MSA in the Modern

World

A State of Flux

The Arabs

The Arabic Language

Modern Standard Arabic

Diglossia in Arabic

“In Arabic – the

only Semitic

language that has

remained the

language of a

whole civilization –

ideas spring forth

from the vein of

the sentence as

sparks from the

flint.”

9

The sparks from the flint…

What might have inspired Louis Massignon1 say … ideas

spring forth from the vein of the sentence …? Perhaps he felt it

while browsing through the mystical musings of al-Ḥallāj. It is

not just the beauty of the expression but also the preciseness of

the simile that makes this observation so inevitably mentionable.

The crackling of sparks from the flint represents the highest form

of dynamic agility and most delightful brilliance.

Anyone who deals with, reads, or speaks Arabic language

as a first, second, or third language can sense the truth in his

saying. Although it may be linguistically unacceptable to

attribute a superior or divine status to any language, the

linguistic tradition itself accepts that antiquity and continuity

contribute to the enrichment of any language – thus the

inference that languages in fact do qualitatively vary, and it is

possible to differentiate them on the basis of their state of

development.

Hence, ideas may not spring forth from the vein of the

sentence in all languages. This certainly has nothing to do with

the inherent superiority of a language. Rather, it can be seen as

a developmental outcome and is the result of the evolutionary

dynamism that a language had been set into due to its own

specific circumstances. The roughly 1600-year old uninterrupted

and luminous history of Arabic language explains its diverse

repertoire and emphatic presence.

The Arabic language today is the medium of daily

expression for some fifty million people. For many

1 . One of the greatest Orientalists and scholars of Islam who was fascinated by 10th century mystic al-Hallāj.

10

centuries in the Middle Ages it was the language of

learning, culture and progressive thought throughout the

civilized world. Between the ninth and twelfth centuries

more works – philosophical, medical, historical, religious,

astronomical and geographical – were produced through

the medium of Arabic than through any other tongue. The

languages of Western Europe still bear the marks of its

influence. Its alphabet is, next to the Latin, the most

widely used system in the world1.

The only factual error in the above quotation is

demographic in nature. Other than the fact that the number of

speakers of Arabic language now has increased almost six-fold,

everything else remains an iconic truth.

As a language of around 300 million people, Arabic

occupies an important position among the languages of the

world. It is represented in UN and its associate organizations and

several other international forums. All major universities have

departments of Arabic language and Arab culture, which are

marked by unprecedented activities and enthusiasm. With the

changing world, Arabic also has changed. However, it has done

so by remaining rooted to its origins. It still derives energy from

the same veins which have nourished it since its birth.

Arabic presents itself in many forms in the modern age.

With immense attributes of divinity and liturgical presence, it is

successfully playing its part as a worldly language as well. We

take a brief overview of its people, the Arabs, followed by some

general information about the language. Subsequently, Modern

Standard Arabic is discussed with some examples of latest lexical

1 . Hitti, P.K., The Arabs: A Short History

11

developments. A discussion of diglossia serves as a closing to

this chapter.

12

The Arabs

Theories abound regarding the timing of the arrival of first

nomads to Arabian Peninsula. Historians assume that the

settlement of the peninsula took place in the second millennium

BC, but there are no clues to determine what was the language

that they used for communication. In the period between the

thirteenth and the tenth centuries BC, advanced civilizations were

established in the South of the Peninsula. The inhabitants of the

South Arabian empires did not call themselves Arabs. Some

South Arabian inscriptions, towards the end of the second

century BC, mention nomads called ‘arb (pl. ’a‘rb), who are

contrasted with the sedentary population of the south. However,

the earliest appearance of the name Arab is traced from a

different region. The Assyrian king Salmanassar III, in a

cuneiform inscription dating from 853 BC, mentions one of his

adversaries Gindibu who was from the land of Arbi or Arbāya.

The use of the name Arabs as a people’s name is

registered a little later. Tiglatpilesar III (745-727 BC) and his

successors used the term Arabs for the first time in this sense

under the form Arabu, Aribi. For the Assyrians and the

Babylonians, this term conveyed the connotation of all kinds of

nomadic tribes. Probably, it served as a collective name for all

people coming from the desert who invaded the lands of the

urban civilizations and who were alternately fought by the

Assyrians or enlisted by them as allies against other enemies. In

715 BC, Sargon II attempted to end the opposition from the

nomads by settling some tribes in the neighborhood of Samaria1.

1 . The names of these tribes in the sources are mentioned as Tamudi, Ibadidi, Marsimani, and Hayapa (Kees Versteegh 1997, p. 23)

13

Reliefs in the palace of king Assurbanipal in Niniveh show

Arab camel-riders being fought and subdued by the Assyrians.

Dating from mid-7th century BC, these depict well-armored and

disciplined Assyrian troops of Assurbanipal (668-627) driving off

lightly equipped camel-mounted Arab raiders. Hebrew Bible also

attests the name Arabs, for instance in Jeremiah 25:24 (end of

the seventh century BC), where mention is made of all the kings

of the ‘Arab and of the ‘Erab that live in the desert:

… And all the kings of Arabia, and all the kings of the

mingled people that dwell in desert, …1

The etymology of the name ‘Arabs’ is unknown. According

to some scholars Hapiru of the Mari inscriptions are identical with

the Aribi and their name may be connected with the Sumerian

word gab-bīr ‘desert’. Another theory proposes the name Arabs

to be related to the root ‘a-b-r in the sense of ‘to cross (the

desert)’, from which the name of the Hebrews is also derived.

The lack of knowledge about which language was spoken by the

various tribes indicated with the name Aribi and similar names

prevents us from deriving any conclusions about their linguistic

prehistory.

The emergence of the Arabs in history is closely connected

with the use of the camel. An Assyrian scribe recorded the event

of a major but inconclusive battle at Karkar between

Salmanassar III, the Assyrian king, and his enemy, the ruler of

Damascus. The scribe noted the impressive size of enemy forces

including 1000 warriors on camel. According to the scribe, the

men on camels are brought to the battle by Gindibu the Arab.

1 . The Holy Bible, Authorized King James Version, World Bible Publishers

14

The recent studies of the development of camel-breeding

indicate that the first domestication of this animal took place in

the south of the Arabian peninsula, and from there it became

known around 1200 BC in the north through the incense trade1.

In the view of some scholars, this may be the period when

Semitic-speaking groups from the fringes of the Syrian desert

detached themselves from the sedentary civilization and took off

into the desert. The language which we call Arabic was

developed in this process of nomadisation or bedouinisation.2

Invention of a new kind of saddle by the nomads of the

Syrian desert enabled them to ride the hump of their camels.

