ = Don’t worry!
2.24 māt, bimūt ‘to die’
This verb expresses mental or relational processes, and frequently has hyperbolic connotations.
The mental processes are related to affection:
bmūt ʕalēki[50]
‘I die on you.’ = I am totally in love with you / I am crazy about you.
bmūt fīki[51]
‘I die in you.’ = I am totally in love with you / I am crazy about you.
bmūt ʕaṭ-ṭrāb yǝlli ʕam tǝmši ʕalē
‘I die on the dust you (f. sg.) are walking on.’ = I am totally in love with you / I am crazy about you.
All these idioms are synonymous.
Relational processes are attributive:
raḥ mūt mǝn žūʕi
‘I will die from my hunger.’ = I am very hungry.
3 Grammatical Remarks
3.1 Word order
The regular word order in Syrian Arabic verbal predications is as follows: Definite subjects either precede or follow the verb, whereas indefinite subjects follow the verb. However, some factors may alter this order (cf. Cowell 1964: 407–411).
a) In the idioms presented, definite subjects occur before or after the verbs. Many of these subjects are body parts showing a suffixed pronoun which refers to its human possessor:[52]
Subject – Verb order
| Subject (definite) | Verb | Meaning |
| ḍamīro his conscience |
ʕam yʕazzbo is tormenting him |
= He has a guilty conscience. |
| mǝxxi my brain |
raḥ yṭǝʔʔ is going to explode |
= I am very stressed. |
Verb – Subject order
| Verb | Subject (definite) | Meaning |
| ʕam biʕazzbak is tormenting you (m. sg.) |
ḍamīrak? your (m. sg.) conscience? |
= Do you have a guilty conscience? |
| rtabaṭ was tied |
əlsāno his tongue |
= He was not able to speak. |
| sakkar closed |
mǝxxi my brain |
= I am not able to think. |
b) On the other hand, all indefinite subjects in the data appear after the verb:
| Verb | Subject (indefinite) | Meaning |
| ʔəža came |
tēlēfōn a telephone |
= There was a call. |
| ʔəžāki did come to you (f. sg.) |
xabar? news (lit. a new)? |
= Do you have news? |
c) Complements:
If the sentence has complements, they are usually placed at the end of the sentence:
Verb – Subject – Complements order
| Verb | Subject | Complements | Meaning |
| biṭīr flies |
ʕaʔli my mind |
mǝn ǝl-farḥa from the happiness |
= I am extremely happy. |
| rǝžeʕ Did return |
ʕaʔlo his mind |
la-rāso? to his head? |
= Did he come back to his senses? |
Subject – Verb – Complements order
| Subject | Verb | Complement | Meaning |
| ʕyūna lal-bənət the girl’s eyes |
btāxod takes |
ǝl-ʕaʔəl the mind |
= The girl’s eyes are wonderful / amazing. |
However, if the complement is an adverbial particle or a phrase denoting time, it tends to be placed at the beginning of the sentence, and it is followed by the verb:
Complements – Verb – Subject order
| Complements | Verb | Subject | Meaning |
| mbāreḥ yesterday |
ma ʔažāni did not come to me |
nom sleep |
= Yesterday, I was not able to sleep. |
| ləssa still |
ma ʔəža did not come |
naṣībi my fate |
= I have not found the one yet. |
| bukra tomorrow |
btəmši walk |
l-ʔiyyām the days |
= Life will go on. |
3.2 Verbal inflection
The great majority of the verbs show full inflectability in tense, number, and mood, as observed in other languages: for instance, English (cf. Moon 1998: 94). However, some forms occur with more frequency than others.
3.2.1 Tense
Generally, verbs inflect in all tenses, for example:
Verbal inflection
| Tense | Idiom | Meaning |
| Simple past | mbāreḥ ma ʔažāni nom | ‘Yesterday sleep did not come to me.’ = Yesterday I was not able to sleep. |
| b-present | bākol əkfūf | ‘I eat palms (of a hand).’ = I am slapped (several times). |
| Present continuous | ma ʕam bīžīni nōm | ‘Sleep is not coming to me.’ = I am not able to sleep. |
| Future | raḥ ʔākol bahdale | ‘I will eat an insult / humiliation.’ = I will be insulted / humiliated. |
| Future perfect | la tkūn ʔakalət bahdale? | ‘Won’t you have eaten an insult / humiliation?’ = Won’t you have been humiliated? |
However, a few verbs do not allow certain inflections. For example, in ǝl-ʔǝṭṭ ʔakal lsāno ‘The cat ate his tongue’ = He does not speak, the verb ʔakal must be conjugated in the past tense, if not, the idiomatic sense would be lost. The reason is that the idiom denotes a situation that figuratively results from a previous action, specifically because the cat ate his tongue, he is not able to speak anymore.
