You are on page 1of 36

Body Parts We Live By in Language and Culture:

The raaS head and yidd hand in Tunisian Arabic1


Zouheir Maalej
Abstract
It is now widely documented across languages and cultures that body parts are used
to conceptualize mental faculties, emotions, character traits, and cultural values. The
languages studied and documented in these domains of knowledge cut across different families of languages and cultures such as Arabic, Basque, Chinese, Danish, Dutch,
English, Estonian, German, Indonesian, Japanese, Korean, Malay, Persian, Spanish,
Thaayorre, Turkish, etc. As a follow-up of work done on body parts in Tunisian Arabic
(henceforth, TA), I argue that a motivated division of labor between the various parts
of the body is active in many languages and cultures. Such a division, however, does
not prevent overlap between some body parts in terms of what domain of knowledge
they are culturally made to conceptualize. I also argue that internal body parts in general are more likely to be based on metaphor and get involved more in mental faculties and emotions and less with character traits and cultural values. However, external
body parts are more likely to be based on metonymy and get involved more in character traits and cultural values and less with mental faculties and emotions. In the
current chapter, the body parts, raaS (head) and yidd (hand), will be dealt with in TA
to show part of such a division. Unlike the heart and the eye that have been shown to
conceptualize mental faculties, emotions, character traits, and cultural values to different degrees, it will be argued that, owing to their salient place in the body and their
saliency in some types of cultural experience, the raaS (head) and yidd (hand) in TA
are mostly used to conceptualize character traits and cultural values.

Introduction
The embodiment thesis is the backbone on which cognitive linguistics rests.
More than allowing for the body to get into the mind, embodiment is impor1 The author is indebted to Iwona Kraska-Szlenk, the co-editor of this collection, for many useful comments that have improved this chapter. The author is also indebted to two reviewers
for some pertinent comments on contents and language and style. Obviously, responsibility
for the chapter is incumbent on the author.

koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 4|doi .63/9789004274297_13

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

225

tantly part-and-parcel of a theory of human understandingindirect understanding via metaphor (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980: 178). The embodiment
thesis is motivated by pre-linguistic image-schematic structures arising from
personal and socio-cultural embodied experiences, held to have a figurative
character, as structures of embodied imagination (Johnson, 1987: xx). Thus,
the centrality of human embodiment directly influences what and how things
can be meaningful for us, the ways in which these meanings can be developed
and articulated, the ways we are able to comprehend and reason about experience, and the actions we take (Johnson, 1987: xiv). This has a consequence for
the mind, which is not merely embodied, but embodied in such a way that our
conceptual systems draw largely upon the commonalities of our bodies and of
the environments we live in. The result is that much of a persons conceptual system is either universal or widespread across languages and cultures (Lakoff &
Johnson, 1999: 6).
Embodiment via body parts has started to gain momentum in cognitive
linguistic studies thanks largely to two full-length edited volumes (Sharifian
et al., 2008; Maalej & Yu, 2011). The two publications investigate the conceptualizing role of internal and outer body parts respectively, concluding that they
target knowledge domains such as mental faculties, emotions, character traits,
and cultural values (Aksan, 2011; Foolen, 2008; Gaby, 2008; Geeraerts & Gevaert,
2008; Goddard, 2008; Ibarretxe-Antuano, 2008; Ikegami, 2008; Maalej, 2008,
2011; Marmaridou, 2011; Nagai and Hiraga, 2011; Niemeier, 2008; Nissen, 2011;
Occhi, 2008, 2011; Sharifian, 2008, 2011; Siahaan, 2008, 2011; Vainik, 2011; Yoon,
2008; Yu, 2002, 2004, 2008abc, 2009, 2011). Most of these researchers studied
the body parts of heart, eye, liver, and stomach in their respective languages.
Very few, however, focused on the head (Aksan, 2011; Siahaan, 2011), and no
study was devoted to the hand in these two volumes.
In English, the head is used in expressions such as the following, most of
which do not make sense to speakers of Tunisian Arabic (TA) but are intelligible to them as will be shown through expressions using raaS head in TA:
head to head = in a race, when two contestants are doing as well as each
other: They are head to head in the polls.
off the top of your head = when you give an answer to something without having the time to reflect: Whats our market strategy? Well, off the
top of my head, I can suggest...
have a good head for = be good at something: Hes an accountant and he
has a good head for figures.
have your head in the clouds = dream: Hes always got his head in the
cloudshe makes all these impossible plans.

226

Maalej

go over your head = not understand something: The lesson went over
my headI didnt understand a word of it.
keep your head = stay calm: He always keeps his head in a crisis.
be head over heels in love = be completely in love: You can see that hes
head over heels in love with her.
keep your head above water = manage to survive financially: Despite
the recession, they kept their heads above water.
use your head = think about something to solve a problem: Its quite
simplejust use your head!2
In English, the same can be said of the word hand such as in the following
expressions, most of which do not make sense to speakers of Arabic but are
intelligible to them as will be shown through expressions using yidd hand
in TA:
On hand
available for use.

My mum always has lots of food on hand
In hand
in your possession or control.

He has the situation well in hand
Out of hand
very quickly without serious thought.

He decided to go to Italy out of hand
Out of hand (2) not controlled.

Her children were tired and quickly got out of hand,
running everywhere
At hand
close in distance or time.

She always keeps her phone close at hand
At first hand
in a direct way

I was able to verify his statement at first hand
Eat out of someones handto be completely controlled by someone.

Her boyfriend has her eating out of his hand
Offhand
without premeditation or preparation.
I cant give you my telephone number offhand, Ive forgotten it
By hand
with the hands.

Jane makes earrings by hand
Second hand having had a previous owner.

I love my handbag, even though its second hand
Get/Lay your hands onto find, get, or control (someone or something).

I finally managed to lay my hands on some of that
chocolate cake
2 http://www.english-at-home.com/idioms/head-idioms/.

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

227

Hand in glove very closely.



James and Sue are working hand in glove to make the
project work
On the one hand,on the other handused to introduce statements
that describe two different or opposite ideas, people,
etc.

On the one hand, its really cheap, but on the other I
cant afford it3
Wash your hands of something: To wash your hands of a problem or
situation means that you refuse to deal with it any longer.
With a heavy hand: Dealing with or treating people with a heavy hand
means acting with discipline and severity, with little or no sensitivity. He
ran the juvenile delinquent centre with a heavy hand.
Have your hands full: If you have your hands full, you are very busy or
you have a lot to do.4
For instance, both heavy hand and hands full also exist in TA, but they do
not at all mean the same thing as in English. The former profiles slow performance while the latter profiles wealth.
The current chapter is structured as follows. The first section deals with the
head and its correlative functions as mental faculty, character traits, and cultural values. The second section addresses the correlative functions of hand in
TA as character traits (including those in proverbs). The third and last section
is devoted to a discussion of both body parts in terms of their cognitive and
functional roles in Tunisian culture.
1

The Head in TA

In the literature, studies of head across languages abound. Niemeier (2008:


35960) classifies the conceptualizations of head in English into three
major conceptual metaphors, namely, head as LOCUS OF REASONING, head
as CONTROL CENTRE, and head as CONTAINER. Siahaan (2011: 96103) has
found head in German and Indonesian to profile the same conceptual
metaphors of head as LOCUS OF THOUGHT, head as CONTAINER, and head as
the correlate of HUMAN CHARACTER TRAITS. However, she was able to show
that German speakers have a preference for the function of kopf head
3 http://www.abaenglish.com/blog/english-vocabulary-learn-english-with-aba/idioms-andexpressions/expressions-with-the-word-hand/ (accessed on 23/1/2012).
4 http://www.learn-english-today.com/idioms/idiom-categories/hands.htm (accessed on 23/1/
2012).

