Vol.8(8), pp. 95-109, August 2017 DOI: 10.5897/JLC2017.0437 Article Number: A22389B65395 Journal of Languages and Culture ISSN 2141-6540 Copyright © 2017 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article http://www.academicjournals.org/JLC Full Length Research Paper Language attrition in bicultural bilinguals: Evidence from Neo-Aramaic animal metaphors Ala Al-kajela McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON L8S 4M2 Canada. Received 30 March, 2017; Accepted 21 May, 2017 Animal-based metaphors are ubiquitous in natural languages with distinct cross-cultural implications. In this study, these conventional or dead metaphors, so to speak, are used as a tool to measure language erosion and cultural integration. We assumed that Neo-Aramaic-English bicultural bilinguals (NA-E) and Canadian-English speakers (CE) have the linguistic and cultural capacity necessary to establish concerted conceptualizations and culturally agreed upon connection between the target and source domain of these metaphors. This assumption was based on the fact that animals are one of the main categories of language vocabulary that native speakers learn during the early stages of their linguistic development. We selected widely known animal metaphors- 13 had identical meanings and 11 had culturally distinct meanings. The results showed no significant difference between the two groups as to the meaning of identical metaphors and animal gender associations. However, we found a significant statistical difference in the good and poor match of the culturally distinct metaphors. Animal gender associations did not show any significant difference. The frequency scale did not show any significant difference except for 'always' with distinct metaphors. Key words: Neo-Aramaic, cultural integration, animal metaphors, language attrition. INTRODUCTION In this study, we target a figurative aspect of a minority pluralism strengthens or weakens the heritage language language (that is, Neo-Aramaic) and the role of host of the minority group in question. culture in language erosion. It is widely known that the Therefore, we assume that the hegemonic culture puts Canadian society is made up of a large number of increasingly potential pressure on certain aspects of ethnicities which resulted in developing a mosaic cultural language which creates a state of disequilibrium between system. minority and majority language. In language-centered More often than not, individuals belonging to distinct cultures minority, group members usually put emphasis ethnicities and having various linguistic and cultural on their heritage language. That said, apart from backgrounds are encouraged by the general inclusive language there might exist other cultural aspects that atmosphere to retain their cultural and linguistic identity. would greatly contribute to and clearly delineate the However, it is unclear whether such kind of cultural boundaries of existence, identification and future E-mail: [email protected]. Authors agree that this article remain permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License 96 J. Lang. Cult. continuity of the minority group. attest that metaphor is both a ubiquitous phenomenon When two languages are in contact situation, it is and intransigent problem in language. customary to borrow or transfer (non)linguistic forms and In line with this, Lakoff and Johnson (1980) claimed components from source language (L1) to target that metaphor is not only 'pervasive' in our daily language (L2) (Aikhenvald, 2003; James 1980; Heine interactions but also in our 'thought' and 'action'. They and Kuteva, 2005; Lado, 1957; Muysken, 2000; bluntly stated that "our ordinary conceptual system, in Thomason and Kuafman, 1988; Thomason, 2001). On terms of which we both think and act, is fundamentally the microlinguistic level, lexical, phonetic, and metaphorical in nature" (p.3). phonological transfer or borrowing from L1 to L2 usually In other words, people conceive the social world causes difficulties for second language learners. through conceptual metaphors, which enable them to However, research in first and second language understand abstract or target concepts using knowledge acquisition proved that high-frequency linguistic of dissimilar, typically more concrete or source concepts. structures are acquired faster and earlier (Ellis 2002; Lakoff (1993) further claimed that "... the locus of Goodman et al., 2008). In fact, the high frequency of metaphor is not in language at all, but in the way we these structures facilitates the process of borrowing or conceptualize one mental