LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 24, No. 2, October 2021 

 
LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching 

 http://e-journal.usd.ac.id/index.php/LLT 

Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia 
 

299 
 

 

CULTURAL TRANSLATION OF PROVERBS  

FROM NEPALI INTO ENGLISH 

 

Nabaraj Neupane 

Tribhuvan University, Prithvi Narayan Campus, Pokhara, Nepal 

correspondence: nabarajneupane24@gmail.com 

DOI: 10.24071/llt.v24i2.3045 

received 6 January 2021; accepted 12 October 2021 

 

Abstract  

Proverbs are witty, pithy, and epigrammatic expressions. They are idiosyncratic, 

being based on a specific culture. As cultural translation is difficult, translation of 

proverbs is not easy. Yet, translation practices on such genre have been appearing. In 

such a scenario, some such practices are found in the domain of Nepali into English 

translations. In this background, the present study aims at reviewing the available 

models for translating proverbs and recommending one, which can be used for 

translating Nepali proverbs into English. To achieve the objectives, I collected 

twenty proverbs purposively from Lall (1991) and Sharma (2000), primarily because 

I could deal only with twenty in a short period and limited space. By way of 

qualitative analysis and interpretation and by testing Wilson's (2009) model, I have 

concluded that the model is applicable for the purpose. 

 

Keywords: proverb, translation, model, connotation, context 

 

Introduction 

Translation practices began as early as human contacts began. This is evidenced 

in Dam, Brogger, and Zethsen’s (2019) words, “Translation as an activity, a 

phenomenon, a concept is of course as old as mankind, and has been and will 

continue to be part of human life regardless of the existence or not of a scholarly 

field” (p. 231). This implies that translation began since antiquity; and has been and 

will be an integral part of human life. Even for Stenier (1975), history of translation 

can be marked in the statements of Cicero (106-43 B. C.) and Horace (65-8 B. C.) on 

translation (as cited in Bassnett, 2005). On the other hand, tracing the history of 

translation in the East, Krishnamurthy (2011) has written: 

 

The first need for inter-language communication in the subcontinent probably 

arose through trade. The oldest linguistic evidence is to be found in the 

characters inscribed on steatite seals found in the Indus valley in the North West. 

These are said to date from 2500 to 1500 B. C.  

(Krishnamurthy, 2011, p. 450). 

 

Therefore, history of translation in the Indian subcontinent can be marked as 

back as 2500 B. C. Although translation history of Nepal has not yet been marked, 

Sharma and Shrestha (1999) have viewed that Sanskrit scriptures were translated into 



LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 24, No. 1, April 2021 

300 
 

Nepali since 1770. They have further written that Shakti Ballabh Aryal's Mahābhārat 

viratparva (1770)  Hāsyakadamba (1778), Bhanu Dutta's Hitopadeś mitralāv (1774) 

marked the translation history in Nepal. Since then, different institutions and 

translators have been practising translation works (i.e. literary, academic and 

technical translations).  

Literary translation has been flourishing worldwide as literature reflects society 

and culture. A big canvas of cultural heritage can be traced in literature and its 

translation has been essential to expand the horizon of knowledge. Out of other 

literary texts, proverbs are nail marks of culture as all cultures have a storehouse of 

such formulaic expressions. They are based on cultural settings, historically 

remarkable events, folklores, expression of feelings, experiences, and quotations of 

public figures and celebrities. So, they are deep-rooted on folk tales, beliefs, 

traditions and customs.  

In the context of Nepal, only a few books are published on proverbs and their 

translations. Sharma (2000) has asserted that Motiram Bhatta's Ukhānko bakhān ra 

jānne kathāko sangraha [Description of proverbs and a collection of known stories] 

(n.d.) was the first book in Nepali proverbs. Taking help of this book, Puskar 

Shamsher published a book Nepali Ukhān ra tukkāko barnanukramānusārī sūcī ra 

bākyapaddati ityādiko koś [A bibliometric list of proverbs and idioms, and a 

dictionary of the history of the syntax] (1941). Sharma (2000) has further conceded 

that Ganga Prasad Pradhan's Nepali Ukhānko postak [A book on Nepali proverbs] 

(1908) was published from Darjeeling. Therefore, Nepali proverbs got a form of a 

book only in the early 20th century. Regarding their translations, I have found only 

two, viz., Lall (1991, first published in 1985) and Sharma (2000). Therefore, 

translation of proverbs has been burning need to identify culture to Nepali people 

themselves and the world outside, which is observing multiculturalism, 

multilingualism, cultural pluralism, and co-existence of all the tribes and their 

traditions.  