228

Maalej

while Indonesian speakers have a preference for the position of kepala head
(Maalej & Yu, 2011: 11). Aksan (2011: 24748), on the other hand, argues that in
Turkish bai head is profiled as head as HIGH STATUS, head as a RULER, and
head as TALENT.
The word raaS (head) in TA5 is used as a source domain for many conventional expressions such as raaS bSall (onion head), raaS um (garlic head),
raaS lift (turnip head), raaS bruklu (cauliflower head), raaS krum (cabbage
head), raaS xass (lettuce head), raaS bisbes (anise head), raaS ilmissaak (head
of the pin), etc. It should be noted that these expressions designate vegetables
which are roughly thought to resemble the human head in shape but not in
size or function. The human head also profiles many other different target
domains for various motivations such as raaS innahj (head of the street) for
the beginning of the street from the speakers perspective, raaS ilfitla (head of
the thread) for the part that guides us to the ball of thread, raaS ilmaal (head
of the capital) for money capital, etc.
I prefer to see raaS head in TA as an ensemble of metaphors and metonymies which constitute a higher level of cognitive representation known as a
cultural model of raaS head. What a cultural model affords over disparate
and sometimes conflicting conceptual metaphors is a more dominant conceptual frame containing various sub-models that complement each other as
different facets of the more overarching cultural model (Niemeier, 2008: 350).
This ties in with what Lakoff and Johnson (1980) say about different conceptual
metaphors serving the same concept without these alternatives being contradictory. Thus, the cultural model of raaS head in TA profiles it as concerned
with the mental faculty of thinking, some character traits, some cultural values, and as used in many metonymic expressions where the head stands for the
person, as will be demonstrated in the following sub-sections.
1.1
Mental Faculty
In many cultures, the heart is associated with emotions while the head is
associated with reason. Reason is seen to reside in the head since the latter includes the brain. Thus, the head is a PART-WHOLE metonym for reason, whereby it functions as the LOCUS OF REASONING as in the following
example:

5 Throughout this paper the TA examples are transcribed according to the following conventions: capital letters T, D, S, for emphatic (pharyngealized) T, , S, respectively, for , H
for , R for , for and for ; otherwise IPA symbols are used. Vowel length is indicated by
vowel doubling.

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

(1)

amill illi
qal-l-u
[he]
do-PERF that tell-PERF to him
He did what his head told him.
He acted without seeking advice.

229

raaS-u
head his

The linguistic metaphor in (1) is reproachful of the mental behavior of the actor
but in general to do what your head told you in TA presupposes, depending
on the context, either that you acted reasonably or unreasonably. A reasonable
head is laudable while an unreasonable one is not.
If it turns out that a person is unable to make the right judgment or reasoning about a given state of affairs, it is thought in TA that his head needs repairing, as is suggested in the following example:
(2)

qaad-l-u
raaS-u
[you] repair to him head his
Repair his head.
Can you reason him?

As is presupposed from the linguistic metaphor in (2), because the head is not
functioning properly, it needs to be repaired, i.e. the person possessing the
head needs reasoning with. The conceptual metaphor governing (2) is THE
HEAD IS A MACHINE.
Apart from being the LOCUS OF REASONING and A MACHINE, the cultural
model of raaS is still not complete without the existence of some coherence.
If the head is the locus of reason and a machine, it should logically need to be
filled with contents in order for the machine to find fodder to act upon. When
someone cannot make sense of a given state of affairs, the state is conceptualized as being denied access to the head or resisting acceptance within the head
as in the following example:
(3)

l-iHkaja ma
daxlit
the story no
enter-PERF not
The story did not get into my head.
The story did not make sense to me.

l-raaS-i
to head my

As a metonymic metaphor, the head is conceptualized as a container which


only reasonable states of affairs can get into, as is clear from the verb daxlit

230

Maalej

(did not enter). As the seat of the mental faculty, the head can give and deny
access to what it finds (in)compatible with reason. If access is permitted, it
means that a state of affairs is judged as reasonable, and can now reside in
the container. If access is denied, it means that a state of affairs is rejected as
unreasonable. In this sense, THE HEAD IS A CONTAINER FOR REASON.
The head in TA occurs in some proverbial expressions as a container for
knowledge and intelligence as in the following expressions:
(4)

xu
il-ilm
min ruS il-fkaarin
[you] take-IMPERF
the knowledge from heads the turtles
Take knowledge from turtles heads.
Knowledge is not to be taken from simple-minded people.

This is an ironical proverb, which discourages people from obtaining knowledge from those who have little or none of it, and exhorts them to acquire
it from knowledgeable people. What suggests that THE HEAD IS A CONTAINER
FOR KNOWLEDGE is the preposition min (from). Another conceptual metaphor
pertaining to the head as a container is found in (5) below:
(5)

ir-raaS
illi ma
fi-ih zur
baSla xair min-nu
the head that no in it cunningness onion better from it
A head without cunningness is no better than an onion.
There is no better head than a smart one.

Smartness or intelligence is assumed to be the contents of the head, which suggests the conceptual metaphor of THE HEAD IS A CONTAINER FOR INTELLIGENCE.
There is coherence between head as a CONTAINER FOR KNOWLEDGE and head as
a CONTAINER FOR INTELLIGENCE. Intelligence acts on this knowledge to make
it worthwhile. For this reason, the two conceptual metaphors could be lumped
together as THE HEAD IS A CONTAINER FOR KNOWLEDGE AND INTELLIGENCE.
Since the head does not make maximal use of thought or reasoning, it can
be manipulated by the others as in the following examples:
(6)

dawwar-it-l-u
raaS-u
[she] turn-PERF-FEM to him
head his
She turned his head.
She made him change his mind.

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

(7)

231

TaiHit-tu
ala raaS-u
[she] fall-PERF him
on head his
She made him fall on his head.
She seduced him.

The linguistic metaphor in (6) above is coherent with THE HEAD IS A MACHINE,
whereby the head has been manipulated in order to make it function (un)
reasonably. Dawwar (to turn) presupposes here a button on a machine, which
is turned on and off. In (7), however, love is conceptualized as falling on the
head, which entails that since the head is now not in its uppermost position
on the axis of VERTICALITY of the body, it cannot perform its normal functions
of thinking and reasoning.
1.2.
Character Traits
Beside its important role as a mental faculty, the head in TA is also used in conceptualizing the character trait of stubbornness as in the following examples:
(8)

raaS-u
kbiir
head his
big
His head is big.
He is stubborn.

This conceptualization of stubbornness capitalizes on size, which makes the


head bigger than its normal size in non-stubborn individuals. Thus, TA manipulates the size of the head by making it bigger than normal to conceptualize
stubbornness, which roughly can be captured as BEING STUBBORN IS HAVING A
MANIPULABLE HEAD.
Stubbornness is also conceptualized in a way that is conflictive with
(8)above. For instance, in (9) below the head is thought to be rather physically
inflexible since it shows a certain hardness, which is indicative of resistance to
persuasion:
(9)

raaS-u
SHiiH
Head his hard
His head is hard.
He is stubborn.

232

Maalej

Tunisians expect their fellow citizens to show some degree of flexibility,


with stubbornness being conceptualized as BEING STUBBORN IS HAVING AN
INFLEXIBLE HEAD.
A variant of (9) can be found in (10) and (11) below, which actually relate to
it by entailment, i.e. if something is hard, it is not easily breakable or it does
not break at all:
(10)

(11)

raaS-u
ma jitkissar
head his no break-IMPERF not
His head does not break.
He is stubborn.
raaS-u
ma jqiSS-u-
qaaDi faas
head his no cut-IMPERF judge Fes
His head cannot be cut by the judge of Fes.
He is so stubborn.