domain in terms of another" (p. transferring from one language to another (Pagel et al., 203). For Gibbs (1994) "...human cognition is 2007). It is disappointing to admit that high-frequency fundamentally shaped by various poetic or figurative facilitation hypothesis fails to explain how animal processes" (p.1). metaphors, which are characterized by low frequency, In social cognition, some researchers have emphasized are transferred in contact situation from L2 to L1. that metaphor is a top-down knowledge and placed little Little empirical work has been done on the influence of emphasis on the constraints that shape metaphor from L2 on L1 in childhood bilingualism. Wong-Fillmore (1991) the bottom up. According to Landau et al. (2010) "people showed evidence from interviews with parents and stated are able to use pieces of knowledge about the source that ''as immigrant children learn English, the patterns of concept as a structural framework for reasoning about, language use change in their homes, and the younger interpreting, and evaluating information related to target they are when they learn English, the greater the effect'' concept" (p. 1046). (p. 341). To summarize, metaphor is a vital part of our Pavlenko (1999, 2000) and Pavlenko and Jarvis (2000) conceptual network which we draw heavily on to construe dealt with L2 influence on L1-based concepts in post- and extract abstract concepts from concrete ones. It is puberty or late bilingualism, where L2 learners borrow worth noting that according to the semantic model (within lexical item to express specific concepts or refer to new generative grammar framework) of Katz and Fodor objects that do not exist in their cultural cognition (for (1963) figurative language including metaphor was contact neologism see Otheguy and Garcia, 1993). labelled deviant and semantically unacceptable. In this study, we investigate a transfer that occurs on the macrolinguistic level where bilingual speakers successfully transfer L2 sociopragmatic knowledge to The basis of animal metaphor their L1. We assume that NA-E bilinguals stop being an active part of the cultural and linguistic realm by A considerable number of people conjecture that humans eschewing the dynamic process of formalizing and and animals are two different organisms. However, a expressing the concerted conceptualizations of the sizable number of this population considers humans cultural group to which they belong. We use animal superior and more important than animals, because metaphors to examine the effect of this conceptual humans are apparently privileged to drive cars, wear transfer on language erosion. The study sheds light on fancy suits, live in skyscrapers, own businesses, read, language attrition that is caused by 'reverse' or 'backward' and write, etc. transfer from L2 to L1 (Cook, 2003). Succinctly, it is not a Nonhuman animals, so to speak, are not entitled to semantic transfer that deals with the lexical meaning of indulge in such human activities. If we consider the list of words, but rather a conceptual transfer that is essentially things that humans can do, we discern that millions of based on speaker's world knowledge and experience people do not have the capability to access or execute drawn from cultural interaction or enculturation so to what is considered germane, and probably unique, to speak. humans such as literacy. A deeper inspection would reveal that humans and animals share a significant number of faculties and even some emotions. Metaphor: A multidisciplinary perspective Contrary to Descartes (1637/1988) and Davidson (1985), extensive research has been carried out to prove In Poetics, Aristotle (350 B.C.E) describes metaphor as that animals do not lack mental ability. Some researchers "strange...unusual, different from the normal idiom... and have shown that many animals are able to think, but they the mark of the genius". This said, most investigators do not possess the versatility that characterizes human Al-kajela 97 consciousness. They have „perceptual consciousnesses‟ On the one hand, cross-cultural studies of metaphor or a basic version of the human consciousness. showed that conceptualizations could differ cross Natsoulas (1983, p.29) described it as “the state or facility linguistically because the same animal may carry of being mentally conscious or aware of everything.” different images1, and one concept can be associated Savage-Rumbaugh et al. (1998) used Yerkes with two different animals (Ansah, 2011; Kövecses, 2000; Laboratory keyboard system to show that chimpanzees Talebinejad and Dastjerdi, 2005). can communicate