Another restriction in inflection is found in la ykəllak fəkər ‘Don’t have (m. sg.) a thought’ = Don’t worry! In another tense, the form ykǝll- (> kān, bikūn with the assimilation n > l) would lose its idiomatic sense. For example, *kalli fəkər would mean ‘I was thinking about (sth.),’ although it is not used.[53]
Moreover, in Modern Standard Arabic (henceforth MSA), Abdou (2012: 115) shows idioms in which the verb only occurs in the present tense, for example, yaḥrutu fi al-baḥri = He is plowing the sand. He claims that the past would be expressed by adding the verb kāna. My data do not show any example of this kind, but it is certainly a matter to bear in mind in further research.
3.2.2 Number
The majority of verbs in the data occur in the singular because idioms tend to address a single person. Among them, the first and third person prevail. The second person, however, is seldom used, except for imperative forms (see Section 3.2.3). As the data have plenty of dialogues where cases of second person are likely to happen, one would have expected to find more examples.[54]
Concerning the plural persons of the verb, there are only a few instances in the first person, for example, nḥəṭṭ ʕala žərǝḥna mǝləḥ ‘We put salt to our wounds’ = We make matters worse. The low use of plural subjects in phraseology has been attributed to the insecurity amongst speakers towards pluralizations (cf. Moon 1998: 96).
Finally, one idiom is constantly conjugated in the first-person plural, although the person who speaks is only one – a phenomenon known as “modesty plural” (cf. Du Bois 2012: 324). It is the combination of the verb byǝfraḥ ‘to be happy at’ and the preposition fī- (+ suf. pron.), which usually collocates with verbs yxalli or bədd-: xallīna nǝfraḥ fīk ‘Let us be happy in you (m. sg.)!’ = Get merry!; xallūna nǝfraḥ fīkon ‘Let us be happy in both of you!’ = Get merry (you both)!; bəddna nǝfraḥ fīk ‘We want to be happy in you (m. sg.)!’ = Get merry! Furthermore, the idiom mǝndabber rāsna ‘We manage our head’ = We will get by / we can deal with the situation, may refer to a single person when conjugated in plural, although its use in the first person singular (bidabber rāsi) is also common.[55]
3.2.3 Mood: Imperative
My data show a significant number of imperative verbs, which are intended to correct bad attitudes or habits, or to give advice. They occur in dialogues, which are common in the data. Among these, idioms involving body parts are particularly productive. For example: šaġġel mǝxxak! ‘Make your (m. sg.) brain work!’ = Think!; ḍəbbi lsānek! ‘Place your (f. sg.) tongue!’ = Do not speak! / Do not say anything to anyone!
Furthermore, the data only show one imperative in plural form: trǝkūni bi-rāḥti ‘Leave (pl.) me with my calm!’ = Leave me alone / in peace! which is another evidence of the reduced use of plural subjects in idioms.
Another common phenomenon in the corpus is the indicative / imperative shift:
Indicative / imperative shift
| Indicative | Imperative |
| ʔaxadət rāḥti ‘I took my calm.’ = I calmed down. |
xōd rāḥtak ‘Take your (m. sg) calm!’ = Calm down! |
| ḍabbet əlsāna ‘She placed her tongue.’ = She did not speak / She did not say anything to anyone. |
ḍəbbi lsānek! ‘Place your (f. sg.) tongue!’ = Do not speak! / Do not say anything to anyone! |
Indicative / negative imperative shift
| Indicative | Negative imperative |
| ʕaṭētak wǝšš əktīr ‘I gave you (m. sg.) much face’ = I paid too much heed to you / I let you go too far. |
la ṭaʕtī wǝšš ‘Don’t give (m. sg.) him face!’ = Don’t pay heed to him! / Don’t let him go too far. |
| ʔakalət hammak ‘I ate your (m. sg.) concern.’ = I was worried about you. |
la tākol hamm ‘Don’t eat (m. sg.) concern / worry!’ = Don’t worry! |
3.2.4 Voice
Passive forms are more prolific in written language than in spoken.[56] In Arabic, unlike in some Western languages, passivization is made by morphological inflection of verbs, and it is therefore not a syntactic process. Vernacular varieties of Arabic generally express the passive with the derived verb form VII, i.e. nfaʕal, byənfəʕel ‘to be done,’ whereas in MSA, the passive is formed by changing the internal vowel pattern of the verb, i.e., kataba, yaktubu ‘to write’ (active) vs. kutiba, yuktabu ‘to be written’ (passive).