The difference between (10) and (11) is that the latter is stronger in meaning
than the former. This difference comes from the fact that (10) capitalizes on
the heads breakability; should the head break, it will be reduced to pieces,
which counts as persuasion to the heads owner in TA. On the other hand, (11)
capitalizes on the unlikelihood of the head to be beheaded, i.e. even if the head
is cut off, the owner of it will not be persuaded. In other words, the hyperbolic
dimension in (11) means to say that the person in question is very hard, if not
impossible, to persuade.
In (12) below, the fact that someone is unlikely to be persuaded as a result of
their being stubborn is not because their head is big or hard but because it
cannot retain reason owing to its metaphoric structure:
(12)

raaS-u
naaif
head his
dried up
His head is dried up.
He is stubborn.

The head is conceptualized as having here a sponge-like texture. A sponge


cannot retain much water owing to its porous structure, therefore drying up
quickly because of its permeability. By analogy, a spongy head as in (12) cannot

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

233

keep enough reason inside it to function properly, which causes it to dry up.
Since the head is dried up, the person possessing it cannot be easily persuaded.
In (13) below, someone is stubborn owing to their heads structure.
(13)

raaS-u
mlaHHam
head his meaty
His head is meaty.
He is stubborn.

The knowledge that the head in animate beings includes more bones than
flesh and a soft brain is important here. However, I do not in the least mean to
imply that Tunisians are aware of the difference in texture between the brain
and flesh in creating this conceptualization of stubbornness. Popularly, someone may be conceptualized as lahma fiha ruH (X is but flesh inside which there
is a soul), which means that they are made of flesh or alive meat but without
reason and emotions.
Another important linguistic metaphor realizing the conceptual metaphor
of BEING STUBBORN IS HAVING AN INFLEXIBLE HEAD is found in (14):
(14)

raaS-u
ma jidxil
head his
no
enter-IMPERF
A comb is unable to enter his head.
He is stubborn.

fi-ih miT
in it comb

This metonymic metaphor profiles the head in a PART-WHOLE metonymic relation with hair as suggested by the lexical items jidxil (enter) miT (a comb).
Stubbornness is conceptualized as having entangled, impenetrable hair for
the comb.
1.3
Cultural Values
Together with the mental faculty and the character trait of stubbornness, the
head in TA also profiles cultural values such as industriousness, hospitality and
dishonor, as will be shown in the following.
1.3.1 Industriousness
Industriousness in TA is conceptualized as an image metaphor, which depicts
industrious people as drawing a full circle with their body, with their feet
higher than their head as in (15) below:

234
(15)

Maalej

saakai-h ala
min raaS-u
feet his
high-COMPARATIVE
than head his
His feet were higher than his head.
He was head over heels.

It is interesting to note that the image of industriousness in TA depicts the


feet as reaching the head in a forward movement, with the head remaining in
place as a result while in English the expression head over heels depicts the
person as bending his head back to reach the heels in a backward movement
as a result of the fact that it is the head that is over the heels. In English terms,
in English the expression is head over heels while in TA it is heels over head.
The conceptual metaphor that can be written for (15) is BEING INDUSTRIOUS IS
HAVING ONES FEET OVER ONES HEAD.
1.3.2 Hospitality
Hospitality in TA capitalizes on the UP-DOWN and VERTICALITY image schemas
as in the following examples:
(16)

(17)

(18)

illi hazz
wild-i w baas-u
HaTTn-i
fuq raaS-u
that raise-PERF son my and kiss-PERF him put-PERF me on head his
He who raised my son and kissed him raised me above his head.
He who has loved my child has actually respected me.
xalla-ni/hazz-ni
[he] put-PERF me/lift-PERF me
He put/lifted me over his head.
He was hospitable to me.

fuq
over

raaS-u
head his

ala raaS-i
w
ain-i
On head my and eye my
On my head and my eyes.
You are welcome.

All of the examples in (1719) conceptualize hospitality as a vertical movement. In the proverb in (16) and the conventional metaphor in (17), hospitality
capitalizes on the head as a space over which a guest is raised by a hospitable
person. In (18), hospitality capitalizes on the head and the eyes. Thus, hospitality is conceptualized as BEING HOSPITABLE IS PUTTING PEOPLE OVER ONES

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

235

HEAD AND EYES, which suggests that hospitality is motivated by the more primary conceptual metaphor UP IS GOOD.
1.3.3
Dishonor and Pride
The UP-DOWN schema is capitalized upon in TA in the conceptualization of
dishonor and pride, with the former as DOWN and the latter as UP as in the following examples:
(19)

(a)

(b)

xalla-l-na
raaS-i
fi-t-traab
[he] cause-PERF to us head my in the sand
He caused our head to be in the ground.
He dishonored us.
hazzil-na
raaS-na
[he] lift-PERF to us our head
He lifted our head for us.
He made our pride.

Since the head is the uppermost part of the body, it overlaps with pride on the
schema of VERTICALITY as in (19b) above. When the head leaves its uppermost
position and lands in the position of the feet, which corresponds to the DOWN
position on the VERTICALITY axis, dishonor is conceptualized. In (19a), traab
(sand) is obviously under our feet, which is where dishonor locates the head
in the case of TA. The conceptual metaphors here are BEING DISHONORED IS
HAVING ONES HEAD DOWN and BEING PROUD IS HAVING ONES HEAD UP, which
are governed by the more primary metaphors, DOWN IS BAD and UP IS GOOD.
1.4 Part-for-Whole
So far, the head in TA has been investigated in metaphoric expressions.
However, the head is also used in PART-WHOLE metonyms, where the head
stands for the person, such as in ja raaSu aliiha (came his head on her: He
came to find fault with her), aat fi raaSu (came in his head: He had to do it
alone or he was accused of having done it), raaSi fi raaSu (my head in his head:
We were just the two of us), jiDrab raaS braaS (he beats a head with a head:
He plots between two of them and keeps watching them), xallaawah braaSu
fiddaar (They left him with his head at home: They left him alone at home),
dazzha fi raaSi (he shoved it in my head: He did it and accused me of having
done it), ndabbar raaSi (I meddle through my head: I can meddle through by
myself), imma raaSi wa illa raaSu (either my head or his head: It is either me

236

Maalej

Mental faculties
of reasoning
and intelligence

Head for person


metonym

Cultural
model of the
head in ta

cultural values of
industriousness,
hospitality,
dishonor, and
pride

Character trait of
stubborness

Figure 1

The semantic domains of the cultural model of the head in ta

or him), and kabbu fi ruS baDhim (They clutched in the heads of each other:
They picked up a row).
The cultural model of the head in TA can be summed up in the following
figure:
2

The Hand in Tunisian Arabic

In TA, jidd (hand) profiles several important target domains such as agricultural tools (jidd ilmisHa: the hand of a spade; jidd ilbaala: the hand of the
shovel; jidd ilmiT: the hand of the rake; jidd miHraa: the hand of a plow),

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

237

kitchen utensils (jidd itTinara: handle of the pan; jidd izzizwa: the handle of
the coffee pot; jidd ilqiffa: the handle of the alfalfa basket), practical tools (jidd
ilbaab: the door handle; jidd ilmTarqa: the handle of the hammer), and the
work force (ljidd laamla). Another important use of yidd (hand) in TA profiles
the hand as a unit of measurement such as in jidd qamH (a handful of wheat),
sometimes diminished to ywaida qamH (a hand not full of wheat), jidd dihn (a
coat of paint), etc.
Comparatively, studies of hand are not as thick as those on head across languages. For instance, Morrow (2009: 16) tells us that the hand lemma has a
much higher frequency of occurrence than that of heart in the British National
Corpus. He explains this higher frequency by the fact that people are more
conscious of what they do with their hands since at some level they are making
decisions about how they will use their hands.
In TA, unlike the head which is used to conceptualize character traits and
cultural values, the hand is overwhelmingly used for character traits. Obviously,
the involvement of the hand in practical jobs makes it a better candidate for a
lot of practical skills in which it is used. Another characteristic of the hand is
that it is also used in many TA proverbs that highlight its practical dimension
and nature for the workings of Tunisian culture. A further use of hand is as a
PART-WHOLE metonym, where the hand stands for the person.
2.1
Character Traits
Compared to the head, which is only involved in the character trait of stubbornness, the hand in TA is involved in many positive and negative character
traits.
2.1.1
Dexterity and Awkwardness
As associated with the hand, dexterity seems to be the character trait which
finds locus in the hands, which are conceptualized as a container for manual
work as in the following example:
(20)

Sanit-ha
fi jdii-ha
Craft her
in hand her
Her craft is in her hand.
She has craft in her hands.

