ProverbHub
Near equivalentPatience and delayed outcomes2 members

Someone is tempted to rush a task where a mistake would cost more than the time saved.

Similar practical message with a limited difference, shown beside the similarity.

Create a lesson result

Overall coverage: VerifiedLast reviewed 2026-09-30How this was reviewed

Why these are connected

Both sayings are used to stop someone rushing a task and to argue that the time hurrying saves is not worth what it costs. Each sets speed against getting the work right and comes down on the side of getting it right.

Where they differ

The English saying names the consequence: waste, the material, effort or money lost when rushed work has to be redone. It is phrased as a general rule about what haste does. The Arabic saying names the fault instead, a mistake, and is phrased as advice to the listener: go slowly rather than err. It concedes that slowness is a cost and says it is the smaller one, which the English saying never states. Neither record establishes present-day usage.

Compare

  • Saying 1: English

    English
    Sense: Verified

    Haste makes waste.

    Functional meaning

    Warns that rushing a task can produce errors, rework, or loss that outweigh the time saved.

    Usage context

    Applicable when speed is likely to reduce quality or create avoidable rework.

    Relationship to this situation

    Near equivalentRelationship: Verified

    States the warning as a general rule and names the cost of hurrying: waste, meaning lost material, rework or expense.

    Community
    Unknown
    Region
    Unknown
    Historical period
    Recorded from 1546; extended forms are documented through 1864.
    Register
    everyday warning
  • Saying 2: Arabic

    Arabic
    Sense: Verified

    «اِبْطِي ولا تِخْطِي»

    English translation

    Take your time so you don’t slip up.

    Literal wording

    Go slowly, and do not make a mistake.

    Functional meaning

    The saying advises the listener to slow down rather than risk getting something wrong. It names the fault it wants to prevent, an error, and it does not pretend that going slowly is free: it admits that taking longer has a cost and judges that cost to be the smaller one. Used in conversation, it turns a choice between speed and correctness into a clear priority, with correctness first. The advice fits work where an error is costly or hard to undo and where extra time does little damage. It is misapplied when the delay is itself the harm, as in an emergency, a closing deadline or a chance that will not wait, and it can sound like an excuse when offered to justify avoidable slowness. It holds only while slowness really is the lighter of the two costs.

    Usage context

    A parent, teacher, senior colleague or friend might say it to someone who is hurrying through a task where accuracy counts, such as checking figures, filling in an official form or finishing careful handwork. It works as gentle advice before or during the work, and after an error as a mild reminder. It lands badly when the listener is already being careful and simply needs to move, or when the situation calls for fast action.

    Relationship to this situation

    Near equivalentRelationship: Verified

    Gives the same warning as advice to the listener and names the fault itself, a mistake, while accepting slowness as the price of avoiding it.

    Community
    Unknown
    Region
    Unknown
    Historical period
    Unknown

For teachers

Take this comparison into a classroom.

A minimal Compare – Discuss – Reflect result, editable in this browser session, with the review date attached to whatever you copy. Nothing is saved and nothing is sent.

Create a lesson result

How this comparison was reviewed

Overall coverage: Verified

Every required claim and relation in this set passed its recorded review path.

Relationship review: Verified
Limited confidence

The two sayings make the same argument. The relation evidence covers one side only: the English side rests on a historical dictionary entry, while the Arabic wording is attested by an internal source that may support only the wording, so the Arabic reading is the project's own independently written interpretation and no source-backed claim describes it. The pairing is editorial, and no transmission or shared origin is claimed.

Last reviewed
2026-09-30
Reviewed by
AI publication review, separate from the one that proposed it (AI completeness review)

How this record reached us: AI suggested. This describes provenance and does not raise confidence.

Verified:
Passed the recorded review path, with review date and roles shown.
Disputed:
Credible disagreement exists. Review the competing interpretations before classroom use.
Overall coverage: Partial
— Some required claims are reviewed but not yet verified. Use the review state before classroom use.

Candidate, reviewed and rejected material is editorial-only and never appears on this site.

Relationship detail

Supporting facets. One label cannot carry a whole relationship.

Alignment
Aligned
Evidence quality
Limited
Metaphor overlap
Low
Use-case overlap
High
Semantic closeness
High
Historical direction
Not established

Historical relationship

Not established. The reviewed sources do not support a claim about transmission or shared origin between these members, so none is made.