Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol.7 No.2 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 296 EFL Learners’ Performances on Associating English proverbs with Equivalent Turkish Proverbs: A Cross-Cultural Study Fatma KİMSESİZ fatmakimsesiz@ahievran.edu.tr Kırşehir Ahi Evran University, Turkey DOI: 10.35974/acuity.v7i2.2643 Abstract As verbal folklore genres, proverbs are an essential part of cultural, social, and linguistic patterns in a given language, yet with universal tendencies present in all languages. As cultural mirrors of a given culture, proverbs may pose a resemblance in meaning and structure across cultures. There are growing appeals for translation studies that revolve around contrasting and investigating equivalent proverbs in the source language and the target language. This is the focus of the current study that aims to examine the performance of Turkish learners of English in translating selected English proverbs in terms of their interlingual equivalents in Turkish based on the theory of re-conceptualization on a comparative basis. Through the study, as an initial step 15 English proverbs were selected and examined under the scope of their re-conceptualization degrees to indicate their level of equivalency in three distinct levels as highly equivalent, roughly equivalent, and non-equivalent proverbs. As a second step, 80 learners of EFL at A2 levels participated in translating 3 groups of proverbs, and later their performance in translating these proverbs was examined and analyzed. The study is a quantitative study and the data was collected through papers uploaded by the learners on an online education program that enables remote learning called AYDEP (Ahi Qualification-Based Education Program), administered by Kırşehir Ahi Evran University. The results indicated that learners performed better in translating maximally equivalent interlingual English proverbs than roughly equivalent proverbs, and they translated and interpreted non-equivalent proverbs differently. Given these points, intertwining an intercultural affinity between the source language and the target language, interlingual equivalent proverbs prove to have facilitating roles in associating English proverbs with Turkish equivalents. Keywords: Culture, EFL, intercultural relationship, proverb INTRODUCTION Proverbs have been studied for centuries as descriptive and favorable linguistic items of cultural values and reflections and they continue to play an essential role in modern studies in literature and culture (Mieder, 2004). They are distilled over many generations carrying a figurative (Norrick, 1985) and universal (Gözpınar, 2014) meaning in usage. Linguistically, proverbs are sentential and framed in a fixed sentence form (Norrick, 2014), mostly occurring in present tense form (Škara, 1995). Semantically they include polysemy, metaphor, metonymy, personification, paradox, and sharp contrasts that can be appealed in any situation (Norrick, 2014). As traditional responses to various ethical problems, proverbs spring up from shared cultural wisdom and common sense that results from judgments and a rich heritage of collected thinking and human experience formed in different situations by the members of a society (Norrick, 2014). That’s why some proverbs are common across languages. Although phrased differently, most culturally-related proverbs are analogous expressing similar sentiments enabling them to be associated with their equivalents across languages (Flonta, https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity mailto:fatmakimsesiz@ahievran.edu.tr Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol.7 No.2 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 297 2011; Lubis, 2018). Despite distinctions arising from ethnic, geographic, historical, and language factors, and despite limited contact in some cases; proverbs are constrained by universal influences of human experience to refer to similar/identical situations and that’s why they can be expressed with similar or identical maxims across cultures (Škara, 1995). Jakobson (1975) said, as a component in all language transactions, translation is divided into three kinds of forms: intralingual, interlingual, and intersemiotic translations. Literally to define, intralingual translation is related to the interpretation of verbal signs with the help of other linguistic manifestations within the same language; interlingual translation deals with interpreting verbal signs through some other languages. Finally, intersemiotic translation manifests itself as an interpretation of verbal signs through signs of “nonverbal sign systems” (Jakobson 1975, p. 233). In the potential of translating, as described by Jacobson (1975; 234– 235), “all cognitive experience and its classification is conveyable in any existing language”. In case of probable linguistic ‘deficiencies’; ‘loan words’, neologisms’, and ‘circumlocutions’ aid to compensate for insufficient language items. In