In this connection, THE HAND IS A CONTAINER FOR MANUAL SKILL. A


related metaphoric expression, but one not governed by the same concept, has

238

Maalej

to do with the hands complying with the person since they possess that skill,
as in the following example:
(21)

jdai-ha
mTaawit-ha
hands her comply-IMPERF her
Her hands comply with her.
She is dexterous.

It is interesting to note that this is not a person-for-hand metonymy, but almost


a disconnection between the person and the hands. Being dexterous with the
hands adds the hands to the person. Thus, when they are skilled, the hands join
the person as if they were themselves another person.
Apart from the container metaphor for hands, being dexterous in TA is conceptualized as having pretty hands as in the following example:
(22)

jdai-ha
smaaH
hands her pretty
Her hands are pretty.
She is dexterous.

According to (22), the conceptual metaphor governing it is BEING A DEXTEROUS


PERSON IS HAVING PRETTY HANDS. What seems to motivate such a mapping
between the prettiness of hands and being dexterous is the popular belief that
beauty is the product and producer of perfection.
On the other hand, a crooked hand is also associated with the opposite of
dexterity, i.e. awkwardness in doing things with ones hands as in the following
examples:
(23)

(24)

jdi-ih
mawwiin
hands his crooked
His hands are crooked.
He is awkward.
jdi-ih
mu xwaat
hands his no sisters
His hands are not sisters.
He is not dexterous.

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

(25)

239

jdi-ih
jdiin
miHraa
hands his hands of plow
His hands are those of a plow.
He has awkward hands.

Being awkward with ones hands in (23) is conceptualized in terms of crooked


hands in contradistinction with the hands in (21) and (22) above. Crooked
hands are far from perfect, which makes them produce unskilled work. In (24),
being awkward is conceptualized in kinship terms, whereby kinship between
the two hands is denied. It is interesting that biologically and physiologically
human hands are not identical in size, in manual capacity, and brain structures
that command them. There are right-handed and left-handed people, even
though the latter are fewer than the former in number across human societies,
which means that the right hand is more active in the former than in the latter category. However, Tunisian culture assumes, as is clear in (24) above, that
the two hands are identical (i.e. metaphorically, sisters) in order for them to be
able to work in harmony and produce perfect movements. When their sisterhood is denied, they start to malfunction. As regards (25), the conceptualization of awkwardness capitalizes on agriculture, whereby the hands of humans
are likened to those of a plow. People familiar with plows know that the hands
of the plow are clumsy in the sense that it cannot perform precise work. To
confirm this, Tunisians insist on having a negative connotation about the work
of the plow as is clear in disapprovingly conceptualizing a hard worker in TA
as a miHraa plow; the plow can never draw a perfectly straight line in the
ground. To unify all of (2325) in one conceptual metaphor, awkwardness may
be captured as BEING AWKWARD IS HAVING CLUMSY HANDS.
2.1.2
Wealth and Poverty
Beside this basic correlation between hand and craft, the hand in TA is tightly
correlated with wealth and poverty. There is a division of labor in Tunisian culture between the right and the left hands, whereby the right one is thought to
be the receiving or earning hand while the left hand is thought to be the spending one. There is also an old belief in that if the right hand itches, earnings are
expected and if the left hand itches spending is very likely.6 In either case, THE
HAND IS A CONTAINER FOR WEALTH as in the following example:
6 On another note, it is common even nowadays with advances in science to see parents in
Tunisia stop their left-handed children from using their left hand when eating and writing
because the right hand is associated in the Tunisian sub-culture with purity and the left hand

240
(26)

Maalej

jidd-u
hand his

maljaana
full

His hand is full.


He is a rich man.

As presupposed by the logic of containers, a container is closely tied to the


FULL-EMPTY schema clearly shown in maljaana full. Following the logic of the
Tunisian culture, since (26) is about wealth, it is the right hand of a wealthy
person that is full of money, which is why TA does not accept the plural jdain
hands of jidd hand to be used. However, the existence of money in the right
hand (earning) does not preclude it from going into the left one (spending).
Obviously, the poor have no money, which is conceptualized in TA in hand
terms as in the following example:
(27)

jidd-u
faarRa
hand his empty
His hand is empty.
He is a poor person.

It is interesting to think again according to the same logic of this division of


labor between hands in the Tunisian culture. The hand which is predicated of
emptiness is the right hand. And since the right hand is empty, the left hand is
logically empty because it does not receive anything from the right one in view
of spending. This situation is spelled out more explicitly in (28) below:
(28)

jidd
farRa
w-l-exra
ma fi-iha ajj
hand empty
and the other
no
in it thing
One hand is empty and the other has nothing in it.
He is broke.

To say that one hand was empty and the other had nothing in it amounts to
saying that both hands are empty. The conceptual metaphor here is BEING
POOR IS HAVING ONES HANDS EMPTY.

is seen as dirty. In many Arab sub-cultures, persons who use their left hand in handing others
coffee, tea, or other things are regarded unfavorably.

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

241

2.1.3
Productivity and Lack of Productivity
The hand in TA is a very productive source domain for many target domains. So
far, four important target domains have been investigated, namely, dexterity,
awkwardness, wealth, and poverty. Here, the hand is profiled for productivity
as in the following examples:
(29)

(30)

jidd-ha
xafifa
hand his
light
Her hand is light.
She is a productive worker.
jidd-ha
raziina
Hand her
heavy
Her hand is heavy.
She is a slow worker.

In (29), the lightness of the hand makes it a good candidate for speed. In
(30), however, the heaviness of the hand makes it a good candidate for slowness of action, which yields the conceptual metaphor of BEING PRODUCTIVE/
UNPRODUCTIVE IS HAVING A QUICK/SLOW HAND.
2.1.4 Thieving
The lightness of the hand is also capitalized upon to conceptualize theft. The
similarity between the two resides in the fact that both productivity and theft
require speed of action. The conceptual metaphor for theft in terms of hand is
BEING A THIEF IS HAVING A LIGHT HAND as in the following example:
(31)

jidd-u
xafifa
hand his
light
His hand is light.
He is a pickpocket.

It should be noted that (31) is similar linguistically to (29) above. However,


conceptually (29) is BEING PRODUCTIVE IS HAVING A QUICK HAND while (31) is
HAVING A LIGHT HAND IS BEING A THIEF. It is interesting to refer to an invocation of God by Tunisians in which they ask Him to make their hands heavier,
i.e. in the opposite sense of (31) as a way of evading, among other things, theft
and other misconducts. The invocation is in (32) below:

242
(32)

Maalej

jaqqal
jdii-na
ala
ma
jaii-na
heavy-IMPERF
hands our
on
what harm-IMPERF us
May God make our hands heavy for what may harm us.
May God protect us from what may harm us.