On the background mentioned above, the present article aims at reviewing the 

available models for the translation of proverbs. Specifically, testing a selected 

model for translated Nepali proverbs, it aims at developing or recommending a 

suitable model for Nepali proverbs. Despite its limitations of time and scope, I think, 

this study will be significant for translators and translation researchers as it forwards 

a translation model for proverbs.  

 

Review of Literature and Theoretical Framework 
Language is context-bound. Context is made up of different parameters, such as 

participants, purpose, settings, way of expressing something, time, etc. Context is 

also dependable on culture, in which language flourishes. Culture and language are 

inseparable (Wang, 2019) and language study encompasses culture (Dumraz, 2017). 

To carry on culture, proverbs are primary means. Proverbs encapsulate a society's 

values, beliefs and culture; and therefore, they are backbones of culture.  

Regarding the history of proverbs, Hernadi and Steen (1999) have written that 

proverbs are with us "for much of the last two thousand or more generations of 

roughly thirty years each." It implies that the history of proverb goes back to sixty 

thousand years before. They have further mentioned that the proverbs in written form 

circulated more than forty-five hundred years ago. Besides, embroidered shawls, 

diaries, letters, devotional manuscripts and printed compilations offer evidences for 



 

LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 24, No. 1, April 2021 
 

 

301 

 

the existence of proverbs in the past. Since then, proverbs have been an integral part 

of culture and language.  

Proverbs have been defined in several ways. Hernadi and Steen (1999) have 

offered selected snapshots of the landscapes of proverbia and they have offered some 

definitions of proverbs and their outlook. They have cited a definition forwarded by 

Brunvand (1986), who defines proverbs as a popular saying in relatively fixed form, 

which is in oral circulation. Emphasizing the folk element in proverbs, Mieder 

(1993) defines a proverb as a phrase, sentence, statement or expression of the folk, 

which contains wisdom, truth, morals, experience, lessons and advice concerning life 

(as cited in Hernadi & Steen, 1999). Therefore, proverbs bear folk elements and they 

are transmitted orally from generation to generation. Virtually, proverbs have been 

an inseparable part of folk culture. They are readily available and easily memorable 

formulas as they are metaphorical, alliterative and grounded on accumulated 

experiences. For example: 

 

A cat may look at a king. 

Every dog has his day. 

A problem shared is a problem halved.  

A stitch in time saves nine. 

Where are bees, there is honey.  

 

Proverbs have been practised by common people from ancient times. They 

represent folk wisdom, accumulated through the ages. Some proverbs are universally 

applicable while others have a distinct flavour of a land and its people (Neupane, 

2017). Translation of the former types poses ease whereas latter (language/ culture-

specific) ones are difficult to translate. Generally speaking, proverbs are 

metaphorical sayings in the form of prefabricated patterns, conveying cultural 

concepts. So, the pragmatics of proverbs should be understood for their better 

translation.  

Translating proverbs requires multidisciplinary knowledge as proverbs are 

related to sociology, semiotics, anthropology, pragmatics, folklores, culture, etc. 

Suggesting three ways to translate a proverb, Beekman and Callow (1974, as cited in 

Gorjian, 2008) have written: (a) the words following the proverb could be introduced 

as the meaning of the proverb; (b) it can be replaced with an equivalent local 

proverb, and (c) its non-figurative meaning could be stated straight forwardly. 

