Diglossia in Arabic: Views and Opinions

Abstract

is a compound Greek word in which di means two and glôssa means tongue or language,(Merriam-Webster Dictionary, n.d.).It means that there are two forms of the language used for different situations. According to Oxford Dictionary, diglossia is a situation in which two languages (or two varieties of the same language) are used under different conditions within a community, often by the same speakers, (English Oxford Living Dictionaries, n.d.) Another definition is listed on Wikipedia as a situation in which two dialects or languages are used by a single language community. In addition to the community's every day or vernacular language variety (labeled "L" or "low" variety), a second, highly codified variety (labeled "H" or "high") is used in certain situations such as literature, formal education, or other specific settings, but not used normally for ordinary conversation. In most cases, the H variety has no native speakers, (Diglossia, n.d.) This is not the case with Arabic, which still have native speakers who can fluently speak and write it, though for specific situations. Zughoul mentioned that the term diglossia was introduced for the first time by the German linguist Karl Krumbacher in 1902. The term became recognized for its current meaning when the French linguist, William Marçais used it in an article in 1930 to describe the linguistic situation in the Arab World, (Zughoul, 1980, p. 201). Discussing diglossia or even the multi-glossia entails the study of mixed varieties and styles which appear side by side, marking one variety ash (H) and leaving the other(s) low (L). The high variety of a language is used in formal contexts; such as religious texts and ceremonies, public speaking, education, cultural indoctrination and other prestigious kinds of uses, thus the H variety is learnt in formal settings. The low variety is used informally in informal contexts; such as everyday conversations, jokes, markets, streets talk, phone calls, and such. In Arabic, the two main varieties are Classic Arabic (CA) or Al-Fusha which is deemed high (H), and the regional colloquial varieties (CA or Al'Amiya) and are considered low (L), (Maamouri, 1998, p.31). Since the Arabic H variety is used in formal contexts and learnt in formal settings, it is to be "taught", whereas the Arabic L varieties are unconsciously acquired. There are confirmed grammar, dictionaries and standardized texts for the H variety; yet, nothing of those are usually used for the L varieties which are acquired by children first. The L varieties often display a tendency to borrow words from the H variety, particularly when used in semi-formal speech. The result is a certain mixture of the H vocabulary into the L varieties. Colloquial Arabic is strictly oral, almost never written, and is characterized by varying degrees of comprehensibility among Arabic speakers of different regions, (Kaye, 2001, pp. 122-123). A third in-between variety has come to be known as Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and is used in media, newspapers and for government work. A fourth ...

What is White Arabic? New labels in a changing Arab world

“…Although as we previously mentioned, this definition of WA generally relates to supra-national contexts, our data also points at two specific national contexts where the term WA also aligns with the present definition: Jordan and Yemen. WA is listed by Alfaisal & Aljanada (2019) as one of the dialects of Jordan, which is used when speakers of «considerably different» varieties spoken in Jordan communicate with each other (Alfaisal & Aljanada, 2019, p. 110). The same is claimed about Yemen, where Dufour (2008) observed that WA is used when mutual understanding is endangered by the perceived linguistic distance between local Yemeni dialects (Dufour, 2008, p. 141).…”

The Influence of Technology and Innovation in Online Teaching Arabic as a Second Language in Dubai

“…Moreover, Gharawi and Bidin (2016) and Batainah, Din, and Al Mashakbh (2018) scrutinized computeraided and hybrid ASL learning aspects and teaching and learning issues ASL, respectively. Likewise, O'Sullivan (2017), Zakaria, Atan, and Robe'ah-Yusuf (2019) and Jwaifell, Abu-Omar, and Al-Tarawneh (2018) focused on the professional development of trainer aspects of ASL pedagogy based on innovative and technology-based interventions while Carroll et al (2017), Shendy (2019), Alfaisal and Aljanada (2019) and Saiegh-Haddad and Ghawi-Dakwar (2017) technology integration or diffusion barriers. Similarly, Haron, Ahmed, Mamat, Ahmad, and Rawash (2016) and Kennetz and Carroll (2018) examined multimedia software's efficacy in teaching ASL based on computer-assisted programs.…”