Responsibility in Arabic and English: A Linguistic Perspective
Abstract
This study examines the concept of “responsibility” from a strictly linguistic perspective through a comparative analysis of the term in Arabic and English, focusing on etymological origin, semantic development, and modern terminological definition. The analysis proceeds along two parallel tracks: an etymological–semantic track and a modern conceptual–terminological track. The findings indicate that the difference between the two terms lies in the angle of semantic focus rooted in their linguistic origins rather than in their modern functional usage, as both converge on assigning a defined duty to an agent with the possibility of accountability in cases of failure. This analysis is explicitly non-normative and is presented as a linguistic reflection open to discussion and revision.
1. Introduction
At first glance, the Arabic term mas’ūliyya (responsibility) and its English counterpart responsibility appear to convey the same meaning in modern usage. However, a closer examination of their etymological origins reveals an apparent semantic divergence that merits linguistic analysis.
In English, the term is etymologically associated with the capacity to respond, whereas in Arabic it is rooted in the notion of being subject to questioning and accountability. This divergence raises a focused linguistic question: does this difference reflect a genuine conceptual divergence, or does it remain an etymological variation without impact on the modern terminological meaning?
To address this question, the present study confines itself strictly to the linguistic level, avoiding cultural, civilizational, or normative interpretations.
2. Methodology
This study adopts a descriptive–analytical approach, based on the following methodological principles:
Restricting analysis to the linguistic level.
Maintaining a clear distinction between the etymological–semantic track and the modern conceptual–terminological track.
Relying on authoritative dictionaries in both languages.
Testing the hypothesis through direct definitional comparison.
Presenting results in a descriptive, non-conclusive manner.
3. The Etymological–Semantic Track
3.1 Etymological Origin in English
The adjective responsible entered English in the seventeenth century (1640s), via Old French responsable (13th century), with reference to a hypothetical Latin form responsabilis, derived from the Latin verb respondere, meaning “to respond, answer, or promise in return” (Oxford Online Etymology Dictionary).
Early English usage defined the term as:
accountable for one’s actions, answerable to another, for an act performed or its consequences.
The Latin verb respondere is composed of two elements:
re- (“back”), indicating reply or return.
spondere (“to pledge”), indicating commitment or obligation.
This etymological structure points to an interactive relation centered on responding, answering, or fulfilling a pledge in relation to a prior claim or obligation, rather than to an autonomous act. In the late seventeenth century (1690s), the term underwent semantic extension to include meanings such as reliable and trustworthy, while retaining its core sense of obligation.
In legal usage, the Century Dictionary distinguishes between:
responsible: the condition of being potentially bound to respond should circumstances require it.
liable: the condition of being actually bound to respond after a fault has occurred.
This distinction indicates that the English etymological–semantic focus is on the capacity to respond, rather than on the actual occurrence of accountability.
Reference: https://www.etymonline.com/word/responsibility
3.2 Etymological Origin in Arabic
The Arabic term mas’ūliyya (responsibility) is derived from the triliteral root s-ʾ-l (سأل), which denotes asking, inquiry, and demand.
The form mas’ūl (responsible) is a passive participle, semantically indicating that a person is the object of questioning, rather than merely the agent of response.
Historical Arabic dictionaries define mas’ūliyya as:
“liability, accountability, and the obligation to commit to what results from it morally, legally, or otherwise التبعة، والمحاسبة، والواجب الالتزام بما يترتب عليها أخلاقيًا أو قانونيًا أو نحو ذلك ”
(Arabic Historical Dictionary, Arabic Language Academy – Sharjah).
Accordingly, the Arabic semantic structure is grounded in:
The existence of an inquiring or questioning authority.
The incurrence of liability or consequence.
The positioning of the individual in a state of being subject to questioning, morally or legally.
Reference : https://almojam.org/?id=3173&wordId=19415
4. The Modern Conceptual–Terminological Track
4.1 Definition in English
The Cambridge Dictionary defines responsibility as:
something that it is your job or duty to deal with.
This definition emphasizes:
Duty.
Assigned task.
Performance as the practical handling of what has been assigned.
Reference: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/responsibility
4.2 Definition in Contemporary Arabic
The Riyadh Dictionary of Contemporary Arabic defines mas’ūliyya as:
“liability; consequence. تَبِعة، وعاقبة”
This definition emphasizes:
Liability.
Consequence.
Accountability for what results from action or omission.
Reference: https://dictionary.ksaa.gov.sa/result/%D9%85%D8%B3%D8%A4%D9%88%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%A9
4.3 Transitional Note
Based on these modern terminological definitions, the proposed hypothesis can now be examined by comparing the points of semantic focus in Arabic and English.
5. Testing the Hypothesis
5.1 Point of Semantic Entry
In Arabic, responsibility originates from questioning and accountability.
In English, responsibility originates from duty and assigned task.
5.2 Semantic Direction
In Arabic, the semantic orientation points toward what follows later, in terms of consequences and outcomes.
In English, it points toward what must be performed now, in terms of execution and performance.
5.3 Position of the Agent
In the Arabic linguistic conception, the agent occupies a position of accountability.
In the English linguistic conception, the agent occupies a position of performance and execution.
5.4 Result of the Test
From this analysis, it can be understood that in Arabic, responsibility is centered on the act insofar as it entails consequences, placing the individual in a position of accountability according to the nature of those consequences. Decision-making, in this view, is closely tied to anticipating future outcomes, which may be understood as assigning greater semantic weight to consequence.
In contrast, in English, responsibility is centered on the administrative and performance-based handling of an assigned task within the framework of duty, without explicit emphasis on future consequence or liability. Here, the semantic weight lies primarily in performance rather than accountability.
5.5 Clarifying Note
Nevertheless, both conceptions include the same constituent elements:
Liability
Consequence
Task
Duty
Performance
The difference lies not in the presence or absence of these elements, but in the semantic focal point within each linguistic framework.
6. Conclusion
This study demonstrates that the difference between the Arabic and English concepts of responsibility is an etymological–semantic difference in perspective rather than a functional difference in modern terminological usage. While Arabic tends to foreground accountability and consequence, English tends to foreground duty and performance. In contemporary contexts, however, both concepts converge functionally.
This analysis is offered as a non-normative linguistic reading, open to discussion and revision.