Obviously, theft and other misconducts are seen as harming the individuals
committing them.
2.1.5
Power and Authority
As addressed in Maalej (2008) concerning the heart and earlier in this chapter in connection with the head, the manipulation of body parts in Tunisian
culture is a very common practice when it comes to the conceptualization of
character traits and cultural values. Indeed, the hand is manipulated in two
ways in the conceptualization of power and lack of authority, as in the following examples:
(33)

(34)

jidd-u
Tawiila
hand his
long
His hand is long.
He has a lot of power.
jidd-u
qaSiira
hand his
short
His hand is short.
He has no power.

In (33), the hand is manipulated by lengthening it to obtain power and authority. This elongation logically makes the arm an extension of the hand while
in (34) it is shortened to conceptualize lack of power, which yields the conceptual metaphor, BEING POWERFUL/POWERLESS IS HAVING THE SIZE OF ONES
HAND MANIPULATED. In both cases, it seems that the hand and the arm are coextensive; in the case of (33), co-extensiveness profiles the hand and the arm as
longer than normal while in the case of (34) co-extensiveness profiles the hand
and the arm as shorter than normal.
Manipulation is not the only way of acting upon the hand to conceptualize
power in TA. The UP-DOWN schema is also used to create the conceptual metaphor of POWER IS UP as in the following linguistic metaphor:

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

(35)

243

jidd-u
lfuqanijja
Hand his
the upper
His hand is the upper one.
He has a lot of power.

The opposite of this conceptual metaphor is LACK OF POWER IS DOWN, which


conceptualizes the situation of all the people whose hands are under or
beneath the hand of the individual in (35) above.
Still with manipulation, there is a sense in which powers are attributed to
persons, whereby they can cause changes to things or events but the manipulation does not occur to the hand per se as in the following example:
(36)

jidd-u
tammid
hand his
freeze-IMPERF
His hand can make water freeze.
He has supernatural powers.

l-ma
the water

As is clear in (36) above, this use is a superstitious one, having to do with the
attribution of extraordinary powers to someone, which may not be true as is
clear from the hyperbole of freezing water just by using the hand. Obviously,
this superstition does not reflect a belief that that the person in (36) can actually freeze water, but refers to his infallible actions. The conceptual metaphor here is PERFORMING EXTRAORDINARY ACTIONS IS HAVING A HAND WITH
EXTRAORDINARY POWERS.
2.1.6
Generosity and Meanness
The productivity of the practice of manipulation is also found in the conceptualization of generosity in TA as in the following example:
(37)

jidd-u
miTluqa.
Hand his
stretched
His hand is stretched forward.
He is generous.

The hand is conceptualized as miTluqa stretched out, which is an unnatural physiological position to be in. This stretching of the hand as generosity

244

Maalej

correlates with social and financial outreach. To understand the motivation


of stretching the hand as generosity, one may refer to the other position that
flexes the hand at the elbow, which necessarily involves the arm with the
hand. When the arm is flexed at the elbow, it automatically comes closer to
the body, which does not count as generosity and solidarity. However, when
it is stretched forward, the hand leaves the ego of the body toward the other.
Thus, generosity can be captured in the following conceptual metaphor: BEING
GENEROUS IS HAVING ONES HAND EXTENDED FORWARD.
Apart from forward manipulation of the hand, generosity builds on THE
HAND AS A CONTAINER FOR WEALTH shown previously to conceptualize the
contents of the hand as generosity as in the following example:
(38)

illi
fi
jidd-u
mu liih
What
in hand his
no to him
What is in his hand is not his own.
He is very generous with his money.

Since (38) builds on THE HAND AS A CONTAINER FOR WEALTH as is clear from the
preposition fi in, the linguistic metaphor conceptualizes the contents of the
hand as not possessed by the generous person, which means that he/she gives
that away to the poor. Notice again that the singular yidd hand is used instead
of the plural from (26) above across all the character traits.
On the other hand, the hand is used to conceptualize meanness in a different way, whereby the hand assumes a metaphoric image such as a cupped,
closed hand as suggested by the following linguistic metaphor:
(39)

jidd-u
ma tqaTTar l-ma
hand his
no
drip the water
Water does not drip from his hand.
He is very mean.

A miser is conceptualized as having the fingers of his or her hand so tight


together that water cannot leak in between them, which shows that his or her
wealth is tightly kept for the self. To adopt the water metaphor here, the conceptual metaphor can be captured as BEING A MISER IS HAVING AN IMPERMEABLE
HAND.

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

245

2.1.7 Discouragement
Being discouraged in TA can come from the self or from the others. For convenience, the former will be called self-discouragement and the latter external
discouragement. Self-discouragement is conceptualized through fire, coldness, and pain metaphors as in the following linguistic metaphors:
(40)

(41)

(42)

jidd-i
Harqit-ni
hand my
burn-PERF me
My hand burnt me.
I thought twice before buying it.
jdajj-a
hands my

birdit
cold-PERF

My hands got cold.


I had no courage to do it.
jid-di
wijit-ni
hand my
hurt-PERF me
My hand hurt me.
I thought twice before buying it.

In TA, when they are high, prices are talked about as laswaam naar (prices are
fiery), which entails the burning effect. In (40), the hand is conceptualized as
burning the speaker, which counts as discouragement to buy. The two metaphors seem to cohere, and motivate each other. If prices are fiery, they burn the
buyers hands, and if they burn buyers hands, the buyers become discouraged
and refrain from buying. The reason it is involved here is that the hand metonymically does the paying or spending in all financial transactions: money,
credit card, check, money draft, etc.
Getting discouraged is not confined to financial scenarios. One may get discouraged in anything and by anything which requires action or involvement.
In (41) above, discouragement takes place by causing the hand to get cold or
colder. It seems that enthusiasm for doing something has its correlate in the
nervous system, in particular in the system known as the sympathetic nervous
system, which activates what is often termed the fight or flight response...
Postganglionic neurons principally release noradrenaline (norepinephrine).
Prolonged activation can elicit the release of adrenaline from the adrenal
medulla. Once released, noradrenaline and adrenaline bind adrenergic receptors on peripheral tissues. The effect of noradrenaline and adrenaline includes

246

Maalej

pupil dilation, increased sweating, increased heart rate, and increased blood
pressure.7 The opposite of enthusiasm or discouragement is not immune to
what is known as the parasympathetic nervous system, which is sometimes
called the rest and digest system. The parasympathetic system conserves
energy as it slows the heart rate, increases intestinal and gland activity, and
relaxes sphincter muscles in the gastrointestinal tract.8 Thus, it seems that
coldness in the body as a result of reduced activity in the body is by extension transmitted metaphorically to the hand even though coldness is not a
physiologically real thing in connection with a lack of enthusiasm for doing
something. However, it is not suggested that Tunisians are fully aware of this
scientific knowledge regarding this character trait. Owing to the fact that coldness in the hand has been there in the language and culture for a long time
because it has a strong experiential grounding in all cultures, I would like to
consider this mapping between coldness in the hand and lack of enthusiasm
as culture-specific in the same way a cold person is mapped onto lack of emotion and affection in English. An approximate conceptual metaphor for (40)
and (41) is BEING DISCOURAGED IS WHEN ONES HAND UNDERGOES A CHANGE IN
TEMPERATURE. As to (42), it builds on pain to conceptualize discouragement.
Obviously, the pain here is more mental than physical. It is mentally painful
to have to pay for something and not get ones moneys worth. The conceptual
metaphor that best captures (42) is BEING DISCOURAGED IS FEELING PAIN IN
THE HAND.
External discouragement, however, is caused by external forces or factors as
in the following linguistic metaphors:
(43)

(44)

Darb-u
ala jdii-h
[he] beat-PERF
on hands his.
He beat him on his hands.
He has little freedom to act.
kattif-l-u
jdii-h
[he] tie-PERF to him
hands his
He tied up his hands for him.
He has his hands tied.