This enlarged their range of movement enabling them to

maintain herds and gave them the control of the caravans from

the south. In all probabilities, this innovation took place in the

last centuries BC and marked the beginning of real

bedouinisation. The new fashion of riding also enabled the

nomads to maintain regular contacts with the urban civilizations

in Syria and Iraq. A further refinement was reached in the

second and third centuries CE with the invention of the saddle-

bow, which led to the development of a society of rider-warriors,

represented by the type of Bedouin tribes which we know from

the period directly before Islam3.

After the land trade between South Arabia and the Fertile

Crescent became more important than the sea trade, the role of

the nomads in this trade increasingly became a significant factor.

South Arabians had established settlements all along this main

1 . Kees Versteegh, The Arabic Language, p. 242 . Garbini, 1984 (quoted by Versteegh, 1997)3 . Kees Versteegh, The Arabic Language, p. 24

15

trade route. When their power waned, the nomadic tribes began

to control the flow of commerce themselves. The first stage of

this new development was dominated by the caravan cities of

Petra and Palmyra. The Nabataean kingdom of Petra was

conquered by the Roman emperor Trajan in 106 CE. After the

destruction of Petra, the Palmyrans of the oasis of Tadmūr 200

km to the northwest of Damascus took over.

The conquest of Palmyra by the emperor Aurelian in 272 CE

marked the end of the great caravan oases. After the third

century, the competition of the three powers of Byzantium,

Persia, and Ḥimyar, the last of the South Arabian empires,

dominated the course of events. Each of these powers had their

own ally among the Arab nomads: the Banū Lahm supported the

Persians, the Banū Ghassān the Byzantines, and the kingdom of

Kinda was in the service of the Himyarites.

In the fifth and sixth centuries, however, the political scene

changed considerably, first after the fall of the Ḥimyaritic

kingdom in 525 CE following an Ethiopian invasion, and then after

the constant fighting between Persia and Byzantium, which

weakened both. With the waning of the power of their patrons,

the Arab allies lost their power too. This furthered the

emergence of commercial centers inland, in the first place

Mecca, which had already become a cultural and religious center

for the nomadic tribes and now saw its chance of dominating the

caravan trade.

The Banū Quaraysh, the dominant tribe of Mecca, became

one of the most powerful tribes in the peninsula, and to some

extent one could say that, thanks to the mission of one of its

16

members, the Prophet Muḥammad (PBUH), it never lost this

position throughout the entire history of the Islamic empire1.

1 . ibid, p. 26

17

The Arabic Language

Arabic is the undisputed and highly prestigious national

language of 22 Arab states. It is one of the six official languages

of United Nations, and has a rich cultural heritage in art,

literature, philosophy, and science. Arabic has proved to be

flexible and adaptable and has, over the centuries, absorbed

words, terms, and ideas from many peoples. Arabic in the

present age is undergoing a process of modernization to make it

suitable to serve as a vehicle for communication for a society

rapidly becoming Westernized, technological, urbanized, and

industrialized.

Arabic belongs to the Semitic branch of Afroasiatic

languages and is the language of inhabitants of North Africa, the

Arabian Peninsula, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq. Outside

these areas, it is spoken by Arabs living in Israel, and in some

parts of sub-Saharan Africa, North and South America, and Soviet

Central Asia. A large number of institutions of Arabic teaching

are established in regions like Indian subcontinent, Southeast

Asia, and wherever there is a significant Muslim population.

These institutions or madāris teach Arabic language with special

emphasis on Islamic theological sciences.

The Arabic language is the main, if not the sole, unifying

factor for most of the Arab world. Spanning across diverse

terrains and lifestyles, the Arabs connect through their language.

Indeed, the very term Arab refers first and foremost to the

language. The idea and ideal of Pan-Arabic Nationalism, or of

Pan-Arabism, refers to unity of all Arabic-speaking peoples, who

together make up the Arab Ummah.

18

On an emotional level, Arabs are very much attached to

their language. Most peoples of this world cherish their language

and deem it to be the best or most beautiful of all languages, but

it seems this kind of sentiment is very strong among the Arabs.

This attachment springs from the strong link between the Arabic

language and Islam and its Book, the Qur’ān.

The Arabic language is far from being monolithic. It has

several varieties, each used differently according to function and

region. Arabic offers the classic example of the linguistic

phenomenon for which Ferguson (1959) introduced the term

diglossia. On one hand, there is formal Standard variety, the

written language of the Qur’ān and classical literature, which is

studied and taught. This form is considered to be the only

formally admissible variety of the language and is the only

means of pan-Arab communication in a slightly simplified form

known as Modern Literary Arabic or Modern Standard Arabic.

Opposing this high variety of Arabic is the low vernacular variety,

or rather varieties, spoken by Arabs throughout the world.

The sociolinguistic profile in the Arab World has been

variously described in terms of diglossia, triglossia, tetraglossia,

and even penta-gloassia1. These colloquial varieties or linguistic

variations are sometimes viewed as a hindrance to promoting the

spread of Standard Arabic and Arabicization. It should be

mentioned that the educational, cultural, political, and religious

awareness recently witnessed in many countries of the Arab

world has played a very significant role in bringing Arabicization

into consideration.

1 . Al-Haq, Al-Abel (1986) p. 28

19

The term Arabicization refers to the cultivation and

extensive use of Arabic as the language of all Arabs, and their

official means of oral and written communication. It covers broad

issues such as language and nationalism, language as a medium

of instruction, scientific research and administrative and social

activities1. The need for Arabicization springs from the fear that

Arabic language will split into different dialects. These dialects

have a strong connection with the masses, and they are almost

like the mother tongue of the common people.

This situation has been there in the Arabic speaking world

since older times. The efforts of preserving a formal language

that binds the Arabs in one common thread are as old as the

language itself. These efforts were further intensified after Islam

was introduced in the beginning of seventh century CE. Many

linguistic norms were evolved and rules were laid for preserving

and codifying religious texts and sayings of the prophet of Islam.

The notion of a standard language became very prominent since

that time. The Qur’ānic Arabic de facto became the yardstick for

measuring the purity of the Arabic language.

Expansion of Islam beyond the peninsula was steady and

rapid. Millions of people belonging to different cultures and

creeds came into the folds of Islam. The new philosophy was

spread and Arabic discovered new frontiers of growth. With

widened horizons, the need to standardize the language became

essential. Arabic was discovering a new world of opportunities.

It had found new climes to expand its wings. Two contrary things

1 . El-Mouloudi (1986), p. 21

20

were happening at the same time – standardization of Arabic and

its relocation to alien and unknown climes.