My data only register two idioms with a passive sense. The first is nxarab bēti ‘My house was ruined’ = I had a big problem, which is a variant from yəxrab bētak! ‘May your (m. sg.) house be ruined’ = Damn you!, showing a verb from the simple form, and also commonly used for cursing somebody. Interestingly, when the verb shifts to form VII, and hence undertakes a passive sense, its meaning is no longer a curse but an existential process, with negative connotations.
The second example is ǝl-maktūb byǝnʔara mǝn ʕənwāno ‘A manuscript is read by its title’ = Someone can be judged by their external appearance / The outcome of a situation can be guessed from an early stage. The components of this idiom do not allow any morphological variation, therefore it fits in what Cruse calls “frozen” or “dead metaphor” (cf. Cruse 1986: 41–42). However, a native informant provided us with the following variant: ǝl-maktūb bibayyen mǝn ʕanwāno[57] ‘a manuscript is clear by its title’ = Someone may be judged from the external appearance / The outcome of a situation may be guessed from an early stage, where the verb is substituted for another from the first form, but it does not show any substantial semantic difference. This kind of substitution could be regarded as a “revival” of a dead metaphor (cf. Cruse 1986: 41–42).
3.3 Morphological variation
3.3.1 Verb / active participle
Active participles generally behave like verbs, despite their adjectival inflection (cf. Cowell 1964: 265), therefore the shifting verb / active participle happens often.[58] These participles may express an action which takes place in the present moment, or an action which took place sometime in the past, but the effects remain in the present, known as “the resultative function.” For example:
Verb / active participle shift
| Verb | Active participle |
| nəʕmel yəlli byəṭlaʕ mən ʔīdna ‘We do what comes from our hand.’ = We do what we can. |
šu ṭāleʕ bi-ʔīdna? ‘What comes in our hands?’ = What can we do? |
| raḥ yṭīr mən əl-faraḥ ‘He will fly from the happiness.’ = He is very happy. |
ṭāyra mǝn ǝl-faraḥ ‘I (f.) am flying from the happiness.’ = I am very happy. |
| fətət bǝl-ḥēṭ ‘I entered the wall.’ = I don’t understand / I can’t find a solution or a way out. |
huwwe fāyet bǝl-ḥēṭ ‘He is entering the wall.’ = He doesn’t understand / He can’t find a solution or a way out. |
However, in some cases the shifting involves a semantic change:
Verb / active participle shift, with semantic change
| Verb | Active participle |
| məši l-ḥal ‘Walked the state.’ = The problem (or situation) was solved. |
māši l-ḥāl ‘Is walking the state.’ = It is OK / I am OK. |
3.3.2 Verb / verbal noun variation
The shifting verb / verbal noun is not very productive in my data, only showing the following example:
Verb / verbal noun shift
| Verb | Verbal noun |
| la tḥāwel ətlǝff w əddūr ‘Don’t try (m. sg.) to turn and move in circles!’ = Speak directly! / Get to the point! |
bala laff u dawarān ‘Without turning and moving in circles.’= Straight talk / Getting to the point. |
3.4 Lexical variation
Several idioms show the replacement of one verb for another which literally has a different meaning but idiomatically are similar, hence they may be considered synonymous variants. This phenomenon seems to be quite common, as observed by Nunberg et al. (1994: 504) in English, Kotb (2002: 32) in Egyptian Arabic, and Abdou (2012: 105) in MSA. The replacement of one lexical item with another points out the motivation’s transparency of the idiom (cf. Abdou 2012: 108).[59] Examples include:
Lexical variation
| Idiom a | Idiom b |
| ṭawwel bālak! ‘Extend your (m. sg.) mind!’ = Calm down! |
tammen bālak! ‘Calm your (m. sg.) mind!’ = Calm down! |
| biṭayyer ǝl-ʕaʔəl ‘It / he makes fly the mind.’ = It / he is wonderful or amazing. |
byāxod ǝl-ʕaʔəl ‘It / he takes the mind.’ = It / he is wonderful or amazing. |
| byərkod wara l-mašākel ‘He is running behind the problems.’ = He wants to cause problems. |
byəlḥaʔ əl-mašākel ‘He follows the problems.’ = He wants to cause problems. |
| šaġġel mǝxxak! ‘Make work your (m. sg.) brain!’ = Think! |
fatteḥ mǝxxak! ‘Open your (m. sg.) brain!’ = Think! |
| byərʔoṣ mən əl-faraḥ ‘He is dancing from the happiness. = He is very happy. |
biṭīr mən əl-faraḥ ‘He flies from the happiness’ = He is very happy. |
4 Conclusion
The particularities of Syrian Arabic idioms seem to be congruent with those in other Arabic varieties.[60] Moreover, some similar idioms are used in Western languages as well.[61] However, because of the grammatical particularities of Arabic, differences exist.