7 http://www.sciencedaily.com/chapters/s/sympathetic_nervous_system.htm (accessed on
January 26, 2012).
8 http://www.sciencedaily.com/chapters/p/parasympathetic_nervous_system.htm (accessed
on January 26, 2012).

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

247

The conceptual metaphor that governs (43) is the same as the one governing
(42), i.e. BEING DISCOURAGED IS FEELING PAIN IN THE HAND as a result of beating while (44) is governed by BEING DISCOURAGED IS LOSING CONTROL OVER
ONESS HANDS.
2.1.8
Failure and Loss
It seems that the two recurrent domains that dominate character traits in TA
are hand as a container and manipulation of the hand. Failure and loss are
partly conceptualized in terms of a container as in the following linguistic
metaphors:
(45)

(46)

biik rat
jdai-k
faarRin
Why return-PERF
hands your
empty
Why did you return with your hands empty?
Why did you return empty-handed?
rja
bi ydii-h
[he] return-PERF
with hands his
He returned with his hands in his hands.
He returned with nothing in his hands.

fi ydii-h
in hands his.

In (45), faarRin empty presupposes that THE HAND IS A CONTAINER while (46)
states that the contents of the container is the hand itself, which means that
they are empty like in (45). Thus, building on the container image schema,
(45) and (46) profile failure and loss as BEING A FAILURE OR LOSER IS BEING
EMPTY-HANDED.
2.1.9
Control and Loss of Control
Again, THE HAND AS A CONTAINER is an important conceptual metaphor for the
conceptualization of character traits in TA. However, what sometimes makes
the difference between the different traits is the contents of the hand as in the
following examples:
(47)

flaan
fi
jidd-i
X
in hand my
X is in my hand.
X is under my control.

248

Maalej

In (47), control over somebody is conceptualized as having that person as the


contents of the container, i.e. the hand, which suggests the conceptual metaphor of BEING CONTROLLED IS BEING CONTAINED IN THE HAND.
However, loss of control over somebody can occur in two ways: the controlled leaving the container and the controller getting rid of the controlled as
is shown in the following examples:
(48)

(49)

flaan
xra
min
X
leave-PERF
from
X left my hand.
X is not under my control.

jid-di
hand my

flaan
nfadht
min-nu
X
shake-PERF
from him
I shook my hand off him.
X is not anymore under my control.

jid-di
hand my

In (48), the controlled person is liberated by deliberately leaving the hands of


the controller while in (49) the controller gets rid of the controlled person by
not providing them with the opportunity to be contained in the controllers
hand. The conceptual metaphor for (48) and (49) is LOSS OF CONTROL IS NOT
TO BE CONTAINED IN THE HAND.
2.1.10
Involvement and Solidarity
There is an old saying in Arabicjadu Allahi maa lamaa (Gods hand is
with the group)which encourages group work and collaboration between
individuals. Such a principle is exemplified by a lot of hand expressions in TA,
which have to do with involvement in and solidarity with the other members
of the group. Such expressions include jwiida jwiida (hand-DIM9 hand-DIM,
which is an invitation to people to give a hand in a given activity), jiddi jiddik (my hand, your hand: which is an invitation to equally participate in an
activity), jiddu fil ana (his hand in the dough: to have a hand in something),
jwaida lillaah (a hand to God: an invitation to contribute to an activity for free),
ma HaTTi fiha jiddu (he did not put his hand in it: he did not give a hand),
madd jiddu lil Hinna (he lent his hand to henna:10 he was ready to contribute to
9
10

DIM stands for diminutive.


Henna(Lawsonia inermis, also calledhenna tree) is aflowering plantused since antiquity
to dye skin, hair, fingernails, leather andwool (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henna).In

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

249

something), HaTTu ljidd fil jidd (they put the hand in the hand: they are hand
in glove with each other), and jdiih ala min raaSu (his hands are higher than
his head: he was much involved in an activity). The conceptual metaphor that
roughly captures most of these linguistic metaphors is BEING INVOLVED AND
SOLIDARY IS MAKING USE OF ONES HANDS.
2.2
Hand in Proverbs11
Maalej (2009: 136) considered proverbs as a cultural wealth summing up the
way of life and thought of a given culture. The following proverbs reveal various things about the Tunisian culture.
(50)

(51)

(52)

jifna
maal il-iddain
wi jibqa
amal il-lidain
perish-IMPERF money of the grandfathers and remain-IMPERF work of the hands

Inherited wealth perishes and only the skill of the hand remains.

bfumm-i
nibni
qSarr wi b-jid-di
nibn-i Taabuna12
with mouth my [I] build-IMPERF castle and with hand my [I] build-IMPERF bread oven
I can build a castle by talking and with my hand I build a bread oven.
aSfur
fi-l jidd
wla
ara
Bird
in the hand
rather than
ten
A bird in the hand instead of ten on the roof.

fis-StaHH
in the roof

The proverb in (50) praises manual work that is the result of manual skill over
money because the former is thought to remain while the latter may disappear,
while in (51) building a traditional bread oven with the hand is preferred over
talking about building a castle. On the other hand, (52) talks about practical
sense where something in the hand is preferred over something which is not,
i.e. something which you possess is better than something that you wish to
possess.
Tunisia, henna is used by women as a decoration of their hands and feet mainly for
weddings.
11 The entries for these proverbs include three lines only because no English gloss has been
attempted for them.
12 A tabouna in the Tunisian culture is a traditional one-yard high clay oven, with a narrower
open top, a wider bottom, and openings on the side to let air in, fixed to the ground and
heated to serve as an oven to make a special kind of thin bread known as tabouna bread
by sticking it to the side of the oven.

250

Maalej

According to Lakoff and Turner (1989: 162), proverbs are governed by the
conceptual metaphor of GENERIC IS SPECIFIC, where the GENERIC level of the
mapping is the text of the proverb and the SPECIFIC level is the state of affairs
in the world profiled by the proverb.
(53)

(54)

(55)

(56)

(57)

(58)

(59)

(60)

taTii-h
Sbu yHibb
l-jidd
b-kullha
[you] give-IMPERF him finger [he] like-IMPERF the hand by all
He was given a finger, but he wanted all the hand.
illi
bidd
Sbu
bidd
who pull-PERF
finger
pull-PERF
He who pulled a finger pulled all the hand.

l-jidd
the hand

b-kullha
by all

qaSSu-l-u
jid-du
aat
mwaatijja lit-Tambur
[they] cut to him hand his come-PERF suitable
to the drum
They cut off his hand, and it came handy for the drum.
aTawa-h
balHa
madd
jid-du
lil-arun
[they] give-PERF an unripe date [he] extend-PERF hand his to the bunch
He was given an unripe date, but he extended his hand to the whole bunch of dates.
Sbaa
jid-dik
mu mistwijja
Fingers
hand your
not
even
The fingers of your hand are not even.
ad-du
min yid-du illi tu-u
[he] take-PERF him from hand his that hurt-IMPERF him
He was held from his aching hand.
wajja
mil-Hinna
w
wajja
min
raTabit l-jidiin
a little
from henna
and a little
from
softness the hands
Some is due to the henna, some to the softness of the hands.
illi
tiDrab-u
jid-du
ma tuu
that [it] beat-IMPERF him
hand his
no
hurt-IMPERF not
One who is beaten by ones own hand does not suffer.