The same classical tribal linguistic situation, where each

tribe had its own dialect but there was one common language for

intertribal trade and poetry, was replicated on a much larger

scale. In vast Islamic empire, al-fuṣḥā or the classical standard

Arabic reigned as one common language. This was

accompanied, in the true nature of growth of languages, by

evolution of several colloquial or ‘āmmiya varieties of Arabic in

different regions. These lahjāt have essentially sprung from

Arabic but they do not represent Arabic.

The term Arabic refers to the standard form of the

language used in all writings and media. The diverse colloquial

dialects of Arabic are interrelated but vary considerably among

speakers from different parts of the Arabic-speaking world.

These dialects differ from standard Arabic and from one another

in pronunciation, vocabulary, and grammar and are usually

labeled according to major geographic areas, such as North

African, Egyptian, and Gulf. Within these broad classifications,

the daily speech of urban, rural, and nomadic speakers is

distinctively different. Illiterate speakers from widely separated

parts of the Arab world may not understand one another,

although each is speaking a version of Arabic.

The sound system of Arabic has 28 consonants, including

all the Semitic guttural sounds produced far back in the mouth

and throat. Each of the three vowels in standard Arabic occurs in

a long and short form, creating the long and short syllables so

important to the meter of Arabic poetry. Although the dialects

21

retain the long vowels, they have lost many of the short-vowel

contrasts.

All Arabic word formation is based on an abstraction,

namely, the root, usually consisting of three consonants. These

root sounds join with various vowel patterns to form simple

nouns and verbs to which affixes can be attached for more

complicated derivations. For example, the borrowed term bank

is considered to have the consonantal root b-n-k; film is formed

from f-l-m. Arabic has a very regular system of conjugating

verbs and altering their stems to indicate variations on the basic

meaning.

This system is so regular that dictionaries of Arabic can

refer to verbs by a number system (I-X). From the root k-s-r, the

form I verb is ka-sa-ra, "he broke"; form II is ka-ssa-ra, "he

smashed to bits"; and form VII is in-ka-sara, "it was broken up."

Nouns and adjectives are less regular in formation, and have

many different plural patterns. The broken plurals are formed by

altering the internal syllable shape of the singular noun. For

example, for the borrowed words bank and film, the plurals are

bunūk and aflām respectively.

Normal sentence word order in standard Arabic is verb-

subject-object. However, Modern Standard Arabic, due to the

influence of SVO languages like English and French, utilizes both

VSO and SVO patterns. In poetry and in some prose styles, the

VSO word order can be altered. When that happens, subject and

object can be distinguished by their case endings, that is, by

suffixes that indicate the grammatical function of nouns. These

suffixes are only spelled out fully in school textbooks and in the

22

Qur’ān to ensure an absolutely correct reading. In all other

Arabic texts, these case endings (usually short vowels) are

omitted, as are all internal short-vowel markings.

The Arabic script, which is derived from that of Aramaic, is

written from right to left. It is based on 18 distinct shapes that

vary according to their connection to preceding or following

letters. Using a combination of dots above and below 8 of these

shapes, the full complement of 28 consonants and the 3 long

vowels can be fully spelled out. The Arabic alphabet has been

adopted by non-Semitic languages such as Modern Persian or

Farsi, Urdu, Malay, and some West African languages, such as

Hausa. The use of verses from the Qur’ān in Arabic script for

decoration has led to the development of many different

calligraphic styles over the past 1400 years. Calligraphy is a high

art form in the Arab world.

Being the language of the Qur’ān, some limited knowledge

of the language for reciting the Holy Book exists throughout the

Muslim world. For instance, in a country like India, which has a

huge Muslim population, as the liturgical language of Islam and

sunnah, formal training of Arabic is provided through madāris (s.

madrasah). These madāris are institutions for the study of

Islamic philosophy, jurisprudence, theology, and other aspects of

Islamic affairs. Some of the prominent madāris in India are

Nadwat-ul-Ulema in Lucknow and Dār-ul-‘Ulūm in Deoband.

Scholars from these institutions sometimes go on to emerge as

experts in Arabic language and other related fields. Such a

system can be found in all random pockets where Muslims live in

significant numbers.

23

The term ‘Arabic’ is applied to a number of speech-forms

which, in spite of many and sometimes substantial mutual

differences, possess sufficient homogeneity to warrant

their being reckoned as dialectal varieties of a single

language1.

As apparent from the above, Arabic exists in unique

circumstances where Arabs belonging to different regions have a

specific local variety of Arabic which is their mother tongue.

Different regions have a different variety of Arabic dialect which

they use as their language. The difference between these

vernaculars is so vast that the Moroccan Arabic is virtually

unintelligible in Iraq. The local vernacular is used in everyday

commerce, but rarely written.

Contrasting to the local vernaculars is standard, or formal,

Arabic, which is used for writing and formal speech. This variety

is mostly acquired in formal setting starting from schools. This

implies that a large section of the Arab people do not command it

sufficiently to use it themselves. However, this is the variety

which is used by the popular media, public communication, and

other formal entities, and serves as a common thread among all

Arabs.

The above-described phenomenon has existed in Arab

societies since older times. The earlier composition of the Arab

society was tribal. Each tribe took great pride in its own

traditions, values, and other specific characteristics like language

and customs. Although their language did not differ much, they

had different varieties and dialects marked by their own personal

1 . A.F.L. Beeston, The Arabic Language Today, Hutchinson University Library, London (1970)

24

imprints. Later, when the Arabs emerged as conquerors and the

Arab conquests expanded the horizons of the Arab linguistic and

cultural influence, the geographical and demographic diversity

affected their language.

Each region developed its own special variety of Arabic.

What kept a standard, mutually comprehendible variety of Arabic

alive was the uniting force of Islam and the Holy Book of the

religion. Albeit, the undercurrents of the powerful local linguistic

assertion surface from time to time to reemphasize people’s

passionate attachment to their real mother tongue, which is one

or the other colloquial variety. Some of the colloquial varieties

have even become a part of the educational curricula in various

institutions. Among these Egyptian Colloquial or Egyptian

Standard Arabic and Iraqi Colloquial Arabic are most significant.

The standard variety of Arabic has remained remarkably

stable. The grammar, syntax, and basic vocabulary of the Arabic

literature produced since the 8th century to the present is

strikingly homogeneous. There would be some obvious stylistic

difference felt while comparing the works of medieval writing

from now, but this difference is just superficial and does not

hinder comprehension. It is just like the difference between

Shakespeare’s language and today’s English. This is one

remarkable aspect of the recorded or literary Arabic language.