The literal and the idiomatic meaning of a verb differ considerably, and the latter is determined by the collocates.
An unsurprising finding is that approximately two thirds of the mental processes in my data involve body parts; among them, many are related to the head of an individual or their particular elements (e.g., məxx ‘brain,’ bāl ‘mind,’ rās ‘head,’ ʕaʔəl ‘mind, sense, intellect,’ wǝšš ‘face’). These lexemes are metonymically connected to cognitive, perceptive, or affectionate processes, and are very productive in phraseology.
In other languages, and in different Arabic varieties, negative actions and emotions are recurrently expressed through idioms. Moreover, some verbs are more likely to occur in negative contexts; on the other hand, idioms denoting positive actions or emotions are infrequent. The former requires a sensitive and indirect expression, but not the latter.
While verbs allow different types of variation, this variation mostly happens at morphological and lexical levels, and therefore could be considered superficial. In general, in order to retain the idiomatic meaning, collocations are relatively restricted (cf. Sinclair 1991: 121). This explains, for example, the scarcity of examples showing syntactic processes, as explained in Berlinches (2019: 39).
The linguistic particularities briefly presented in this contribution definitely need further investigation. Idiomatic expressions in Syrian Arabic are an insufficiently investigated field of research, even though idioms are frequently used on a daily basis, and they are crucial for an understanding of the language. I hope this paper sets the foundations for further research on the topic, which will result in a better understanding of both Arabic phraseology and Syrian Arabic.
References
Abdou, Ashraf. 2012. Arabic Idioms. A corpus-based study. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203808788Search in Google Scholar
Abdou, Ashraf. 2016. Aspects of the Syntactic Behaviour of Arabic Idioms: A Corpus Analysis. Zeitschrift für Arabische Linguistik 63. 61–86.10.13173/zeitarabling.63.0061Search in Google Scholar
Abdul-Raof, Hussein. 2006. Arabic Rhetoric. A pragmatic analysis. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203965399Search in Google Scholar
Al-Dāya, Muḥammad Ruḍwān. 2002. Muʕǧam al-Kināyāt al-ʕammiyyah al-Shāmiyyah [Lexicon of Damascene dialectal metonymies.] Damascus: Dār al-Fikr.Search in Google Scholar
Aldoukhi, Rima, Stephan Procházka & Anna Telič. 2016. Lehrbuch des Syrisch-Arabischen 1. Praxisnaher Einstieg in den Dialekt von Damaskus. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Search in Google Scholar
Barbot, Michel. 1981. Évolution de l’Arabe contemporain. Vol. I: Bibliographie d’Arabe moderne et du Levant. Introduction au parler de Damas. Vol. II: Les sons du parler de Damas. Paris: Maisonneuve.Search in Google Scholar
Barthélemy, Adrien. 1935–1954. Dictionnaire arabe-français: Dialectes de Syrie, Alep, Damas, Liban, Jérusalem. Paris: Geuthner.Search in Google Scholar
Behnstedt, Peter. 2009. Syria. In Kees Versteegh (ed.), Encyclopaedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics 4, 402–409. Leiden & Boston: Brill.Search in Google Scholar
Benson, Morton, Evelyn Benson & Robert F. Ilson. 1986. Lexicographic Description of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.14Search in Google Scholar
Berlinches Ramos, Carmen. 2019. Idioms in Syrian Arabic: A First Approach towards a Lexico-Semantic and Grammatical Analysis. Zeitschrift für Arabische Linguistik 70. 17–43.10.13173/zeitarabling.70.0017Search in Google Scholar
Bloch, Ariel & Heinz Grotzfeld. 1964. Damaszenisch-arabische Texte. Mit Übersetzung, Anmerkungen und Glossar. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner.Search in Google Scholar