In all of the proverbs above, the GENERIC is the hand and the SPECIFIC is states
of affairs that the GENERIC can be applied to. For instance, (53) applies to all
scenarios of giving mixed with greed to have more, which is denounced by

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

251

the proverb. In (54), there are two GENERIC domains, namely the finger and
the hand. The proverb may apply to scenarios where two related topics may
raise each other as in kinship relations; if you talk evil of the son, you are
doing it to the father. The proverb in (55) is applied to situations where one
mishap can serve a good purpose. The proverb in (56) applies to scenarios
where someone is given something but gets greedy by wanting more, which is
very similar to (53). In (57), situations where false analogy and overgeneralization prevail are denounced. The proverb in (58) deals with scenarios where
one is talked to about a sensitive issue. In (59), blame is attributed to more
than one responsible factor. And proverb (60) applies to situations or scenarios
where reproach and blame come from a close person, which does not really
hurt and harm the blamed person.
In parallel to the metaphors discussed on character traits, the following
proverbs develop the same traits:
(61)

(62)

jidd
waHda
ma tSaffaq
hand single
no
clap-FEM-IMPERF
A single hand cannot clap.
jiqriS
w-jid-du
[he] pinch-IMPERF
and hand his
He pinches with his hand underneath.

taHt-u
under him

In (61), the sense of collaboration is reinforced as in involvement and solidarity


metaphors above while (62) develops the character trait of covert evil behavior
of plotting, which only exists in proverbial form.
2.3
Hand-for-Person Metonyms
Like with head, the hand in TA is also used in a PART-WHOLE metonym of handfor-person as in the following examples:
(63)

(64)

jdi-ih
ma Tammin
ajj
hands his
no
do-IMPERF
nothing
His hands can do nothing.
He can do nothing with his pair of hands.
l-Hall
wir-rabT
the untying
and the tying
Untying and tying is in his hand.
He has all the power.

bi-jid-u
by hand his

252
(65)

(66)

Maalej

tabarak
allah
ala
jwaidaat-ha
bless
God
on
hands-DIMINI her
Blessed be God about her hands.
Blessed be God about her.
la
jdiin!
no hands
What a pair of hands you have!
I bet you a million that he cannot do it!

The motivation for the hand-for-person metonym is that the hand makes it
possible to access the body, of which it is part.
The cultural model of the hand in TA can be schematically represented in
the following figure:

Wealth
and
poverty

Dexterity and
awkwardness

Productivity
and lack of
productivity

Power
and
authority

Thieving

Generosity
and
meanness

The cultural
model of the
hand in ta

Control and
loss of
control

Failure
and
loss
Involvement
and
solidarity
Figure 2

Discouragement

Hand-forperson
metonymies

The semantic domains of the cultural model of the hand in TA

253

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

3 Discussion
The investigation of the two body parts of head and hand in TA in sections
(1) and (2) above show two cultural models consisting of a set of conceptual
metaphors, very often inconsistent with each other but complementing each
other to make the cultural model more explanatory of daily life experiences.
Why is, for instance, the concept of mental faculty structured by more than
one conceptual domain? Lakoff and Johnsons (1980: 95) answer is that there
is no one metaphor that will do the job. The conceptual metaphors here seem
incoherent and inconsistent with each other as can be seen in THE HEAD IS THE
LOCUS OF REASONING, THE HEAD IS A MACHINE, and THE HEAD IS A CONTAINER
FOR KNOWLEDGE AND INTELLIGENCE. Yet, though such metaphors do not
provide us with a single consistent concrete image, they are nonetheless coherent and do fit together (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980: 105). The head as a locus of
reasoning presupposes or entails that it should have contents (knowledge and
intelligence), which are dealt with by the head as a machine.
The following figure shows the constituent conceptual metaphors that
make up the cultural model of the head in TA:

THE HEAD
IS A CONTAINER
FOR REASON,
INTELLIGENCE AND
KNOWLEDGE

BEING
STUBBORN
IS HAVING
MANIPULABLE
HEAD

BEING
INDUSTRIOUS
IS HAVING ONE'S
FEET OVER ONE'S
HEAD

Figure 3

THE HEAD
IS THE LOCUS OF
REASONING
THE HEAD
IS A MACHINE

The cultural
model of the
head in ta

BEING
DISHONORED IS
HAVING ONE'S
HEAD DOWN

BEING
STUBBORN IS
HAVING AN
INFLEXIBLE
HEAD

BEING
HOSPITABLE
IS PUTTING PEOPLE
OVER ONE'S
HEAD

The cultural model of the head in ta in terms of its conceptual metaphors

254

Maalej

It is worth noting that there is a clear division of labor between the cultural
model of the head and the cultural model of the hand in TA even though the
hand recruits more conceptual metaphors than the head owing to its practical dimension in everyday life. The head takes care of the main function of
mental faculty and related issues, which the hand could not possibly have performed because it lacks saliency with them (e.g. the hand cannot be made to
think because it is not salient with the mental faculty, whose seat is actually
the head). On the other hand, the hand takes care of character traits that are
salient with practical matters in the culture.
In terms of the conceptual metaphors used in the two cultural models, it
should be pointed out that the saliency of the head in the uppermost position
in the body makes it possible to conceptualize certain cultural values in terms
of the UP-DOWN and VERTICALITY schemas. This saliency of the head with such
schemas is not available to the hand, which is culturally manipulated in different ways. It seems that the manipulation of the size, position and temperature of the hand are important cognitive semantic domains in conceptualizing
character traits in TA. Recall that size with the heart in TA yields generosity
(qalb-u kbiir, his heart is big) and hardness of the heart is indifference and lack
of compassion (Maalej, 2008). With the head, size and hardness give the possibility of construing stubbornness in TA in two alternative ways.
The following figures show the cultural model of the hand in TA in terms of
its conceptual metaphors:

being
awkward
is having
abnormal
hands
being
poor is having
one's hands
empty

being
a thief is
having an
underweight
hand

Figure 4

THE
HAND IS A
CONTAINER FOR
MANUAL
SKILL

being a
dexterous
person is
having pretty
hands
the
hand is
container for
wealth

The cultural
model of the
hand in ta

performing
extraordinary
actions is having
a hand with
extraordinary
powers

being
productive/
unproductive is
having a speedy/
slow hand

being
powerful/
powerless is
having the size
of one's hand
manipulated

The conceptual metaphors of the cultural model of the hand in ta ( from 2.1.1. to 2.1.5)

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

being a
miser is having
an impermeable
hand

being
discouraged is
feeling pain in
the hand

being
generous is
having one's
hand extended
forward

being
discouraged is
when one's hand
undergoes a
change in
temperature
being
discouraged
is losing control
over one's
hands

The cultural
model of the
hand in ta

being
controlled is
being contained
in the hand

being a
failure or
loser is being
empty-handed
loss control
is not to be
contained in
the hand

Figure 5

255

being
involved and
solidary is
making use of
one's hands

The conceptual metaphors of the cultural model of the hand in ta ( from 2.1.6. to
2.1.10 plus 2.2. and 2.3.)