other words, anything, even cultural phrases such as proverbs, “expressed in the source language may well find its translation in the target language” (Mandziuk-Nizińska, 2020, 208). As asserted by Mandziuk-Nizińska (2020), common ground can be established between the source language (SL) and the target language (TL) although linguistic and cultural distinctions may preclude obtaining a direct equivalence in translation. Since a given culture plays a fundamental role in translation (Bassnett, 2002; Lefevere, 1992, Venuti, 2000), it is better to know the source language culture to perceive the culture-specific information in the target text (Mandziuk-Nizińska, 2020). On this ground, it’s notable that culture-specific themes need to be addressed in foreign language teaching for a variety of reasons (Byram & Feng, 2004). Thus, foreign language teachers should involve cultural studies in their classes by comparing and contrasting both native and the target cultures (Byram & Morgan, 1994). There is a common tendency to presume that certain similar or identical situations are experienced in different speech communities, thus, that they are expressed with similar or identical maxims show that proverbs are constrained by universal influences of human experience to refer to these situations. As a result, findings from the cross-cultural studies reveal that a high percentage of proverbs are similar or identical semantically and linguistically. Moreover, results of the contrastive analysis demonstrate that the majority of proverbs have common grounds despite distinctions arising from ethnic, geographic, historical, and language factors. (Al –Timen, 2015; Buljan & Gradečak-Erdeljić, 2013; Chakyroglu et al., 2018; Lubis, 2018; Mandziuk-Nizińska, 2020; Rusieshvili-Cartledgea & Gözpınar, (2014), Syzdykov, 2014; Xiangyang, 2016). In line with these result, translating proverbs requires a reciprocal insight into the meaning, moral, and values of the existing proverbs in both languages. (Wilson, 2010). One of the issues worth mentioning in translating proverbs is glossing their literal and literary translations. Essentially, literal translation provides one-to-one correspondence across languages (Strauss, 2005), while literary translation renders the figurative meaning behind the proverb (Landers, 2001). Thus, information can be elicited for its denotative and connotative meaning. To achieve the intended translation effect, the items to be used need to conform to the lexical, phonetic, and syntactic practices (Mandziuk-Nizińska, 2020) without losing sight of all linguistic and cultural specifications (Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, 2017). One sounding premise in associating proverbs across languages is re-conceptualization operations (given in Appendix A) put forward by Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (2010). The employment and the number of the operations can differ from translation to translation in a given context. The underlying concept of these differences compose degrees of re- conceptualization which draw a direct proportion to the distance between the source language https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol.7 No.2 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 298 and the target language translations (Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, 2010). To be specific, as the number of re-conceptualization operations escalates, the distance between the target language and the source language expands. When translating proverbs, if a proverb is roughly attached to its equivalent in the source language, the degree of re-conceptualization operations will increase to compensate for the vacancy in meaning and structure. The other way around, those proverbs with the closest equivalent in the source language signify a very low degree of re- conceptualization (Mandziuk-Nizińska, 2020). Thus, when the sense employed for the construction of a proverb is almost the same and the degree of translation operations is low, then it can be claimed that a maximal equivalency has been attained (highly equivalent). On the other hand, proverbs with a low degree of re-conceptualization necessitate more translation operations. They carry a similar meaning with a different formulation and appear to be slightly corresponding. Those proverbs which express a similar meaning appear to be roughly equivalent. Expressing ‘an analogous kernel of truth’ (Mandziuk-Nizińska, 2020, p.215), those proverbs evoke utterly divergent concepts and different metaphorical scenes to convey nearly the same message. Looking through an intralingual perspective, non-equivalent proverbs are unique within their native language, bearing no association with the target language. It seems futile to search for an equivalent version of them or to express them faithfully in the target language, hence learners resort to translation or interpretation to understand the message. Without a doubt, even the practice of word-for-word