Even if we go beyond the medieval times to the Islamic era or

pre-Islamic era, the difficulty would only consist of lack of

semantic awareness of the terms. In terms of grammar and

basic language, one hardly finds any hardship.

25

During the long history of Arabic language, there have

been periods of high development in literature. The Arabic of

medieval writing is termed as Classical Arabic. Another term,

Modern standard Arabic, is popular among linguists and scholars

to denote the formal written variety of the language in modern

times. This variety is essentially a descendant of Classical

Arabic. It has inherited the roles and functions of Classical Arabic

and has evolved in the same mold.

Like the literary classical Arabic, Modern Standard Arabic

has assumed the role of serving the entire Arab World as a lingua

franca. Being the language of modern times, it has been

influenced by the currents of modern thoughts and other modern

languages. The stylistic influence of French and English is quite

evident resulting from the European hegemony over the Arab

countries after Renaissance. When a foreign power occupies a

territory, it is not just the military and administrative dominance.

The entire sociocultural and economic paradigm is influenced.

The culture and language of the occupied area is influenced by

the ambitions of the ruling class that tries to impose their rules

upon the subjugated people. The brief French domination was

enough to fuel the winds of change in Egypt and surrounding

areas. Later, the British occupation also made a significant mark

upon the character of the Arab regions.

Apart from that, the Arabs were astounded by the newly-

discovered Reformation and Renaissance of the Europeans.

Rulers like Muhammad Ali and his followers made significant

efforts in starting a process which went on to herald the Arab

Enlightenment which transformed the Arab culture, particularly

their thought patterns, language, and literature. Throughout the

26

19th century, the currents of change and reformation were

building up. Seeds of educational and intellectual changes were

sown during this period by many prominent Arab thinkers and

scholars. New patterns of thinking emerged and several schools

of thoughts, often contradicting, came out.

A launching pad of sorts was getting laid for a new breed of

Arabs who will change the course of history in the coming

century. The Arabs, who had seen the pinnacle of glory during

medieval period were thrown back by several centuries by the

kick of fate. They were raring to regain their legacy which had

made them one of the greatest conquerors in the world history.

Quite expectantly, they rose through all ranks to launch an all

round campaign to catch up with what they had lost during a

long patch of inactivity and ignorance.

An overall reformation process was taking shape. Social,

literary, and ideological battleground was marked with activities

of many reformers. Scholarship had renewed its interest in

eclectic issues by breaking free from the rhetoric of extolling past

glories of the ancestors. New sciences were being learned, new

philosophies were being debated, and new wave of hope was

taking shape. Due to a long patch of inactivity, much scientific,

medical, and technical vocabulary had to be borrowed from

French and English.

Classical Arabic

The beginning of the Classical Arabic or literary Arabic is

considered to be from the sixth century CE. This period

witnessed emergence of a very rich variety of Arabic literary

27

language, which mainly produced poetry. It was based on the

oral traditions practiced by various tribal groups who organized

poetry recital competitions. The art of poetry was considered to

be a very distinguished and respectable indulgence among the

tribesmen. During this time, the Arabic ode or qaṣīda evolved to

reach its highest and most eloquent form. During those times,

each Arab tribe had its own dialect and there was no form of

language that could be called a standard variety. The popularity

of these odes or qaṣāid, resulted in a semblance of

standardization of the language, since a uniform language was

used which could be easily comprehensible to several tribes

gathering to be a part of such recital competitions.

The poetic language that was used could either be an

elevated, distinctive, supra-tribal variety shared by the

leadership of the Arabic-speaking communities. Much like

today’s Modern variety of Arabic that unites all the Arab

countries and peoples, despite the prevalence of different

dialectical varieties in their respective regions. It may have been

evolved, beside sharing poetry, for the purpose of inter-tribal

trade and communication, and could have served as a lingua

franca for the people inhabiting the peninsula. Another prevalent

notion is that it may have been the actual vernacular of a

particular region or tribe that was adopted by poets as a shared

vehicle for artistic expression. Whatever the case may be, this

may be seen as the first instance toward standardization of the

Arabic language in its long history.

Later with the arrival of Islam and its prophet Muḥammad

(PBUH), and revelation of the Qur’ān over a period of twenty-two

years (A.D. 610-632), the language of Qur’ānic verses became

28

the supreme parameter of the Arabic language. Thus, at the

beginning of the Islamic period, only two sources of literary

Arabic were available, the Qur’ān and the pre-Islamic poems.

These two important sources played a pivotal role in the

development of the Arabic language. The message of the

Qur’ān, which had to be transmitted and explained, both in letter

and spirit to the followers of Islam, occupied the center of

attention of all the scholarly activities in the beginning.

29

Normative Linguistic Developments

The language of the Qur’ān, divine as it was, baffled and

surprised people of Arabia. It was not the style that they had

ever seen or heard anywhere. Even masters of the art of poetry

and connoisseurs of the literary language were convinced by the

sheer magical eloquence and majestic style of the divine

message. That was the time when direct ties with the desert

were broken and the living practice of poetry was very soon

replaced by scholarly interest in the pre-Islamic poems. The

transmission of both texts had taken place orally and informally,

but in the rapidly expanding empire such a form of transmission

could no longer be trusted.

The language was undergoing a process of standardization.

While in pre-Islamic times the Bedouin regarded themselves as

members of one speech community, they had no single linguistic

norm. Even in the language of poetry, which was supposed to be

supra-tribal, a great deal of variation was accepted. After the

conquests, when Arabic became the language of an empire,

there was an urgent need to standardize the language.

This was important mainly for three reasons. The first

reason was the communication problems that surfaced in the

empire due to the divergence between the language of the

Bedouin and the various colloquial varieties. Secondly, the policy

of the central government aimed at the control of the subjects,

not only in economical and religious but also in linguistic matters.

Hence, the use of Arabic as the language of the central

administration necessitated its standardization. Thirdly,

expansion of the empire created a situation that required a rapid

30

expansion of the lexicon, which had to be regulated in order to

achieve some measure of uniformity.

The process of standardization was marked by three issues.

For the written codification of the language, invention of some

orthographic standard was the most important factor. It was

achieved through the adaptation of existing scribal practices to

the new situation. Then a standardized norm for the language

was elaborated, and the lexicon was inventoried and expanded.

Subsequently, when these requirements had been met, a stylistic

standard was developed. The existing Bedouin model was

instrumental in the development of a stylistic standard for

poetry, but the emergence of an Arabic prose style marked the

real beginning of Classical Arabic.