conscious thoughts and emotions. On the other hand, like other types of metaphor, According to Seeley and Visscher (2003), even worker conceptualizations of animal-based metaphors are bees possess this kind of perceptual consciousness. shared, however not necessarily equally shared by all the Roberts (1996) defends the idea that both humans and members of a cultural group, because they are governed animals experience fear but differently “...we and the by individual experiences and predilections. small dog have emotions both of which can be called Succinctly, these members share cultural cognition that fear, they are nevertheless different emotions, with delineates, delimits and determines whether their different diagnostic and therapeutic implications” (p.155). participation in the cognitive process of conceptualization Some zoologists like Dawkins (1993) adopted a as members of the cultural group is profound or Darwinian approach to link humans and animals in a superficial. Therefore, the Neo-Aramaic2 linguistic identity chain or ring species. Dawkins (1993) claims that our stands out when the NA-E bilingual thoroughly engages speciesist and discontinuous mind obfuscate the fact that in the intergenerational conceptualization process. "a fetus can be “half human” or “a hundredth human”. However, this identity peters out when the inter- “Human”, to the discontinuous mind, is an absolute generational transmission of cultural conceptualizations is concept. There can be no half measures. And from this not consummately marshalled due to spontaneous flows much evil" (p.37, quotes original). According to cultural assimilation or 'acculturation' (Redfield et al., Dawkins (1993), the chimpanzee who lived in Africa five 1936). We agree with Berry and Kostovcik (1990) that and seven million years ago is our cousin. On the other acculturation exerts considerable amount of pressure on hand, the New Scientist, in its editorial of 13 February one group, viz., NA-E bilinguals, more than the other. (1999), conspicuously vindicated the idea that genetic In the same vein, some animal metaphors come to comparison does not justify the claim that gorillas or acquire novel senses and connotations even among the chimpanzees and humans are virtually identical. members of the same speech community. Owl, for Unfortunately, it has become fashionable to stress that example, in one Neo-Aramaic variety is a used to chimpanzees and humans must have staggeringly similar describe someone who is considered a jinx and whose psychologies because they share 98.4% of their DNA. presence portends a bad omen. However, in another But this misses the point: genomes are not like cake variety, owl connotes physical ugliness or obtuseness. recipes... A creature that shares 98.4% of its DNA with Raccoon, for example is usually associated with human is not 98.4% human, any more than a fish that thieves or robbery, but among the youth, this sense has shares, say, 40% of its DNA with us is 40% human...Take been replaced by the image of a girl who wears a lot of DNA as your measure of sentience and moral worth and black eyeliner. However, one cannot just turn a blind eye the chemical connectedness of life ensures that you soon to the cognitive and social influence that metaphor in end up extending honorary personhood to the rat and general and animal metaphor in particular have in the haddock. (p.3) way we dissect the world around us. Marks (2002) rejected the idea of comparing genes and pointed out that "All humans have a pair of large PEOPLE ARE ANIMALS metaphor chromosomes (#2) that no chimpanzee has. It is a correlate, not a cause, of humanness..." (p.245). It is important to give a brief account of the Neo-Aramaic However, there has been a consensus among distinct animal metaphors, as we assume the identical researchers that linguistic competence (mental grammar) ones have straightforward meanings before proceeding and abstract thought are the two faculties that make to the experimental part. In our account, we will allude to homo, and homo sapiens in particular, unique. the fact that Neo-Aramaic animal-based metaphors provide a balanced, non-stereotypical image of both men Acculturation and cognitive patterns women, unlike the image represented by the English culture where woman is viewed as inferior to man (cf. Motivated by their delusionary conventional usage, predictability and allegedly universal nature, which according to research in cognitive linguistics, stems from the idea that figurative conceptualizations are grounded in embodied human experience (Lakoff and Johnson, 1 For our experimental purposes, either meaning was considered a good match. 