translation is possible, it will yield confusing outcomes since, what was once a proverb will lose its edge and turn out to be a sentence with no proverbial sense. Handling the issue from the point of interlingual and intralingual reconceptualization processes, it is possible to divide translation processes of proverbs into 3 groups to light up the distinctions by Lubis (2018) and Mandziuk-Nizińska (2020): 1. Highly (Maximally) equivalent source language and target language proverbs with a relatively low degree of interlingual reconceptualization, 2. Roughly equivalent proverbs with a high degree of interlingual reconceptualization, (Mandziuk-Nizińska, 2020), 3. Non-equivalent proverbs that cannot be associated with any of the culturally or traditionally related proverbs in the source or the target language and that is amenable to intralingual analysis (Lubis, 2018). There are a variety of English and Turkish proverbs that seem highly equivalent in meaning and form. To restate it through the glasses of Lewansdowska’s re-conceptualization operations, these proverbs seem to mirror a low degree of reconceptualization operations with minimal or no changes in meaning and style. When a proverb has the same meaning in literal and literary forms, it means that it is ‘translated in its precise wording’ (Mieder, 2004, p.21). As an example for this group of proverbs, English proverbs ‘Time is money’ senses maximally equivalent to Turkish proverb ‘Vakit nakittir’, signifying that time is a valuable source and it should be used properly especially to earn money (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/time-is-money). Thus, it is possible to notify that such kinds of proverbs stand for highly equivalent English-Turkish proverbs, bearing no reconceptualization operation in translation. As to roughly equivalent proverbs, some parallel proverbs may envisage utterly divergent scenes, yet they indicate approximately the same message. For this group of proverbs, ‘The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree’ and its Turkish version, ‘Armut dalının dibine düşer’, (lit.: A pear falls beneath the pear tree) illustrates a clear instance. The hidden message is that a child usually has a similar character or similar qualities to his/her parents. The English version conjures up the image of an apple tree, whereas the Turkish variant evokes a pear tree, yet both of these languages assimilate family to a tree, and its fruits to children, https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol.7 No.2 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 299 illustrating that a child imitates his/her parents. Although the proverbs are enunciated differently, the governing idea is the same on these proverbs. Some of the proverbs may not be so lucky to reveal coincidence in the target language. They may have no direct equivalent in the target language, then the only thing that can be done is resort to translation. Once it is almost impossible to restate a proverb in the source language with another one closer or identical in the target language, applying to translation or interpretation seems the best thing to be done. As clearly stated by Kramsch (1993, 205), teaching a foreign language should employ “a reflection both on the target and on the native culture”. To route a parallel line for contrasting and teaching a foreign language and culture, zigzagging from L1 to L2 can be drawn and followed (Byram, 1991). Learners’ intercultural ability improves as they gain insights into understanding links and distinctions in the target culture and the source culture (Byram, 2013). As culture-specific units, teaching target language proverbs is suggested for making learners feel a sense of cultural affinity in learning a foreign language (Kimsesiz, 2021). Investigating learners’ performance in translating culturally and traditionally associated expressions and maxims can shed light on their tendency in translating fixed language-specific items. For this aim, proverbs can be an acceptable way to build the bridge between culture and teaching a target language. Hence, this study aims to examine learners’ performance in translating interlingual English proverbs into Turkish equivalences concerning reconceptualization operations with the given proverbs in three groups. All things considered, the research questions are as follows: 1. What is the degree of Reconceptualization of the selected traditional Turkish-English Proverbs in translation in terms of equivalency? 2. How did students score in translating maximally equivalent interlingual English proverbs into Turkish? 3. How did students score in translating roughly equivalent interlingual English proverbs into Turkish? 