The primary concern of the Islamic scholars was the

codification of the texts with which they worked. Even though

oral transmission continued to remain an essential component of

Islamic culture, the risk of major discrepancies in the

transmission became too large to ignore. The need for an

authoritative text was imperative above all in the case of the

Revealed Book. Clearly, the central government had a major

stake in the acceptance of a uniform Book throughout the empire

as the basis for all religious and political activities.

The codification of the Qur’ān was a crucial moment in the

development of a written standard for the Arabic language. On a

practical level, the writing-down of the text involved all kinds of

decisions concerning the orthography of the Arabic script and the

elaboration of a number of conventions to make writing less

31

ambiguous and more manageable than it had been in the

Jāhiliyya period.

Writing was not unknown in the peninsula in the pre-Islamic

period. There are clear indications that as early as the sixth

century writing was fairly common in the urban centers of the

peninsula, in Mecca and to a lesser degree in Medina. In the

commercial society that was Mecca, businessmen must have had

at their disposal various means of recording their transactions.

There are references to treaties being written down and

preserved in the Ka‘ba in Mecca. Even the rāwīs, the

transmitters of poetry, sometimes relied on written notes,

although they recited the poems entrusted to them orally.

The codification of grammatical structure went hand in

hand with the exploration of the lexicon and its necessary

expansion. These two aspects of the process of standardization

are interconnected. Just as the grammarians were needed

because of the perceived corruption of the language, the first

aim of the lexicographers seems to have been the preservation

of the old Bedouin lexicon, which was at risk. There are several

reasons for the lexicographers’ worries. In the first place, the

sedentary civilization of early Islam was markedly different from

that of the desert tribes, who had been the guardians of the

special vocabulary of the pre-Islamic poems. No city-dweller

could be expected to know all the subtle nuances of a vocabulary

connected with camels and animal wildlife and tents.

The second threat to the lexicon had to do with the contact

with other languages. When the Arabs became acquainted with

the sedentary culture of the conquered territories, they

32

encountered new things and notions for which there did not yet

exist Arabic words. The most obvious sources for terms to

indicate the new notions were, of course, the languages spoken

in the new Islamic empire. And this was precisely what some of

the Arab scholars feared. They were convinced that the influx of

words from other cultures would corrupt the Arabic language,

which had been chosen by Allāh for His last revelation to

mankind.

The early beginnings of grammar and lexicography began

at a time when Bedouin informants were still around and could

be consulted. There can be no doubt that the grammarians and

lexicographers regarded the Bedouin as the true speakers of

Arabic. As late as the tenth century, the lexicographer al-’Azhari

(d. 980 A.D.) extolled the purity of their language. He had been

kidnapped by Bedouin and forced to stay with them for a

considerable period of time.

On the basis of this ‘fieldwork’ he wrote his dictionary

Tahdheeb-al-Lugha ‘The reparation of speech’, in the introduction

to which he says: They speak according to their desert nature

and their ingrained instincts. In their speech you hardly ever

hear a linguistic error or a terrible mistake1. Other grammarians,

too, collected materials from the nomad tribes, and it is often

reported that caliphs or other dignitaries sent their sons into the

desert in order to learn flawless Arabic.

In the course of the centuries, the Bedouin tribes

increasingly came into the sphere of influence of the sedentary

civilization, and their speech became contaminated by sedentary

1 . Haaroon, Cairo, 1964-7, p. 7

33

speech. In his description of the Arabian peninsula, al-Hamadānī

(d. 945 A.D.) sets up a hierarchy of the Arab tribes according to

the perfection of their speech. He explains that those Arabs who

live in or near a town have very mediocre Arabic and cannot be

trusted; this applies even to the Arabs who live near the Holy

Cities of Mecca and Medina.

The grammarian Ibn Jinnī (d. 1002 A.D.) includes in his

Khaṣā’iṣ a chapter about the errors made by Bedouin and he

states that in his time it is almost impossible to find a Bedouin

speaking pure Arabic. At the same time, Ibn Jinnī advises his

students always to check their linguistic facts with Bedouin

informants.

Even in the early period of Arabic grammar, our sources

record examples of Bedouin who sold their expertise in matters

of language to the highest bidder, as in the case of the famous

mas’ala zunbūriyya. In this controversy between Sibawayhi and

a rival grammarian Al-Farrā, a question was raised about the

expression “I thought that the scorpion had a stronger bite than

the hornet, but it was the other way round.” Sibawayhi gave the

correct answer, but was defeated by the judgment of a Bedouin

arbiter, who had been bribed by his adversary1.

Modern critics of the attitude of the grammarians towards

the alleged perfection of Bedouin speech often point out that the

idealization of their speech may have been part of a general

trend to extol the virtues of desert life, and that even nowadays

one sometimes hears stories about Bedouin speaking perfect

Classical Arabic. Usually this means that they use words that

1 . Ibn al-'Anbaaree, Insaaf, ed. G. Weil, Leiden, 1913, Pp. 292-5

34

have become obsolete elsewhere, or it refers to their poetical

tradition, which often uses a classicising style of language.

35

Modern Standard Arabic

Modern Standard Arabic or simply Standard Arabic is a

modern variant of Classical Arabic, the language of the Holy

Qur’ān. The terms Modern Standard Arabic or Standard Arabic or

Contemporary Arabic are invariably used by language scientists

when they talk about chiefly written Arabic that serves as a

communication device among all Arabic speakers irrespective of

their nationality, race, or culture as opposed to the spoken Arabic

which varies in tone, pronunciation, and vocabulary due to wide

dialectical variation in different regions of the Arab World. The

modern variety of Standard Arabic is essentially so close to the

Classical Arabic that it could also be referred to as Modern

Classical Arabic, as Edward Said chooses to call it while talking

about Arab culture and language in one of his articles.

The modern classical is the result mainly of a fascinating

modernization of the language that begins during the last

decades of the 19th century -- the period of the Nahḍa, or

renaissance -- carried out mainly by a group of men in

Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and Egypt (a striking number of

them Christian) who set themselves the collective task of

bringing Arabic as a language into the modern world by

modifying and somewhat simplifying its syntax, through

the process of Arabizing (isti‘rab) the 7th century original,

that is introducing such words as "train" and "company"

and "democracy" and "socialism" that couldn’t have

existed during the classical period, and by excavating the

language’s immense resources through the technical

grammatical process of al-qiyās, or analogy (a subject

brilliantly discussed by Stetkevych who demonstrates in

36

minute detail how Arabic’s grammatical laws of derivation

were mobilized by the Nahḍa reformers to absorb new

words and concepts into the system without in any way

upsetting it); thereby, in a sense, these men forced on

classical Arabic a whole new vocabulary, which is roughly

60 per cent of today’s classical standard language1.