Another point worth discussing in this chapter has to do with a shared feature between the two cultural models investigated, which is the container
metaphor. The container seems to lend itself to both cultural models since a
head has a propensity to be a container. First, it is physically the container of
a brain, which in turn contains a mind, which in turn contains cognition. By
extension, the head is a container for everything that is in cognition, including cultural models and metaphors and their correlative mental faculty and
cultural values. The head is, thus, a container for high mental properties such
as thinking, knowledge, and intelligence as part of the brain and mind. On the
other hand, the hand is a container not of high-level mental structures but of
different contents, which include property such as money and even people as
a way of controlling them.
Conclusion
This paper is a contribution to the theory of embodiment. It has investigated
the two body parts of head and hand in TA with a view to seeing which mental
faculties, character traits, and cultural values they profile. Owing to its saliency
as a seat for the mental faculty in many cultures, the head has confirmed this

256

Maalej

saliency in TA since it functions more like a cross-cultural phenomenon in the


conceptualization of the mental faculties. Indeed, it is found to be a seat and a
container for reasoning, knowledge, and intelligence. However, the hand in TA,
which is curiously less studied in other cultures, seems to be more productive
in terms of the host of character traits that it conceptualizes. Indeed, the hand
is involved in no less than fifteen character traits in TA, both positive and negative ones. The mental faculties, character traits, and cultural values studied all
show these to be embodied in a more or less culturally specific way.
The existence of body parts in the conceptualization of abstract domains
such as mental faculties, emotions, character traits, and cultural values in TA
(Maalej, 2004, 2008, 2011) is testimony to embodied cognition. Semin and Smith
(2002: 385) argue that the relevant situation in which cognition takes place
is, almost always, a social situation defined by an individuals group memberships, personal relationships, and social and communicative goals. Since such
conceptualizations are used by most Tunisians, they are part of social embodied cognition.
References
Aksan, M. (2011). The apocalypse happens when the feet take the position of the head:
Figurative uses of head and feet in Turkish. In Z. Maalej & N. Yu (Eds.), Embodiment
via body parts: Studies from various languages and cultures (pp. 241255).
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Foolen, A. (2008). The heart as a source of semiosis: The case of Dutch. In F. Sharifian,
R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and language: Conceptualizations
of internal body organs across cultures and languages (pp. 373394). Berlin: Mouton
de Gruyter.
Gaby, A. (2008). Gut feelings: Locating intellect, emotion, and life force in the Thaayorre
body. In F. Sharifian, R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and language: Conceptualizations of internal body organs across cultures and languages
(pp.2744). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Geeraerts, D. & C. Gevaert (2008). Hearts and (angry) minds in Old English. In
F. Sharifian, R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and language:
Conceptualizations of internal body organs across cultures and languages (pp.2744).
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Goddard, C. (2008). Contrastive semantics and cultural psychology: English heart vs.
Malay hati. In F. Sharifian, R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and
language: Conceptualizations of internal body organs across cultures and languages
(pp. 75102). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

257

Ibarretxe-Antuano, I. (2008). Guts, heart and liver: The conceptualization of internal


organs in Basque. In F. Sharifian, R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body,
and language: Conceptualizations of internal body organs across cultures and languages (pp. 103128). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Ikegami, Y. (2008). The heart: What it means to the Japanese speakers. In F. Sharifian,
R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and language: Conceptualizations
of internal body organs across cultures and languages (pp. 169190). Berlin: Mouton
de Gruyter.
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and
reason. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago/London: The University
of Chicago Press.
. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western
thought. New York: Basic Books.
Lakoff, G. and M. Turner (1989). More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor.
Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Maalej, Z. (2004). Figurative language in anger expressions in Tunisian Arabic: An
extended view of embodiment. Metaphor and Symbol, 19(1), 5175.
. (2008). The heart and cultural embodiment in Tunisian Arabic. In F. Sharifian,
R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and language: Conceptualizations
of internal body organs across cultures and languages (pp. 395428). Berlin: Mouton
de Gruyter.
. (2009). A cognitive-pragmatic perspective on proverbs and its implications for
translation. International Journal of Arabic-English Studies (ijaes), 10, 135154.
. (2011). Figurative dimensions of 3ayn eye in Tunisian Arabic. In Z. Maalej &
N. Yu (Eds.), Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages and cultures
(pp. 213240). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Maalej, Z. & N. Yu (Eds.) (2011). Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various
languages and cultures. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing
Company.
Marmaridou, S. (2011). The relevance of embodiment to lexical and collocational
meaning: The case of prosopo face in Modern Greek. In Z. Maalej & N. Yu (Eds.),
Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages and cultures (pp. 2340).
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Morrow, P. R. (2009). Hand and heart: A study of the uses and phraseology associated with two common nouns. 20
2 2009 3 ) Language and Culture, Publication of Nagoya university, 20: 2.
Nagai, T., & M. Hiraga (2011). Inner and outer body parts: The case of har belly and
koshi lower back in Japanese. In Z. Maalej & N. Yu (Eds.), Embodiment via body

258

Maalej

parts: Studies from various languages and cultures (pp. 149170). Amsterdam/
Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Niemeier, S. (2008). To be in control: Kind-hearted and cool-headed. The head-heart
dichotomy in English. In F. Sharifian, R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture,
body, and language: Conceptualizations of internal body organs across cultures and
languages (pp. 349372). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Nissen, U. K. (2011). Contrasting body parts: Metaphors and metonymies of MOUTH in
Danish, English, and Spanish. In Z. Maalej & N. Yu (Eds.), Embodiment via body
parts: Studies from various languages and cultures (pp. 7192). Amsterdam/
Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Occhi, D. (2008). How to have a HEART in Japanese. In F. Sharifian, R. Dirven, N. Yu &
S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and language: Conceptualizations of internal body
organs across cultures and languages (pp. 191212). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
. (2011). A cultural-linguistic look at Japanese eye expressions. In Z. Maalej &
N. Yu (Eds.), Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages and cultures
(pp. 149170). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Semin, G. R., and E. R. Smith (2002). Interfaces of social psychology with situated and
embodied cognition. Cognitive Systems Research 3, 385396.
Sharifian, F. (2008). Conceptualizations of del heart-stomach in Persian. In F. Sharifian,
R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and language: Conceptualizations
of internal body organs across cultures and languages (pp. 247266). Berlin: Mouton
de Gruyter.
. (2011). Conceptualizations of cheshm eye in Persian. In Z. Maalej & N. Yu
(Eds.), Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages and cultures
(pp.197211). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Sharifian, F., R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.) (2008). Culture, body, and language:
Conceptualizations of internal body organs across cultures and languages. Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Siahaan, P. (2008). Did he break your heart or your liver? A contrastive study on metaphorical concepts from the source domain ORGAN in English and in Indonesian. In
F. Sharifian, R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and language:
Conceptualizations of internal body organs across cultures and languages (pp.
4574). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
. (2011). HEAD and EYE in German and Indonesian figurative uses. In
Z. Maalej & N. Yu (Eds.), Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages
and cultures (pp. 93113). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing
Company.
Vainik, E. (2011). Dynamic body parts in Estonian figurative descriptions of emotion. In
Z. Maalej & N. Yu (Eds.), Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages

the raas head and yidd hand in tunisian arabic

259

and cultures (pp. 4170). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing


Company.
Yoon, K-J. (2008). The Korean conceptualization of heart: An indigenous perspective.
In F. Sharifian, R. Dirven, N. Yu & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and language:
Conceptualizations of internal body organs across cultures and languages (pp. 213
243). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Yu, N. (2002). Body and emotion: Body parts in Chinese expression of emotion.
Pragmatics and Cognition, 10(1/2), 341367.
. (2004). The eyes for sight and mind. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 663686.
. (2008a). The Chinese heart as the central faculty of cognition. In F. Sharifian,
R. Dirven, N. Yu, and S. Niemeier (Eds.), Culture, body, and language:
Conceptualizations of internal body organs across languages and cultures (pp. 131
168). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
. (2008b). The relationship between metaphor, body, and culture. In R. M. Frank,
R. Driven, T. Ziemke, & E. Bernardez (Eds.), Body language and mind.Vol.2:
Sociocultural situatedness (pp. 387407). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
. (2008c). The relationship between metaphor, body and culture. In R. M. Frank,
R. Dirven, T. Ziemke, & E. Bernrdez (Eds.), Body, language, and mind (Vol. 2):
Sociocultural situatedness (pp. 387407). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
. (2009). The Chinese heart in a cognitive perspective: Culture, body, and language. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
. (2011). Speech organs and linguistic activity/function in Chinese. In Z. Maalej &
N. Yu (Eds.), Embodiment via body parts: Studies from various languages and cultures
(pp. 117148). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

You might also like