4. What is learners’ preference in translating non-interlingual English proverbs into Turkish? METHODS Research Design The study employs a mixed-method design with a quantitative-based comparative analysis of proverb equivalence and a qualitative basis for the analysis of the translation performance of the participants. Participants The student participants (F=60; M=20) in this study are A2 level English learners who are freshmen students at the Department of Counselling & Guidance at Kırşehir Ahi Evran University in Turkey. The participants were selected through simple random sampling and they voluntarily took part in the study. Their native language background is Turkish and they had received English as a foreign language since 2nd grade at primary school. Additionally, Turkish students literally begin getting acquainted with Turkish proverbs from the 2nd grade at primary school and learning proverbs is involved in the curriculum of Turkish Language classes since then throughout the educational process both in the primary and secondary schools (MEB, Syllabus for Turkish Language Course, 2019). The ages of the participants in this study vary between 18 and 20 years and their socio-economic status is nearly the same with each other. https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol.7 No.2 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 300 Instrument The main instrument used in this study is a test that asks learners to translate the 18 English proverbs into equivalent Turkish proverbs. These proverbs are divided into three groups as described in the introduction part. The first group involves 5 maximally equivalent proverbs that have almost the same meaning and moral both in Turkish and English, the second group of proverbs involves 5 roughly equivalent proverbs in English with a similar meaning and moral but slightly corresponding to a different scenario in Turkish. The third group includes 5 non-equivalent English proverbs with no association in Turkish. All the selected English proverbs under scope were taken from https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/proverbs.html and their Turkish equivalents were verified at http://www.sozluk.gov.tr. Procedure Within the course of the study, initially, 54 proverbs were selected to be examined under the review of reconceptualization operations proposed by Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (2010), and 15 of them were selected to be grouped in 3 distinct groups as highly equivalent, roughly equivalent, and non-equivalent English –Turkish proverbs. The proverbs were juxtaposed with their correspondences in both languages, and Turkish equivalents were also rendered with their literal and literary meanings. Later, participants were asked to translate these English proverbs into Turkish. Data was collected through translation papers uploaded by the students on AYDEP - a program that allows online teaching, meeting, and file sharing, that works with the license of Big Blue Button, and is officially used for distance learning at Kırşehir Ahi Evran University, Turkey. Firstly, the students were given the translation test with a time allocation of two days. Due to pandemic restrictions, the learners uploaded their answers on AYDEP. As they uploaded their answers back, their scores were recorded and analyzed by the researcher. Data Analysis The analysis of the proverbs translation was recorded by the researcher and was documented in SPSS 21.0, a statistical program for studies in Social Sciences. The descriptive statistics were analyzed for the findings from the translation studies of the students. The descriptive statistics were valued according to the translation performance of the participants with 4 distinct labels as ‘correct equivalents (3), word-to-word translation (2), interpretation (1), and none (0) in nominal measurement. RESULTS Based on the reconceptualization degrees, of the 15 proverbs selected, 5 of them have been labelled as highly equivalent, 5 of them roughly equivalent, and the rest (N=5) was labelled as non-equivalent respectively. The list of the selected proverbs with their number of degrees of reconceptualization and their literal meanings for equivalent proverbs and literary meanings for non-equivalent proverbs are displayed below. Table 1. Equivalency of selected English- Turkish Proverbs under the scope of Reconceptualization Degrees by Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (2010) Groups (Degree of Reconceptualizaiton) English Proverbs Turkish Equivalents Literal / Literary Meaning The number of Reconceptualization Highly equivalent 1 A rolling stone Yuvarlanan taş yosun tutmaz. A rolling stone doesn’t 4 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol.7 No.2 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 301 gathers no moss gather any moss. 2 Better late than never. Geç olsun da güç olmasın. Better late than hard. 1 - 5 3 Out of sight out of mind. Gözden ırak olan, gönülden de ırak olur. He who is out of sight is out of mind. 1 - 5 4 Strike while the iron is hot. Demir tavında dövülür. Iron is struck while hot. 3 - 5 5 The pen is mightier than the sword. Kalem kılıçtan keskindir. The pen is sharper than the sword. 