In the contemporary Arab society, Edward’s Modern

Classical is most widely used on all formal occasions by the

educated class and represents print media, official documents,

formal correspondences, and education besides playing the role

of the liturgical translator for the Islamic community anywhere in

the world. Modern Standard Arabic is just another name for what

Edward Said prefers to call Modern Classical.

MSA is the language of written communication only, as

there are found to be a plethora of dialectical varieties of Arabic

in different regions of the Arab world. So, it also serves as a

lingua franca for all Arabic language users anywhere in the world.

Given the multiplicity of dialects of Arabic prevalent across the

Arab World, Standard Arabic is not acquired as a mother tongue,

rather it is learned as a second language at school and through

exposure to formal broadcast programs (such as the daily news),

religious practice, and print media.

MSA is not acquired as a native language, thus the number

of speakers of the language could at best be conjectural. It is

estimated that each one of some 250-300 million people

throughout the Islamic world have some knowledge of Standard

Arabic. The degree of proficiency in language use also ranges

1 . Edward Said: Living in Arabic, Al-Ahram Weekly: 12 - 18 February 2004 (Issue No. 677)

37

widely, from the ability to follow news broadcasts but no reading,

writing, or speaking skills, to the ability to speak and write the

language with utmost perfection.

The geographical center of the language can be said to

encompass the northernmost part of Africa from Mauritania to

Egypt, the Levant, the Arabian Peninsula, and Iraq. MSA has

developed over the last century to incorporate new words and

idioms such as new technological terms. Translation of

European works of literature in particular accelerated the

process.

The most skilled writers and speakers of MSA use the

language more or less in a uniform fashion irrespective of their

location anywhere in the world. However, there are different

registers1 of Arabic. The highest register approximates Classical

Arabic in its vocabulary and style, unlike the register of Arabic

used in newspapers, social sciences, and technical literature,

which uses a more restricted vocabulary and a distinct style.

In these higher registers, dialectal variation is limited

largely to minor matters of pronunciation (such as stress and the

pronunciation of the letter gīm/jīm) and to the choice of

vocabulary for certain concepts which Classical Arabic offers no

way to express, such as tilifūn or hātif for "telephone", and

tiknulūjiyya or tiqniyya for "technology."

Another factor which differentiates registers at this level is

the degree to which certain grammatical endings such as case

and mood suffixes are pronounced. These suffixes (suffixes of

1 . A subset of a language used for a particular purpose or in a particular social setting.

38

raf‘a, naṣb, jar) are absent in all of the modern Arabic dialects

and their use is mastered only by the most competent speakers

of Standard Arabic. The suffixes are thus not pronounced in the

lower registers of what can otherwise be considered pure

Standard Arabic.

Below these high registers are the Arabic dialects and

registers which mix a modern dialect and Standard Arabic. It is

in such lower registers, where there is influence and borrowing

from a local Arabic dialect, in which there is true dialectal

variation in Standard Arabic.

Standard Arabic is the language of literature and education

in most Arabic countries. Educated people throughout North

Africa and the Arabian Peninsula have good to excellent

command of Standard Arabic besides their native Arabic dialect.

As the language of Qur’ān, Classical Arabic is used as the

language of prayer and recitation throughout the Islamic world.

Virtually all Arabic newspapers, magazines, and books are

written in Standard Arabic as well. In the broadcast media,

Standard Arabic is also the usual language for news and other

scripted informational and educational programming. The media

in which Standard Arabic is not as frequently used as the spoken

Arabic dialects are in song, film, and the theater.

One of the strengths of the standard literary Arabic is that

it is capable of expressing the finest shades of meaning. The

vernaculars in their present form cannot perform the same task.

If they were adapted, such a development would fatally split the

unity of the Arab world. Despite being so diverse, the linguistic

39

thread unites the entire Arab world as one people. The idea of

pan-Arabism itself was based on one Arabic language.

Today tensions exist between the standard language and

the vernaculars, particularly in imaginative literature. In drama

the demand for realism favors the vernacular, and many poets

are tending toward their mother tongue. In the novel and short

story, the trend is toward having the characters speak in the

vernacular while the author uses formal language. Some of the

most celebrated living novelists and poets, however, write

exclusively in the standard language.

This is not something new to the Arab society. There has

always been a situation where one lingua franca kind of a

language has coexisted with several regional dialects. This was

as true in the Classical period as it is now when several tribes

had their own dialects, but for purposes of intertribal

communication and trade and their poetic competitions, they had

one commonly accepted variety of language which can be

compared to the formal Standard Arabic of today.

The social status of Standard Arabic in relation to other

languages and to other varieties of Arabic varies from country to

country. In the countries of the Maghrib, many speakers of

Arabic have been schooled in French and are more likely to use

French than Standard Arabic for reading and for written

communication. In some countries, such as Saudi Arabia, there

is a tendency to use Standard Arabic in all situations in the

broadcast media, while in other countries, such as Egypt and

Lebanon, Standard Arabic is used in more formal programming

while the local dialect is used in informal contexts.

40

Flux in Modern Standard Arabic

The language of this country being always upon the flux,

the Struldbruggs of one age do not understand those of

another, neither are they able after two hundred years to

hold any conversation (farther than by a few general

words) with their neighbors the mortals, and thus they lie

under the disadvantage of living like foreigners in their own

country1.

The lexicon of the Modern Standard Arabic, which is essentially

an extension of the Classical Arabic, has kept renewing itself with

the changing times and the requirements. Following are the

different aspects of lexical growth of MSA. Many of these

Loan Words

(a) Loan words that integrate into the Arabic pattern system.

