[ceol]

> The usage of "his woman" would be routed from translation of Bible from Hebrew.

Mmm, except we're not talking about a transliteration of a Bible verse. This is colloquial usage of the term "his woman" in the English language with respect to American culture, which implies ownership. This has absolutely-- and I mean absolutely-- nothing to do with Hebrew.

> So as long as the bible is part of English speaking culture the usage of woman as wife will be common.

And has nothing to do with what we're talking about. The term implies ownership, and the Bible takes a very "man owns woman" stance. I assume your intent was not to prove my point?