17 Roughly equivalent 6 An apple a day keeps the doctor away. Güneş girmeyen eve doctor girer. The doctor enters a house where sunlight doesn’t enter. 9 – 17 – 18 – 19 - 21 7 Don’t count your chickens before they’re hatched. Doğmadık çocuğa don biçilmez. Any pyjamas can’t be cut off to an unborn baby. 5 – 9 – 10 – 17 – 18 – 19 - 29 8 Many a little makes a mickle. Damlaya damlaya göl olur. Drip by drip becomes a lake. 5 - 9 - 18 - 19 - 29 9 The shoemaker always wears the worst shoes. Terzi kendi söküğünü dikemez. A tailor cannot stitch his own rip. 4 - 17 – 18 – 19 10 The early bird catches the worm Erken kalkan yol alır. Those who get up early make way. 9 – 18 – 19 - 29 Non-equivalent 11 A fool and his money are soon parted. Akılsız ve kazancı çabuk ayrılır. 12 A little of what you fancy does you good Hoşlandığın şeyin azı bile sana iyi gelir. 13 A picture is worth a thousand words. Bir resim bin kelimeye bedeldir. https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol.7 No.2 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 302 14 To travel hopefully is a better thing than to arrive Umutla seyahat etmek, ulaşmaktan iyidir. 15 Beggars can’t be choosers. Dilenciler seçici olamaz. Comparing the intended message and the structure of the mentioned proverbs, it is possible to notice the striking resemblance between highly equivalent English and Turkish versions. As can be observed, the words that form the proverbs are almost identical and the metaphors involved in proverbs are in a fashion similar to each other in this group. Moreover, the meaning and the values in one language correspond to the meaning and values installed in the other language enabling a clear and understandable tone. Hence, proverbs that display an affinity in form, conceptualization, and axiological values of their equivalent saying reveal very low degrees of re-conceptualization with a few or no alterations. In other words, equivalency has been affirmed at the maximal level in the first group. The comparison of the roughly equivalent English – Turkish proverbs reveals that although they are worded differently, they convey a similar message and moral. Expressed differently, they share a common ground in meaning and value. Given these points, equivalency between these proverbs has been outlined at a high level of re-conceptualization degree. Thus, proverbs in the second group appear to be roughly equivalent. On the other hand, proverbs in the third group display a solid proof of non-equivalent English proverbs in Turkish as they cannot be paired to any correspondent equivalent proverb in Turkish. Concerning the second research question that examines learners’ performance in translating maximally equivalent English- Turkish proverbs, descriptive statistics are revealed in the table below. Table 2. Descriptive Statistics of learner performance in maximally equivalent proverbs Proverbs N Correct Equivalent Translations N Correct Equivalent Translations % Mean Std. Deviation P 1 80 80 100 3,0 ,000 P 2 80 76 95 2,8 ,503 P 3 80 72 90 2,8 ,663 P 4 80 55 69 2,6 ,704 P 5 80 74 93 2,8 ,487 Valid N (Listwise) 80 As can be seen in the table, the majority of the learners (N=71; 89 %) performed successfully in corresponding English proverbs with their Turkish equivalents. In other words, highly equivalent proverbs were seized easily by the learners due to their identical meanings simply evocating in Turkish. Related to the third research question, the following table displays the descriptive statistics of learners’ translation score of roughly equivalent English proverbs into Turkish: https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol.7 No.2 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 303 Table 3. Descriptive Statistics of learner performance in roughly equivalent proverbs Proverbs N Correct Equivalent Translations N Correct Equivalent Translations % Correct Equivalent W/W Translations N Correct Equivalent W/W Translations % P 6 80 22 27,5 31 38,8 P 7 80 38 47,5 36 45,0 P 8 80 51 63,8 11 13,8 P 9 80 36 45,0 42 52,5 P 10 80 63 78,8 16 20,0 Valid N (Listwise) 80 Similar to previous findings, most of the learners (N=42; 53%) succeeded in translating these roughly equivalent English proverbs into Turkish equivalents and several students (N=27; 34%) preferred to write word-to-word translations of the proverbs in this group. This result reveals an average level of success of the learners in associating proverbs with closer meanings in Turkish. Regarding the fourth research question, descriptive statistics of learners’ translation preferences of non-equivalent English- Turkish proverbs are shown in the table below. Table 4. Descriptive Statistics of non-Equivalent English- Turkish proverbs Proverbs N Interpretations N Interpretations % Correct Equivalent W/W Translations N Correct Equivalent W/W Translations % P 11 80 17 21,3 60 75,1 P 12 80 42 52,5 25 31,3 P 13 80 7 8,8 67 83,8 P 14 80 47 58,8 27 33,8 P 15 80 6 7,5 72 90,1 Valid N (Listwise) 80 As can be viewed in the table above, learners’ preferences in