Beekman and Callow's (1974) strategies suggest that the translators should seek 

either equivalent local proverbs or their literal meanings. However, proverbs are not 

so easy to translate these ways as they are idiomatic expressions and wise sayings, 

apparently simple but illusory. In this connection, Duff (1989) has proposed four 

strategies in case of non-equivalent: (a) literal translation, (b) original word in 

inverted commas, (c) close equivalents, and (d) non-idiomatic translation. The four 

methods cannot be yardsticks for translating proverbs beautifully and faithfully.  

Tuning the intermediate view, Hatim and Mason (1990) recommended 

communicative translation to translate socio-cultural and metaphorical elements of 

language. Hatim and Mason (1990) further mentioned, "Translation is the negotiation 

of meaning between the producer of the source-language text and the readers of the 

target text, both of whom exist within their different social framework" (p. 1). 

Therefore, the translator explores the intended meaning of the source text 



LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 24, No. 1, April 2021 

302 
 

speaker/writer and manipulates the meaning in the target text. This view embraces 

the domain of pragmatics in translating metaphorical sayings (i.e. proverbs). Further, 

Thalji (2015) has found these four techniques for translating proverbs: TL 

equivalent, paraphrasing, literal translation, and glossing. However, gaps are 

apparent in the use of these techniques. 

Some studies have indicated the difficulties of proverb translation. Of them, 

Mollanazar (2001) has remarked: (a) some similar proverbs can be found in the two 

languages with more or less similar form, vocabulary and meaning; and (b) many 

proverbs may be found in the two languages, which have similar meanings and can 

be applied in the same contexts, but they have different form and vocabulary. These 

cases can be encountered when a translator applies literal translation as a strategy. 

Likewise, Akbarian (2012) has asserted, “For a foreign or second language learning, 

it might be a double effort to first understand a proverb and then relate it to a 

proverbial equivalent in one’s own native language” (p. 704). However, Shehab and 

Daragmeh (2014) have asserted that observational (social) proverbs are less complex 

than the religiously invoked ones for cross-linguistic translation. For them, the 

former types are related to the people’s everyday experiences that are somehow 

universal whereas the second type is associated with the people’s religious beliefs 

and opinions that are religious-specific. By analyzing 10 Arabic proverbs into 

English translations, they concluded that context plays a crucial role in translating 

proverbs. This study proves that the context-based approach is more suitable than the 

literal one. Context of the proverb adheres to culture. This is evidenced in Bhabha 

(2011) that quotes, “Translation is the performative nature of cultural communication 

[…]. And the sign of translation continually tells, or ‘tolls’ the different times and 

spaces between cultural authority and its performative practices” (p. 20, as cited in 

Faiq, 2019, pp. 8-9). This indicates the cultural turn in translation that calls for 

situating translation as a cultural entity. The issue of culture in translation is also 

raised by Al Shehab (2016), who, in his project, asked 20 translation students to 

translate 25 English proverbs into Arabic. His main finding is that the students failed 

to achieve the exact Arabic equivalence of English proverbs. This study shows that 

proverbs adhere to culture and their translations across cultures pose difficulties. 

Also, Unscth (2006) has pointed out the limitations of translating proverbs in these 

words, “To try to translate the ‘meaning’ of a proverb without translating it into the 

form of a proverb is to translate only part of the meaning” (as cited in Pluger, 2015, 

p.325). 

Like Al Shehab’s (2016), Qassem and Vijayasararhi (2015) have indicated the 

students’ difficulties in translating culture-specific expressions. Similarly, Azizah 

(2018) study also aimed to analyze students’ ability in proverb translation. The 100 

students’ translation of 10 English proverbs into Arabic and 10 Indonesian proverbs 

into English showed that translating proverbs is complex. The main reason found 

was their literal translations. This study confirms that without understanding the 

literary (aesthetic) value of the source proverbs, their translations cannot be accurate.  