1980; Lakoff, 1987), according to Black (1962), the 2 NA refers to a group of language varieties that are descendants of Middle Aramaic. NA dialects of the North-Eastern NA (also known as NENA) are British-American philosopher, unempirically labelled spoken in northern Iraq, northwestern Iran and southeastern Turkey. The study animal metaphors 'dead' more than fifty years ago. attempts to shed light on Christian dialect spoken in a town in the north of Iraq. 98 J. Lang. Cult. Hines, 1999; Nilsen, 1996; López-Rodríguez, 2009, physique. 2016). As a matter of consistency, we will simply follow 8. The image of cat in Neo-Aramaic, like Arabic, is based the order used in survey format in Appendix 1. on the myth that cats have seven lives. In this sense, it is similar to the English cat which has nine lives. It is 1. According to Neo-Aramaic culture, somebody who interesting that neo-Aramaic, unlike English, has goes to bed early is chicken. This image is derived from stretched this mythical sense and employed it the direct contact with this domestic animal according to metaphorically; therefore, it is quite common to hear the nature and style of living in their rural area. something like ''s/he is a cat, s/he cheated death on Morphologically, the name of the animal3 is inherently several occasions.'' The context determines whether the marked for feminine gender, but metaphorical use grants metaphor has commendatory or derogatory implications. it permission to be freely used with masculine nouns. The 9. The metaphorical image of pig evokes two English sense, which is, 'timid' or 'coward', of this contradictory senses. In some Neo-Aramaic varieties, metaphorical expression is completely different from the pork is not prohibited; therefore, pig does not imply any Neo-Aramaic one. negative connotations. The animal is jocularly associated 2. Contrary to the English cultural beliefs, Neo-Aramaic with strong, healthy and sometimes spry old people. This owl is loaded with negative connotations. Unlike the wise positive image is not arbitrarily constructed, as it English owl, it is a source of jinx, obtuseness and originates from the fact that pig is not domesticated in this homeliness, probably due to its nocturnal nature. In fact, culture, which eliminates the English image of pig's members of this cultural group presume that there is a gluttony, untidiness and dirtiness associated with a strong correlation between a bad luck bringer and pigsty. People are more familiar with wild boars which are obtuseness. Morphological marking for masculine and hunted in the wilderness. feminine is present in metaphorical use, but, in some 10. The Fish's image is directly linked with water. This Neo-Aramaic varieties, speakers borrow the feminine metaphorical sense refers to people who take great Arabic form and use it neutrally. pleasure in swimming, bathing, splashing, sprinkling, etc. 3. Bear is a big and strong animal, and is usually Fish is a feminine noun in Neo-Aramaic but can be used associated with aggressive behaviour, but for Neo- with masculine nouns on par. The metaphorical sense, in Aramaic speakers, bear signifies feeble-mindedness. English, differs dramatically from the Neo-Aramaic one. Feminine and masculine gender markers are used An inexperienced and fledgling person is a fish, which interchangeably without interrupting the metaphorical apparently has a negative connotation. sense. In some contexts, bear can offensively refer to a 11. Mule carries another contradictory image in the two fat female. languages. Mule is known as a draft animal in both 4. The sheep image in Neo-Aramaic is widely known as a cultures. However, mule has kept its status as a strong, symbol of innocence and amicability with positive hard-working animal in Neo-Aramaic, but its metaphorical connotations that are restricted to males. The sense has shifted, in English, to become associated with metaphorical image related with sheep in the sense of stubbornness. Morphologically, mule is a masculine noun innocence is not quite common in Canadian culture, and thus its metaphorical use is restricted to men. because it has another sense that refers to a timid or dependent individual. 