translating and interpreting the given proverbs fluctuate. This may result from the fact that proverbs in this group do non-exist in Turkish and consequently, learners preferred an understandable way for the meaning of the proverbs in this group as the learners were unable to associate them with any Turkish proverbs. To sum up, learners performed better in translating maximally equivalent proverbs (89%) than roughly equivalent proverbs (53%). On the other hand, as it is impossible to translate non- equivalent proverbs, half of the learners (50%) translated them as one-to-one correspondence and some others (24%) interpreted them and the rest (26%) left it blank. DISCUSSION Forming a genre of folk, proverbs are traditional and insightful expressions prevalent across languages (Mieder, 2004). Another key thing to consider in defining proverbs is that they may have closer or identical equivalents across languages carrying several figurative and metaphoric characteristics in common (Mandziuk-Nizińska, 2020). In the grand scheme of things, they reflect the ‘clear evidence of ethnos-specific worldview and consciousness, folk https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol.7 No.2 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 304 wisdom and philosophical affiliation’ (Chakyroglu et al., 2018). On account of this illustration, translation of proverbs may be rendered and attained at divergent levels (Flonta, 2011; Lubis, 2018) enabling several translation operations from source language to target language. For these operations, various factors such as linguistic patterns, culture-specific items, and discourse units should be considered to obtain a meaning at a maximal level. Although Jacobson (1975) asserted that it is probable to convey all cognitive experience in any existing language, sometimes it is impossible to convey the exact message through the other language as they involve units that block transfer. Given the circumstances, alternative ways are applied such as using loan words, word coinage, transcription, and equivocations which may make up for any linguistic deficiencies in translation operations even in proverbs (Mandziuk-Nizińska, 2020). In the field of research, only a few studies focused on the translation of interlingual proverbs, yet they commonly highlighted the potential of natural similarities in translating proverbs across languages (Al –Timen, 2015; Buljan & Gradečak-Erdeljić, 2013; Chakyroglu et al., 2018; Lubis, 2018; Mandziuk-Nizińska, 2020; Rusieshvili-Cartledgea & Gözpınar, (2014); Syzdykov, 2014; Xiangyang, 2016). According to the findings of Mandziuk-Nizińska (2020), a meaning-oriented typology has been the most appropriate form of translation in a comparative analysis of equivalent proverbs in the source and the target languages. Through the course of the current study, it has been manifested that the aforementioned proverbs in the first group carry a maximal similarity between the two compared variants. Similarly, although phrased differently, proverbs in the second group coincide with the general meaning fixed on all the layers of the semantic model. In this context, it is worthwhile to consider that, based on the reconceptualization degrees, the number of translation operations is low in highly equivalent English- Turkish proverbs; while this number is quite high with roughly equivalent English- Turkish proverbs. However, it is hard to reflect some proverbs similarly in the source language. Taking this drawback into account, non-equivalent English proverbs were inconvenient to be associated with any Turkish proverbs. So, their literal meanings were figured with Turkish meanings to sense their message and morals. The related literature clearly emphasized the facilitating effect of translating maximally equivalent proverbs. According to Collis (1994), as soon as learners grasp the essence of proverbs, they tend to relate similar prompts in their own language. As asserted by Ok (2015), rather than translating it as a form of one-to-one correspondence, learners tend to correlate a proverb in the target language to an equivalent proverb in their native language. In line with these findings, the current study indicated that students performed better at translating maximally equivalent proverbs than roughly equivalent ones. On the other hand, non- equivalent proverbs that belong to the target culture with a specific etymological or historical background may preclude exact translation. Based on this fact, participants were not able to associate non-equivalent English- Turkish proverbs; hence, they applied to word-to-word translation or interpretation of the proverb in suitable form in their language intending to convey a closer meaning in moral, message, and value. Solely, it’s of utmost importance to bear in mind that such kinds of translations may employ a high degree of reconceptualization as explained with non-equivalent proverbs. Eventually, any challenge to tailor them into another language