Often foreign words are borrowed as if their most prominent

consonants were radicals, and the resulting loan word is

accommodated to the CA pattern system2, e.g.

raskala رسكلة ‘recycling’ - root R-S-K-L (Not in Wehr’s 1985)

halwasa3 هلوسة ‘hallucination’ - root H-L-W-S

takathlaka تكثلك ‘to become a Catholic’ - root K-TH-L-K

1 . Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels2 . Modern Written Arabic: A Comprehensive Grammar; Routledge (2004)3 . Hans Wehr Dictionary of MWA, Third Edition

41

daynam دينم ‘dynamo’, breaking last syllable from the

original, with broken plural dayānim ديانم

daynam may be contrasted with alternative dīnāmū دينننامو with

plural dīnāmūhāt ; ديناموهات but the difference is that daynam can

become productive within the Modern Standard Arabic. There

are following such examples1:

’oksīd oxide’ gives rise to the verbs‘ أكسيد ’aksada أكسد ‘to oxide’,

ta’aksada تأكسد ‘to become oxidized’, and the noun ’aksada أكسدة

‘oxidization’

būdra ’powder‘ بننننودرة (French poudre) has spawned the

denominative mubawdara مبودرة ‘powdered up’

makyāj or mikyāj ماكياج ‘make-up’ (French maquillage) has likewise

produced mumakyaja ممكيجة ‘wearing make-up’

In scientific domains, western suffixes, e.g. –ate, -id, -ous, -ic are

attached to Arabic stems:

kibrītīd كبريتيد ‘sulphide’, from kibrīt كبريت ‘sulphur’

ḥadīdīk and حديننننديك ḥadīdūz for حدينننندوز ‘ferric’ and ‘ferrous’

respectively from ḥadīd ‘iron’

khallīk خليك for ‘acetic’, from khall خل ‘vinegar’

faḥmāt فحمات ‘carbonate’ from faḥm ‘coal’

There are other examples of complete morphological

1 . Modern Written Arabic: A Comprehensive Grammar; Routledge (2004)

42

assimilation:

kādir كادر ‘cadre’ forms the broken plural kawādir كوادر ‘cadres

fabrīka factory’ (French‘ فبريكة fabrique), hence fabraka to‘ فبرك

manufacture, fabricate’, mufabrak ,manufactured‘ مفنننننننبرك

fabricated’; and there is also a broken plural fabārik فبنننارك

‘factories’ in addition to the sound plural fabrīkāt 1 فبريكات

barmaja برمنننج ‘to program (a computer)’ (barnāmaj برنامنننج

‘program’ – only four of its five consonants are regarded as

radicals, viz. B-R-M-J, hence the broken plural barāmij برامنننج

‘programs’

tafalwara تفلننننور ‘to fluoresce’ (filūr ,’(fluorine‘ فلننننور mufalwir

’fluorescing‘مفلور

tamalghama تملغم ‘to amalgamate’

(b) Loan words that do not assimilate into the Arabic pattern

system.

There is another class of loan words that retain their foreign form

to a degree which is fundamentally incompatible with the CA root

and pattern system. Although such terms have been introduced

into MSA with phonological and orthographical conventions, it is

difficult to say whether they will become productive as new

roots2:

’arshī ’abisqūbīs أرشي أبسقبيس ‘archbishop’ (أبسقوبس ,in Hans Wehr أرشي

1 . ibid2 . ibid

43

1976)

’arshidūq أرشدوق ‘archduke’

sīnīmātoghrāf سينيماتوغراف ‘cinematograph’

bībliyojrāfiyā بيبليوجرافيا ‘bibliography’

mānīfātūra مانيفاتورة ‘manufactured goods’

bakāloryūs بكالوريوس ‘baccalaureate’

fīsiyolojiyā فيسيولوجيا ‘physiology’

kārikātūriyya كاريكاتورية ‘cartoon, caricature’

tiknoqrāṭ تكنوقراط ‘technocrat’

There may be alterations in case endings. Either invariable –iyā

or fem. –iyya [tun] may be used. Whether the latter is now fully

inflected is rather uncertain – a permanent pausal pronunciation

seems more likely, namely, iyya in both cases.1

tiknolojiyā تكنولوجيا or tiknolojiyyā تكنولوجية ‘technology’

fantāziyā فنتازيا or fantāziyyā فنتازية ‘fantasy’

Adjectival Suffix –ī (nisba)

Proliferation of the adjectival suffix –ī يى (nisba) is viewed as one

1 . ibid, p. 742

44

of the most striking lexical development in MSA. It is now fully

productive to form adjectives on any nominal base. Furthermore,

its feminine singular form is now very productive in the creation

of new abstract nouns. CA was not as prolific as MSA in such

coinage, but some of the recent examples may include items

dating back some centuries.1

Many such examples were first noted in Wehr’s Dictionary of

Modern Standard Arabic (1985), but most of them were not found

in it.2

istimrārī استمراري ‘continual’, ‘continuous’

tabādulī تبادلي ‘mutual’

tajrīmī تجريمي ‘incriminating’

tashjī‘ī تشجيعي ‘encouraging’

ta’hīlī تأهيلي ‘qualifying’

sukkānī سكاني ‘populational’

dhukūrī ذكوري ‘of males’

mu’assasī مؤسسي ‘institutional’

ḥadāthī حداثي ‘modernist’

khidmī خدمي ‘relating to service’

1 . ibid, p. 7432 . ibid

45

rujūlī رجولي ‘masculine’, ‘manly’

’imārātī إماراتي ‘of the Emirates’

khawājātī خواجاتي ‘of foreigners’ (from khawājāt خواجات ‘foreign

gentlemen’)

This ending can freely be attached to loan words of any

structure.

Loan words with Arabic patterns:

kūdī كودي ‘in code’

taktīkī تكتيكي ‘tactical’

Non-assimilated loan words:

tiknolūji تكنولوجي ‘technological’

dīnāmīkī ديناميكي ‘dynamic’

kozmobūlītīkī كوزموبوليتيكي ‘cosmopolitan’ (this is a hybrid based on

French cosmopolite with additional suffix modeled on French –

ique.1

The flux as viewed in the journalistic Arabic:

1 . ibid p. 745

46

Language exists in a constant state of change. The

following view is quite succinct about the course of language

change:

Slow as the rhythm of linguistic development appears to

contemporary observers, hardly noticeable except to those

who deliberately give their attention to it, actually it is very

rapid1.

It would not be an exaggeration to say that there are

probably few written languages that are changing more rapidly in

specific areas than modern Arabic. This is particularly true for

the register used in the language of newspapers and magazines.

The Arabic used in media may be classified as popular as it

extends to a wide and diverse audience of educated and less

educated people. Within the language stratum, however, it is

allocated a place above the standard medium of communication,

the colloquial languages.

The journalistic Arabic contains a few elements that serve

as an endorsement and update of many of the recent

developments in modern Arabic. Some of these changes were

acknowledged as long ago as half a century or more. The

pattern of growth of journalistic Arabic also indicates that this

form of Arabic is so readily open to change that it assimilates

new types of expression and grammatical constructions with

varying degree of ease.

1 . Gully, Adrian (1993, Al-Arabiyya, Vol.6), from Foster (1968:preface), originally quoting from Joshua Whatmough from his Language – A Modern Synthesis, Secker and Wartburg, 1956.

47

Languages are forever changing. Some disappear as

traditional ways of life are threatened, other survive but in

changed form2.