5. In Neo-Aramaic, a prolific woman is a rabbit. It carries METHODOLOGY a slightly negative connotation and is uniquely used to describe women with multiple successive births. It is Experimental design and instrument slightly negative, because having many kids in the family is, in fact, a source of strength. The experiment consisted of two parts which were randomized 6. Louse has negative connotations as it refers to a weak throughout the survey to enhance the statistical validity of our person with no initiatives. Louse is a feminine noun, but results- we capitalized them in Appendix 1 for convenience. The can also describe a masculine referent. On the other first one was made up of 11 animal metaphors. These metaphors have distinct meanings in Neo-Aramaic and hand, Canadians use louse to describe a boorish person. English. Chicken, for example, is conceptualized as a weak 7. Gorilla is another animal-based metaphor that creature which resonates with some human characteristics whereas represents a distinct image in the two languages. When a in the NA culture the conceptualization of this animal is different. In man is hairy, he is a described as a gorilla. It can also be NA, early sleepers are usually referred to as chickens. used to refer to a noisy male or female in spite of being a The second part consisted of 13 identical4 animal metaphors. feminine-marked noun. In English, gorilla carries negative Speakers from the cultures in question have equivalent conceptualizations of these animals, for example, untrustworthy or and positive connotations; first, it is used derogatively to slippery people are described as snakes. We focused on animals refer to a large black male; second, the others sense that are quite familiar and usually metaphorically used in both implies a positive description of man's muscular, toned up cultures; therefore, animals, such as a raccoon, dolphin, panda, etc. were excluded. 3 Animal-bird distinction is irrelevant to our work; therefore, we will use animal as a hypernym. 4 Henceforth, 'Identical' and 'equivalent' will be used interchangeably. Al-kajela 99 In addition to consulting metaphor dictionaries, we interviewed Then, they answered some demographic questions. six native Canadian English speakers (aged +50) to confirm those with dictionary entry and to investigate the meaning of those that we could not find in dictionaries. There are no Neo-Aramaic RESULTS dictionaries because Neo-Aramaic is only spoken. We interviewed seven Neo-Aramaic native speakers (aged +60) to verify the meaning of the metaphors we used in our on-line survey. The nonparametric equivalent of a two-independent We used animal metaphors as a means to examine the effect of samples t-test (that is, the Wilcox rank-sum (two-tailed) learning a second language (i.e. Canadian English) on core test) was used in the study statistical analysis. concepts in the first language (that is, Neo-Aramaic). This will For the identical metaphors, (see Appendix 1, bolded), reveal the influence of cultural integration on native or primary the good match scores of NA-E bilinguals (Mdn 50) and language. The study dealt with the nominal use of animals in CE speakers (Mdn60) did not differ significantly at .05 metaphors, for example, 'X is a pig' (Appendix 1). Adjectival animal metaphors, for example 'shrewish', 'foxy', and 'mousy', etc. and level as shown in the plot below (Figure 1), W= 86.5, Verbal metaphors, such as 'X wanted to white ant Y' or 'X was p=0.9, r= -0.02. 50% of the good match scores lied horsing around with Y' were not tackled. between 70 and 37, which did not differ from the scores The survey consisted of three main questions. The first one of CE speakers whose scores were between 70 and 33. required providing appropriate adjectives to describe the human This suggests that NA-E bilinguals and CE speakers characteristics that each animal implies. As expected, there was a are equally cognizant about this kind of metaphors. The wide range of adjectives associated with each metaphor. In order to tease apart these various adjectives, based on the established plot in Figure 1 shows the convergence between both connotations of the selected animal metaphors, our analysis treated groups and their ability to create a kind of linkage the adjectives as subordinates subsumed under the superordinate between metaphors and human characteristics. term (that is, the animal). We did not find a significant difference between the 'Scorpion' for example, subsumed 'sly', 'untrustworthy', 'sneaky' poor and zero match scores of both groups, (Mdn=27) for and 'wicked' which were treated as a 'good match' whereas other adjectives, such as 'fierce', 'strong', and 'withdrawn' were labelled NA-E speakers did not differ significantly from (Mdn=30) as a 'poor match'. The second question was about gender for CE speakers, W= 84, p= 1, r= -0.02. CE speakers identification- each animal metaphor can be used to refer to male, demonstrated more