Beyond the facets of context and culture in proverb translation, Dicerto (2018) 

has emphasized multimodality in these words, “The way translation is approached 

has changed […]. Modern translators more than ever find themselves working on 

texts that communicate by more than just ‘words’. The translation is an activity that 

is growing even more complex and cannot be accounted for in linguistic terms any 

longer” (p. 1). This implies that the translation of proverbs calls for understanding 



 

LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 24, No. 1, April 2021 
 

 

303 

 

more than what is communicated by mere words. Thus, a translator needs to 

understand multimodal pragmatics for the sound interpretation of culture-laden texts 

(here, proverbs) and to transfer them into the alien language. Likewise, Al-khresheh 

and Almaaytah  (2018) have pointed out the limitations of the use of machines for 

translating proverbs as, “wrong TL equivalent, literal translation, wrong word order, 

inappropriate lexical words, and grammatical mistakes” (pp. 162-163). 

These studies exhibit that translation of proverbs poses difficulties mainly 

because of misinterpretation and/or mistranslation. To minimize the problems, an 

effective strategy can be “adaptation” that in Bastin’s (2020, as cited in Baker & 

Saldanha, 2020) words is “frequently listed among the possible valid solutions to 

various translational difficulties” (p. 10). Adaptation calls for SL-orientation in 

translation and thus is important for proverb translation across languages. 

Since proverbs are epigrammatic in the cultural history and so figurative quality 

of all of the proverbs cannot be translated by using a single strategy. In this line, 

Gorjian (2008) has proposed a three-fold strategy, which includes: (a) exact 

equivalents (strong version), (b) near-equivalents (moderate version), and (c) literal 

translation (weak version). He has recommended the use of literal translation only as 

a last resort.  

In this study, I have selected Wilson’s (2009) model for translating proverbs 

because of its exhaustiveness, adaptability, and relevancy. Wilson's (2009) model 

offers a cognitive descriptive dimension. It incorporates general cognitive tasks, such 

as: analyze, interpret and reformulate, and cognitive functions, such as reading, 

problem-solving, decision making, formulating, researching, consulting, creating, re-

reading, verifying, etc. These cognitive behaviours (tasks and functions) are oriented 

towards the source and target texts. The translator investigates the holistic 

message/meaning, equivalent to both source proverb and target proverb. It is his first 

resort. If equivalent/exact proverbs are not found, only then, he explores its linguistic 

units. The translator should, at first, analyse, interpret and reformulate both the 

source and the target proverbs. Their linguistic units and signified meanings should 

also be incorporated. The structures of both the source and the target proverbs should 

also be analysed. Then, meaning/message is formulated form the interactions of 

context and connotations with the linguistic structures, units, concepts, connotations, 

context by way of analysis, interpretation and reformulation within the source and 

target proverbs. The outcome becomes target proverbs. 

 

Method 

The primary objective of this study was to test the prevailing models for 

translating proverbs (from Nepali into English) and to develop an appropriate model. 

Since document review was the primary technique applied for collecting data, this 

study used only secondary sources. Dictionaries of proverbs like Lall (1991) and 

Sharma (2000) were used for collecting Nepali proverbs, their literal translations and 

corresponding English proverbs. Besides, Duff (1989), Hernadi and Steen (1999) and 

Gorjian (2008) were used for formulating a theoretical framework, based on which, 

Wilson's (2009) model was selected as a sample to test.  

Twenty proverbs, books, articles, and dictionaries were selected purposively for 

testing, using the selected model. I list them in a list, numbering from one to twenty, 

out of them, I selected only three for testing and analysing (as samples) by using the 

lottery method. After testing them, the selected model has been forwarded for further 



LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 24, No. 1, April 2021 

304 
 

translations of proverbs as it was found appropriate to the selected proverbs.  Note 

that, for transliterating Nepali words, phonetic symbols adapted from Turner and 

Turner's (2009) are used.  

 

Findings and Discussion 

Wilson's (2009) model encompasses multiple elements and facts in translating 

proverbs. They are cognitive tasks and functions, linguistic structures of the source 

text and the target text, linguistic units, concepts, pragmatics of the proverbs, and so 

on.  