will bring about a change or damage to their essential nature and they will turn out to be bare sentences with no perceivable proverbial and literal sense. CONCLUSION This study was directed to examine the translation performance of EFL learners in translating on 3 groups of proverbs. For this aim, 80 students participated in translation studies of interlingual and intralingual proverbs in English and Turkish. The data were analyzed qualitatively. In conclusion, the current study revealed that learners performed better in https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol.7 No.2 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 305 translating maximally equivalent proverbs than roughly equivalent proverbs. And they translated, or interpreted non- equivalent English- Turkish proverbs as these proverbs don’t have a similar /identical correspondent in their native language. Although it seems impossible to equate non-equivalent English – Turkish proverbs due to potential linguistic and cultural distinctions between these languages, common ground can be established with highly equivalent and roughly equivalent English –Turkish proverbs. Hence as a pedagogical implication for teaching EFL to learners with Turkish language background, preluding with equivalent proverbs may inspire learners for noticing the cultural connection between English- Turkish. Moreover, it can be recommended for EFL teachers that to experience and analyze both source and the target language, teaching proverbs is essential especially for building a cultural relationship and affinity. Especially equivalent proverbs can be identified and a warm climate through the target culture can be seasoned with such incorporations. As shown by the analysis of equivalent English- Turkish proverbs, common ground exists across these languages. Most importantly, the crux of the matter lies in the fact that anything that brings people closer to shared humanity supports the understanding of the human experience and cultural integrity across nations no matter what caused them to build up to this way. REFERENCES Al-Timen, F. A. A. (2015). An analysis of translation methods for English proverbs: literal, literary, or substitution. European Academic Research II, 11, 14016-14026. Bassnett, S. (2002). Translation studies (3rd ed.). Routledge. Buljan, G., & Gradečak-Erdeljić, T. (2013). Where cognitive linguistics meets paremiology: a cognitive-contrastive view of selected English and Croatian proverbs. Explorations in English Language and Linguistics, 1(1), 63-83. Byram, M. (1991). Teaching Culture and Language: Towards an Integrated Model. IN Buttjes, D. & Byram, M. (Eds.) Mediating Languages and Cultures: Towards in Intercultural Theory of Foreign Language Education, Clevedon, Multilingual Matters Ltd. Byram, M. (2013). Foreign language teaching and intercultural citizenship. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 1(3), 53-62. Byram, M., & Feng, A. (2004). Culture and language learning: teaching, research and scholarship., Language teaching., 37 (3). pp. 149-168. Byram, M., & Morgan, C. (1994). Teaching-and-learning language-and-culture. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Chakyroglu, A. K., Suiyerkul, B., Aitmukhametova, K., Turumbetova, Z., & Smanova, B. "Analysis of the proverbs related to the lexemes" tongue/language"." Opción: Revista de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales 85 (2018): 97-115. Collis, H. (1994). 101 American English Proverbs. Lincolnwood: Passport Books, NTC Publishing Group. Flonta, T. (2011). A Dictionary of English and Spanish Equivalent Proverbs. DeProverbio. com. Gözpınar, H. (2014). The role of proverbs in forming intercultural awareness (on the basis of teaching English, Georgian and Turkish languages). Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University. Jakobson, R. (1975). Językowe aspekty tłumaczenia [On linguistic aspects of translation]. In Seweryn Pollak (ed.), Przekład artystyczny: O sztuce tłumaczenia księga druga. 109– 115 (trans. Zofia Sroczyńska). Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich. https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol.7 No.2 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 306 Kimsesiz, F. (2021) Investigating EFL teachers’ perceptions of teaching English proverbs in EFL classes: A cross-cultural study. RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, (24), 1195-1210. DOI: 10.29000/rumelide.997593. Kramsch, C. (1993) Context and culture in language teaching. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Landers, C. (2001). Literary Translation: A Practical Guide. Great Britain: Cromwell Press Ltd. Lefevere, A. 1992. Translation/history/culture: A sourcebook. Routledge. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. (2010). Re-conceptualization and the emergence of discourse meaning as a theory of translation. In Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk & Marcel Thelen (eds.), Meaning in translation, 105–148. Peter Lang. DOI: 10.13140/2.1.4989.4724. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. (2017). Cluster equivalence, General language, and Language for Specific Purposes. In Marcin Grygiel (ed.), Cognitive approaches to specialist languages, 384–418. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Lubis, S. (2018). The equivalence and non-equivalence of proverbs across cultures. International Journal of Social Sciences, 1(1), 9-17. Mandziuk-Nizińska, J. (2020). To translate, or not to translate: A cognitive linguistic analysis of selected English and Polish proverbs. MEB Türkçe Dersi Öğretim Programı. (2019). At https://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=663 Mieder, W. (2004). Proverbs - A Handbook. Westport, CT; Greenwood Press. Norrick, N.R. (1985). How Proverbs Mean: Semantic Studies in English Proverbs. Amsterdam: Mouton. Norrick, Neal R. (2014). Subject area, terminology, proverb definitions, proverb features". Introduction to Paremiology, edited by Hrisztalina Hrisztova-Gotthardt and Melita Aleksa Varga, Warsaw, Poland: De Gruyter Open Poland, 2015, pp. 7-27. https://doi.org/10.2478/9783110410167.1. Ok, S. (2015). Reflections of ELT students on learning proverbs, International Journal of Language Academy, 3-4, 251-269. Škara, D. (1995). Comparative analysis of proverbs: Universals and Specifics. Studia Romanica et Anglica Zagrabiensia: Revue publiée par les Sections romane, italienne et anglaise de la Faculté des Lettres de l’Université de Zagreb, 42, 365-370. Strauss, M. L. (2005). Form, Function, and the Literal Meaning Fallacy in Bible Translation. SAGE Journals, pp. 153-184. Syzdykov, K. (2014). Contrastive studies on proverbs. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 136, 318-321. Venuti, L. (2000). Translation, community, utopia. In Lawrence Venuti (eds), The translation studies reader, 468–488. Routledge. Wilson, F. C. (2010). A Model of Translation Based on Proverbs and Their Metaphors: A Cognitive Descriptive Approach. Translation Journal, 14 (4). Xiangyang, Z. H. A. N. G. (2016). Language as a Reflection of Culture: On the Cultural Characteristics of Chinese and English Proverbs. Intercultural Communication Studies, 25(3). Internet Sources https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/proverbs.html. https://www.mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=663 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/proverbs.html Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol.7 No.2 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 307 https://www.sozluk.gov.tr APPENDIX Re-conceptualizaton Operations proposed by Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (2010) are listed below: 1) conventional coding; 2) conventional coding with different (subjective) construals; 3) language-convention induced conceptualization by language-specific (semanticized) syntax; 4) negation – shifting on the scale of negation; 5) figure/ground organization of the content; 6) viewpoint (deixis) shift; 7) subjectification; 8) iconicity of syntax and semantics; 9) prototypical phraseological equivalents – different effects; 10) culture-specific items: instruments utensils; 11) culture-specific items: social, educational, etc. structures; 12) class-specific conceptualization of pragmatic events; 13) culture-specific onomatopoeia; 14) proper names: domestication – foreignization; 15) cross-space re-conceptualization of proper names; 16) language/concept specific word games; 17) concept replacement; 18) metonymy: activation of parts of one domain onto the whole domain; 19) metonymy, metaphorical sayings, proverbs, compounds; 20) axiological markedness; 21) quantitative re-conceptualization: decreasing the prominence/salience of part(s) of the scenario; 22) quantitative re-conceptualization: changing the prominence (cultural convention/religious bias); 23) footnotes as lexical gap-fillers; 24) digression as the imposition of the translator’s ideology; 25) elimination of neologisms – conventionalization; 26) neologism for neologisms – attempts at small losses; 7) re-conceptualization by extending background knowledge; 28) re-conceptualization as an effect of foreignization; 29) domestication – reconceptualization in terms of familiar context; 30) re-conceptualization of a lexicalized term into a term and a definitional equivalent or substitution of a Latinate term by a native term; 31) different metaphors – different conceptualizations; 32) literalness and granularity – metaphor – simile; 33) change in the mental image; retaining the same conceptual field; 34) intensification: addition of granularity; https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity https://www.sozluk.gov.tr/ Acuity: Journal of English Language Pedagogy, Literature, and Culture. Vol.7 No.2 2022 https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity 308 35) re-conceptualization by addition, and 36) simplification: schematicity. https://jurnal.unai.edu/index.php/acuity