consistency than NA-E bilinguals did female or both. The third question dealt with frequency. We asked in this condition; their IQR was 13 relative to their NA the participants to give a frequency rating for each metaphor by peers (IQR 20). Again, half of the scores were between depending on a predesigned, descending scale that consisted of six 37 and 17 for NA-E bilinguals and between 33 and 20 for options: always, usually, sometimes, rarely, never, and I do not know this expression. CE speakers. The spread of the data was very similar in case of their zero match (that is, they refrained from giving any Subjects description), (Mdn= 17) for NA-E bilinguals and (Mdn=13) for CE speaker, W=77.5. p= 0.7, r= -0.07 as shown in Two groups participated in the study. The first one consisted of 30 (Figure 2). These results index that the two groups not NA-E bilinguals5 who volunteered to take part in the study. We only did they share the same cultural perspective excluded three NA participants because they did not identify regarding what these conventional metaphors mean but themselves as native NA speakers. The second group was made also demonstrated the same level of cultural leaning as to up of 30 CE monolinguals that were granted one credit in one of the courses upon signing up for the study. Uncompleted surveys were providing wrong meanings and refraining from or failing to not included in our data. To ensure partial homogeneity among provide any. participants, both groups aged between 20 and 28 in order to get a We noticed more convergence between both groups in sensible response to our linguistic questions about animal associations of gender with these metaphors. It is an metaphors. The data collected from the old speakers were not used indication that both groups share the knowledge required for statistical purposes. All the CE participants were undergraduate to establish a correlation between the genders in two students at McMaster University during the time of conducting the survey- a few NA-E bilinguals were McMaster alumni. distinct domains: the animal (source domain) and the human (target domain). All the panels in Figure 3 show an overlap suggesting that NA-E bilinguals and CE Procedure speakers do not differ significantly at 0.05 level. For choosing the correct gender, for both groups (Mdn=53), The participants had to complete an on-line survey on animal W= 94.5, p= 0.6, r= -0.07. However, mismatch scores of metaphor (Appendix 1). The survey takes between 30 to 45 both groups were lower than their good match scores. minutes to complete. However, participants were not obliged to NA-E bilinguals made more mistakes and thus scored answer all the questions in one session as they had the option to save their uncompleted survey and come back at a later time. The higher (Mdn=30) than CE speakers (Mdn=23), W= 66.5, preamble statement gives a brief account about the survey and its p=0.4, r= -0.2. objectives (Appendix 2). Before taking the survey, the participants Both groups demonstrated a pattern in gender had to read the consent form and agree to participate (Appendix 3). identification as they got high scores for matching up gender with the metaphor. However, their scores tapered 5 NA-E bilinguals are immigrants who arrived in Canada when they were off in the other two conditions. NA-E bilinguals showed young children. Most of them have at least 10 years of natural exposure. They did not get any bilingual education at school. more consistency than CE speakers did in choosing 100 J. Lang. Cult. Figure 1. NA-E and CE good match of culturally equivalent animal metaphors. Figure 2. NA-E and CE poor and zero match of culturally identical animal metaphors. gender that did not match up with the metaphor, because difference between NA-E bilinguals and CE speakers at their IQR was 13 compared to 20 for CE speakers. 0.05 level. The good match in Figure 4 show that CE We observed a similar tendency in their behaviour, as speakers scored higher (Mdn=47) than NA-E bilinguals they failed to properly associate either gender with the (Mdn=10), W=100.5, p= 0.01, r= -0.48. Half of their metaphors in question (zero gender match). Again, NA-E scores were between 73 and 25 whereas the 50% of NA- bilinguals scored a bit higher than CE speakers did, E bilinguals scores were lower (22- 5). suggesting that they did not know which gender should In other words, CE speaker were better than NA-E be used in this condition. However, failure to provide bilinguals at associating transformable characteristics of gender did not differ significantly for NA-E bilinguals the target domain with