The selected twenty proverbs are homogeneous in structure (i.e. having two-fold 

structures). For example: 

1. mauna sammati lakshnm (silence grows consent) = action 1 (mauna) + action 2 
(sammati) 

2. jasko lāthi usko bhaĩsi  (might is right) = possession 1 (lāthi) + possession 2 
(bhaĩsi)  

3. kām garne kālu, makai khāne bhālu (one soweth and another reapeth) = action 1, 
agent 1 (kam garne kalu) + action 2, agent 2 (makai khane bhālu)  

4. niveko āgo kasaile tāpdaina (all worship the rising sun) = cause (niveko āgo) + 
effect (kasaile tāpdaina) 

5. ū̃t dulāhā, gadhā purohit (like god-like worship) = agent 1(ū̃t) + possessor 1 
(gadhā) 

 

Since the proverbs collected are homogeneous, only three (out of twenty) have 

been presented and analyzed using Wilson's model, believing that other proverbs can 

also follow the similar path of presentation and analysis.  

 

Proverb 2: mwā̃i khāko hoina sĩgān lāko. (Nepali) 

       A kiss of mouth often touches not the heart. (English) 

For the translation of proverb 2, Wilson's (2009) model fits (figure 1). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 24, No. 1, April 2021 
 

 

305 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1 Application of Wilson's (2009) Model for Proverb 2 

 

Figure 1 demonstrates the appropriate application of the model. The aspects of 

the model are followed in the following way: 

Message : Showy kissing does not touch the heart. 

Meaning : It is not kissing but anointing snot. 

Connotation : Superficial action does not touch one's heart. 

Context : A situation someone kisses with evil spirit but not with the real 

intention of kissing. 

 

The presented proverb (proverb 2) conveys a message to be translated, linguistic 

structure, linguistic units and concepts, connotation and context, which are 

represented in its translated version. By way of analysis, interpretation and 

reformulation, the source proverb has been found translated. In the source proverb, 

there are two actions (kissing at the mouth and anoint snot), being second the 

consequence of the first. This mapping is equivalent in English. The linguistic 

meaning of the source proverb (not real kissing) is translated into the target proverb, 

appropriating it based on the pragmatics of the proverb. Pragmatics incorporates, 

here, context, in which the proverb is used and connotation-the implied meaning. The 

linguistic structure and linguistic meaning, incorporating its pragmatics, have been 

transferred into the target language.  

Therefore, the translation of proverb 2 justifies the selected model. 

 

Proverb 6 : kām garne kālu, makai khāne bhālu. (Nepali) 

    One soweth and another repeath. (English)  

Connotation: 

Superficial action does not  

touch one's heart. 

  Consequence  

(action 1, action 2) 

action 1: kiss at mouth 

action 2: 

 

 

 anoint snot  

  

Linguistic structure 

(syntax, lexical/translation 

units  

Translator  

Source text  

mwaĩ khāko hoina 

sĩgān lāko   

(proverb/message) 

  

Linguistic unit 

(Vehicle/Signifier)  

  

Concept (Signified) 

  

Not real kissing  

  

Message: 

Showy kissing 

doesn't touch heart 

Target Text Reader    

Target Text  

A kiss of mouth often 

touches not the heart  

(proverb message) 

Linguistic Unit  

(Vehicle/Signifier)  

Concept (Signified)  

        Consequence  

(action 1, action 2) 

action 1: kiss at mouth 

action 2: anoint snot  

Not real kissing  

  

Context: A situation in 

which someone kisses with 

evil spirit but not with  

real intention  



LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 24, No. 1, April 2021 

306 
 

For the presentation and analysis of this proverb, figure 2 has been forwarded. 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2 Application of Wilson's (2009) Model for Proverb 6 

 

Figure 2 demonstrates how the model applies to the translation of proverb 6. 

Nepali proverb and English translation are matching in terms of message, meaning, 

linguistic structure, connotation and context. At first, the SL proverb conveys a 

message (one works but other takes fruit) and its meaning (the farmer grows corn, 

but it is bear who eats it). Both the message and meaning are transferred into English 

by way of analysis, interpretation and reformulation. Secondly, the consequence of 

action 1 and agent 1 is action 2 and agent 2, which is deliberately rendered into the 

TL text. Finally, connotation and context (i.e. pragmatics of the proverb) assist to 

reformulate and translate the SL proverb into TL. Therefore, Wilson's (2009) model 

is applicable for translation of proverb 6.  