Cambridge International Dictionary of Idioms. 1998. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cowell, Mark W. 1964. A reference grammar of Syrian Arabic (based on the dialect of Damascus). Washington: Georgetown University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cruse, David Alan. 1986. Lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Du Bois, Inke. 2012. Grammatical and Sociolinguistic Aspects of the First Person Plural Pronoun. In Nicole Baumgarten, Juliane House & Inke Du Bois (eds.), Subjectivity in Language and Discourse, 296–319. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789004261921_015Search in Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A. 1983. God-Wishes in Syrian Arabic. Mediterranean Language Review 1. 65–83.Search in Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A. 1997. Standardization as a form of language spread (1987). In Kirk Belnap & Niloofar Haeri (eds.), Structural Studies in Arabic Linguistics: Charles A. Ferguson’s Papers 1954–1994, 69–80. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789004348578_009Search in Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk. 1994. Metonymy. In Ronald Asher & James Simpson (eds.), The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics 5, 2477–2478. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Search in Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk. 2003. The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in composite expressions. In René Dirven & Ralf Pörings (eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast, 435–465. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110219197.3.435Search in Google Scholar
Izwaini, Sattar. 2015. Patterns of Lexical Collocations in Arabic. Zeitschrift für Arabische Linguistik 61. 71–99.Search in Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar (4th edition). London: Hodder Arnold.Search in Google Scholar
Kotb, Sigrun. 2002. Körperteilbezogene Phraseologismen im Ägyptisch-Arabischen. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 2003. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 2006. A Glossary of English Grammar. Edinburg: Edinburgh University Press.10.1515/9780748626915Search in Google Scholar
Moon, Rosamund. 1998. Fixed Expressions and Idioms in English. A Corpus-Based Approach. Oxford: Clarendon press.10.1093/oso/9780198236146.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Nunberg, Geoffrey, Ivan Sag & Thomas Wasow. 1994. Idioms. Language 70. 491–538.10.1353/lan.1994.0007Search in Google Scholar
Ritt-Benmimoun, Veronika, Smaranda Grigore, Jocelyne Owens & Jonathan Owens. 2017. Three Idioms, Three Dialects, One History: Egyptian, Nigerian and Tunisian Arabic. In Veronika Ritt-Benmimoun (ed.), Tunisian and Libyan Arabic Dialects: Common Trends – Recent Developments – Diachronic Aspects, 43–84. Zaragoza: Prensas de la Universidad de Zaragoza.Search in Google Scholar
Sinclair, John. 1991. Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Editorial (English)
- Editorial (Deutsch)
- Articles
- Criteria for sample sentences in phraseological dialect dictionaries: a proposal based on GEPHRAS2
- ¿Coger con las manos en la masa es una locución o una colocación?
- The contextual behaviour of specialised collocations: typology and lexicographic treatment
- Lexical bundles in the academic writing of the Arts and Humanities: from corpus to CALL
- Proverbial markers and their significance for linguistic proverb definitions: an experimental investigation
- Polysemie, Ambiguität und Vagheit der Idiome aus kognitiver Perspektive
- Idioms in Syrian Arabic: a semantic and grammatical approach to the verb
- Book reviews
- Book reviews
- Book reviews
- Book reviews
- Book reviews
- Book reviews
- Book reviews
- Obituary
- Elena Arsenteva In Memoriam (1956–2022)
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Editorial (English)
- Editorial (Deutsch)
- Articles
- Criteria for sample sentences in phraseological dialect dictionaries: a proposal based on GEPHRAS2
- ¿Coger con las manos en la masa es una locución o una colocación?
- The contextual behaviour of specialised collocations: typology and lexicographic treatment
- Lexical bundles in the academic writing of the Arts and Humanities: from corpus to CALL
- Proverbial markers and their significance for linguistic proverb definitions: an experimental investigation
- Polysemie, Ambiguität und Vagheit der Idiome aus kognitiver Perspektive
- Idioms in Syrian Arabic: a semantic and grammatical approach to the verb
- Book reviews
- Book reviews
- Book reviews
- Book reviews
- Book reviews
- Book reviews
- Book reviews
- Obituary
- Elena Arsenteva In Memoriam (1956–2022)