the source domain. We noticed (Mdn=17) and CE speakers (Mdn=13), W=76.5, p= 0.7, that NA-E bilinguals had less variability (IQR=17) than CE r= -0.08. speakers did (IQR= 50), which indexes more agreement Distinct metaphors showed that there was a significant or a general tendency within this group to provide less Al-kajela 101 Figure 3. Three levels of gender agreement with culturally identical animal metaphors. Figure 4. NA-E and CE good match of culturally distinct animal metaphors. good matches. Figure 4 shows the good match scores of this kind of metaphors more frequently than CE speakers both groups for each distinct metaphor. did (Figure 5 right panel). Their (Mdn=37) was higher CE speakers were well informed about animal than that of CE speakers (Mdn=27), W= 47, p= 0.4, r= - metaphors relative to NA-E bilinguals, because they 0.16. scored lower throughout the other two conditions (that is, The low scores of NA-E bilinguals (Figure 4) in distinct giving poor matches or providing none). NA-E bilinguals metaphor good match condition explain part of the scored higher on poor match condition, we did find a variability in their geneder match for these metaphors significant difference between both groups as left panel in (IQR= 42 compared with 28 for their Canadian peers). Figure 5 shows, NA-E bilinguals (Mdn=43) and CE However, there was not a significant difference between speakers (Mdn=17), W= 21, p=0.01, r=-0.47. NA-E NA-E blinguals (Mdn= 40) and CE speakers (Mdn= 50) bilinguals preferred not to associate any description with as shown in Figure 6, W= 75, p= 0.3, r= -0.2. Regarding 102 J. Lang. Cult. Figure 5. NA-E and CE poor and zero match of culturally distinct animal metaphors. Figure 6. Three levels of gender agreement with culturally distinct animal metaphors. gender mismatch NA-E bilinguals scored lower (Mdn= associations. 17) than CE speakers (Mdn= 23) did, but they shared the NA-E blinguals and CE speakers did not score high on same value of IQR (17), W= 69, p=0.6, r= -0.11. the frequency scale. Apparently, there was an ascending NA-E blinguals did not opt for either of the gender pattern that showed a shift towards higher scores as options more frequently than CE speakers. For the participants moved away from high frequency to low condition of gender zero match, they scored as high as frequency options (Figures 7 and 8). We did not find a their gender match condition. However, there was not a significant difference between NA-E bilinguals and CE significant difference between both groups at .05 level. speakers on the frequency scale- all the p-values were For CE speakers median was (27) and for NA-E above the significance level of 0.05. Statistical results bilinguals (Mdn=40), W= 43.5, p= 0.3, r=-0.2. The plots in obtained from Wilcoxon signed-rank test are summarised Figure 6 give a detailed description of gender in Table 1. Al-kajela 103 Figure 7. Three levels of usage frequency with culturally identical animale metaphors. Figure 8. Three levels of decreasing frequency with culturally identical animal metaphors. We noticed that the frequency patterns of distinct their general tendency to score higher on 'usually' and metaphors are similar to those associated with identical 'sometimes'.Even with 'rarely' and 'never', NA-E blinguals metaphors. The scores of NA-E bilinguals and CE seemed to score relatively lower than CE speakers. speakers took an ascending trajectory towards the lower end of the frequency scale. NA-E bilinguals and CE speakers did not differ significantly in their ratings on the DISCUSSION frequency scale (Figures 9 and 10). In spite of the fact that both groups scored considerably The study presented in this article provided empirical low , we found a significant difference in their ratings of evidence in support of the claim that the dominant culture 'always' as shown in Table 1. This can be attributed to of the majority group could influence the linguistic 104 J. Lang. Cult. Table 1. The significance obtained from wilcoxon test for the frequency of identical and distinct metaphors. Degree of frequency Degree of frequency p- W p-value r W r Identical metaphors distinct metaphors value Alwyas 55 0.07 -0.326 Always 31.5 0.02 -0.422 Usually 50 0.07 -0.326 Usually 56 0.7 -0.054 Sometimes 80.5 0.8 -0.377 Sometimes 68 0.6 -0.091 Rarely 102 0.3 -0.165 Rarely 65.5 0.7 -0.061 Never 121.5 0.06 -0.348 Never 86 0.09 -0.309 None 76.5 0.7 -0.075 None 47 0.4 -0.162 Figure 9. Three levels of usage frequency with culturally distinct animal metaphors. Figure 10. Three levels of decrease frequency with culturally distincy animal metaphors.