 

Proverb 16 : ū̃t dulāhā gadhā purohit. (Nepali) 

   Camel as a bridegroom and donkey as a priest. (English) 

 

For the translation of proverb 16, Wilson's model is applicable (but the figure is 

almost similar to figure 1 and 2, therefore, it is not presented here). It exhibits how 

the model can be applied in translation by way of representing SL message and 

meaning, concept, mapping, and pragmatics in TL proverb. These aspects are 

presented below: 

 

Connotation: 

Toil should be honoured 

Context: A situation occurs in 

which one produces  

something but the other  

consumes it  

It is injustice  

  

One soweth and 

another repeath 

(proverb/message) 

Source text  

kām garne kālu 

makai khāne bhālu 

(proverb/message)  

  

Linguistic unit 

(Vehicle/Signifier)  

  

Concept (Signified) 

  

 Consequence  

 action 1, agent 1 

 (one grows crop) 

 action 2, agent 2 

 (bear eats it) 

  

  It is injustice  

  

Message: 

One works but 

other takes fruit 

Target Text  

Linguistic Unit  

(Vehicle/Signifier)  

Concept (Signified)  

       Consequence  

 action 1, agent 1 

 (one grows crop) 

 action 2, agent 2 

 (bear eats it) 

 

Linguistic structure 

(syntax, lexical/translation 

units  

Translator  Target Text Reader 



 

LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 24, No. 1, April 2021 
 

 

307 

 

SL proverb : ū̃t dulāhā gadhā purohit. 

Message : As the bridegroom, as a priest.  

Meaning : Camel as a bridegroom, donkey as a priest. 

Mapping : Consequence   

Context : A situation in which the two inappropriate things  

are matching. 

Therefore, the model (i.e. Wilson's, 2009) is applicable for the translation of 

proverb 16. Likewise, this model applies to other selected proverbs, too.  

 

Conclusion  

Proverbs are culture-specific. They are brief, witty, idiomatic, popular and pithy 

expressions, based on accumulated folk experiences. To translate proverbs from one 

language to another is not easy, yet approximate translation is possible. There is not a 

precise model, which can be completely implemented for translating proverbs. 

However, by implementing Wilson's (2009) model, translation of proverbs can be 

evaluated and other proverbs can also be translated. As a concluding remark, I must 

say that this study is limited only to twenty proverbs and the analysis is just a niche; 

through which a brief interpretation can be done. It requires more experiments and 

more illustrations to justify the model's reliability and applicability. This implies that 

this model (Wilson's model) is appropriate for translating Nepali proverbs into 

English. 

 

References 

 Akbarian, I. (2012). A grey area in translating proverbial expressions: The case of 

English and Persian. Procedia: Social and Behavioural Sciences, 47, 704-710. 

Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.721  

Al-khreshen, M. H., & Almaaytah, S. A.  (2018). English proverbs into Arabic 

through machine translation. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and 

English Literature, 7 (5), 158-166. Retrieved from 

http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.7n.5p.158. 

Al Shehab, M. (2016). The ability of translation students in translating English 

proverbs into Arabic and vice-versa at Jadara University in Jordan. Journal of 

Literature, Language and Linguistics, 29, pp. 10-19. 

Azizah, Lulu Atun (2018). Translating English into Indonesian proverb analysis. 

Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 297, 205.  

Bassnett, S, (2005). Translation studies (3rd ed.). London & New York: Routledge. 

Bastin, Georges L. (2020). Adaptation. In Mona Baker & Gabriela Saldanha (Eds.), 

Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies (3rd ed.) (pp. 10-14). London & 

New York: Routledge. 

Dam, Helle V.; Brogger, Matilde Nisbeth; & Zethsen, Karen Korning (Eds.) (2019). 

Moving boundaries in translation studies. London & New York: Routledge. 

Dicerto, Sara (2018). Multimodal pragmatics and translation: A new model for 

source text analysis. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 

Duff, A. (1989). Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Durmaz, M. (2017). Tracing the local culture in a reading book. Journal of 

Languages and Culture, 8(9), 141-146. Retrieved from 

https://academicjournals.org/journal/JLC/article-full-text-pdf/4309E1B66009.  

Faiq, Said. (Ed.). (2019). Discourse in translation. London & New York: Routledge. 

  

https://academicjournals.org/journal/JLC/article-full-text-pdf/4309E1B66009


LLT Journal, e-ISSN 2579-9533, p-ISSN 1410-7201, Vol. 24, No. 1, April 2021 

308 
 

Gorjian, B. (2008). Translating English proverbs into Persian: A case of 

comparative linguistics. Retrived from 

www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/projects/cropus/UCCTS2008proceedings/papers/Gorjian.p

df.  

Hatim, B., & Masson, I. (1990). Discourse and the translator. London: Longman.  

Hernadi, P., & Steen, F. (1999). The tropical landscapes of proverbia: A 

crossdisciplinary tranvelogue. Retrived from 

http://cobweb.ucla.edu./culture/Hernadi_Steen_99.html  

Krishnamurthy, R. (2011). Indian tradition. In Baker, M., & Saldanha, G. (Ed.), 

Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies. (2nd ed.). London & New York: 

Routledge.  

Lall, K. (1991). Nepalese book of proverbs. Kathmandu: Tiwari's Pilgrims Book 

House.  

Mollanazar, H. (2001). Naturalness in the translation of novels from English to 

Persian (Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Warwick, UK). Retrieved 

from http://ga.warwick.ac.uk/wrap/1138.  

Neupane, N. (2017). Strategies used in translation of culture specific concepts: 

Exploration into Nepali novels (Unpublished PhD Dissertation). Tribhuvan 

University, Kathmandu, Nepal. 

Pluger, C. (2015). Translating New Testament proverb-like sayings in the style of 

local proverbs. The Bible Translator, 66(3), 324-345. Retrieved from 

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2051677015610110 

Qassem, M. A., & Vijayasarathi, G. (2015). Problematicity of translating cultural 

idiomatic expressions from English into Arabic. Asia Pacific Translation and 

Intercultural Studies, 2(1), 57-73. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.1080/23306343.2015.1016259. 

Sharma, J. P. (2000). Nepali-English proverbial dictionary. Sankhuwasabha, Koshi: 

Ms Indira Sharma.  

Sharma, M, R., & Shrestha, D. (1999). Nepali sāhityako sankshipta itihās (5th ed.). 

Lalitpur: Sajha Prakashan.  

Shehav, Ekrewa, & Daragmeh, Abdelkarim. (2014). A context-based approach to 

proverb translation: The case of Arabic into English translation. Translation 

Review, 90(1), pp. 51-68. https://doi.org/10.1080/07374836.2014.9867799. 

Thalji, M. B. (2015). The translation of proverbs: Obstacles and strategies (Master’s 

Thesis). Middle East University, Amman, Jordan. Retrieved from 

https://meu.edu.jo/libraryTheses/5871fd344b5b6_1.pdf. 

Turner, R. L., & Turner, D. R. (2009). A comparative and etymological dictionary of 

Nepali language. New Delhi: Adarsh Books.  

Wang, J. (2019). Translating and rewriting Chinese proverbs: A case study of 

Howard Goldblatt’s English translation of Mo Yan’s “Shengsi Pilao”. English 

Language and Literature Studies, 9(2), 12-24. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.5539/ells.v9n2p12. 

Wilson, F. C. (2009). A model for translating metaphors in proverbs (French to 

English): A cognitive descriptive approach. An unpublished M. A. thesis. The 

University of British, Columbia, Okanagan, Kelowna. Retrieved from 

http://hdl.handle.net/2429/12923 

 

 

http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/projects/cropus/UCCTS2008proceedings/papers/Gorjian.pdf
http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/projects/cropus/UCCTS2008proceedings/papers/Gorjian.pdf
http://cobweb.ucla.edu./culture/Hernadi_Steen_99.html
http://ga.warwick.ac.uk/wrap/1138
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2051677015610110
https://meu.edu.jo/libraryTheses/5871fd344b5b6_1.pdf
http://hdl.handle.net/2429/12923