To many observers, Arabs are less and less able to read,

understand, write, and speak in this formal variety called Modern

fuṣḥa or MSA. The prevailing Arab attitude about this variety of

Arabic seems to indicate general and constant complaints about

the level of correctness of fuṣḥa at the level of the innovative

forms that professionals and individual users introduce almost on

a daily base in that language.

Newspaper writers according to some observers, bear an

important share of the responsibility of spreading faulty and

incorrect language in spite of the efforts made by the editors and

well-trained correctors to maintain a minimum standard of

acceptable language production. A more serious criticism is

addressed to newspaper Arabic and that is the free and

deliberate use of colloquial forms whenever there is an urgent

need that arises (and even sometimes, for the sake of

communicative realism).

Talking about the grammatical rules of MSA, Parkinson

(1981: 26) remarks that “[for] many Arabs, and for some

Arabists, the term fuṣḥa is used to mean the classical language

described prescriptively by the medieval grammarians. Since the

modern written language used in newspapers, literature, etc.

still basically follows those rules, it also is considered fuṣḥa. But

since they are using the term prescriptively, it would be

impossible for their fuṣḥa to undergo a syntactic change. For

2 . Nicholas Ostler: Empires of the World: A Language History of the World (2005), Harper Collins

48

them, VSO is the basic word order no matter what people do,

since that is what the grammarians say it is.” Both Arab scholars

and users replace fuṣḥa (and Modern Standard Arabic) in a rigidly

normative mold with a prescriptive set of rules to which

everybody should strictly conform.

The 20th century began under the slogan of the language.

The emergence of nationalism, whether it was pan-Arab such as

in Syria and Lebanon, or regional such as in Egypt, was invariably

linked to the language. In order to reclaim the medieval Arabic

language known as al-‘Arabiyya, a modern form of literary Arabic

evolved - commonly known as standard Arabic, which

distinguished itself from the al-‘Arabiyya at the lexical,

syntactical, and stylistic levels.

The first half of the 20th century was a continuation of the

spirit of the Nahda or renaissance. The Arab press played a

decisive role in the renaissance of the Arabic language as

Ibrahim al-Yaziji noted towards the beginning of the century.

Continuity and change, purism and modernization were not

perceived as contradictory. For instance, al-Yaziji devoted his

article, Language and Time in Al Bayan literary magazine (1898)

to enumerating the morphological processes that permit the

creation of new words. But at the same time, he was also a

pioneer in vilifying common language errors in the press.

The simultaneous attempts of renewal and attachment to

the canons of the language characterized the position of the Arab

academies, particularly the Damascus Academy (founded in

1919) and the Cairo Academy (founded in 1932), both of which

played an important role in what appeared to be the most urgent

49

task in the beginning of the century: the modernization and the

expansion of the lexicon. The 19th century had made literary

Arabic a language of political and social debate, thanks to the

reform movement in Egypt and to the Christian Lebanese

intellectuals who wrote important dictionaries according to

contemporary methods. However, a lot more work remained to

be done.

Influenced by the French academy, the Arabic academies

of Cairo and Damascus aimed to preserve the purity of the Arabic

language as well as adapt its lexicon to modern scientific and

technical needs, a concern that has dominated the Cairo

Academy since 1960. The difficulties in coining precise political

terminology which marked the 19th century gave way in the 20th

century to more daring innovations in the expansion of the

lexicon.

50

Diglossia 1 In Arabic

Shawqi Ḍayf, the President of the Academy of Arabic

language, in his 2001 inaugural speech at the 67th conference of

the Academy openly accused the media of being carelessly

oblivious to note that fuṣḥā is “the language of the peoples of the

‘umma,” lughat shu‘ūb al-’umma jamī‘an, whereas the ‘āmmiyya

“the dialect” is the “daily language of a single people … the local

language understood only by its people.” He argues that the

media has allowed the dialects to gradually but intrusively creep

into domains of use that are traditionally reserved for fuṣḥā and

eventually claims victory over it. Such intrusion needs to be

stopped, he warns, because it will eventually “dismantle the ties

that bond the peoples of the ’umma.” He urges Arab leaders to

commit themselves to the use of fuṣḥā solely in their official

speeches and communiqués to their people2.

Though the choice between standard norm and the

colloquial language may appear to be relatively uncomplicated in

written Arabic, we notice in the light of the above statement by

Shawqi Ḍayf that “gradual but intrusive” permeation of dialects

into the traditionally reserved zones of fuṣḥā (read ‘written’) is

becoming a serious cause of concern. Apart from the media-

sponsored intrusion of ‘āmmiyya in the domain of fuṣḥā, there

are other complications associated with the issue.

1 . Diglossia is a term in linguistics, used to describe a situation where, in a given society, there are 2 (often) closely-related languages, one of high-prestige, which is generally used by the government and in formal texts, and one of low-prestige, which is usually the spoken vernacular tongue. The high-prestige language tends to be the more formalized, and its forms and vocabulary often 'filter down' into the vernacular, though often in a changed form.2 . Diglossia As ‘Zones of Contact’ in the Media, Al-‘Arabiyya, Vol. 37, 2004

51

One of these complications is that many people possess

only a limited knowledge of the standard norm. For them,

Standard Arabic remains the target, but in writing it they make

many mistakes. Another scenario emerges when for ideological

or literary reasons writers decide to compose their literary

writings in an approximate version of the colloquial language.

Even these authors usually mix their colloquial language with

elements from the standard language1.

The best possible manner to explain diglossia is a construct

of hypothetical modern France, as illustrated by Kees Versteegh.

A situation where all newspapers and books are written in Latin,

speeches in parliament are held in Latin, and in churches the

only language used by the priests is Latin. On the other hand,

people talking in a bar use French, people at home or among

friends use French. In school, the official language of the

classroom is Latin, but during the breaks between classes

students use French among themselves, and so do the teachers.

This, of course, is a hypothetical scenario and the situation in

France is not like this; but things could have been different, had

the standard norm not switched from Latin to vernacular French

in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.

In Arabic-speaking countries, the actual situation is very

much like the hypothetical situation sketched here for France. At

first sight, there appear to be two varieties of the language, the

Classical standard, usually called fuṣḥā, and the colloquial

language, usually called ‘āmmiyya or (in North Africa) dārija, and

in Western publications, ‘dialect’ or ‘vernacular’. These two

varieties divide among themselves the domains of speaking and

1 . Kees Versteegh, The Arabic Language, p. 189

52

writing: the standard language is used for written speech and for

formal spoken speech, whereas the colloquial language is used

for informal speech. The colloquial language is everybody’s

mother tongue; people only learn the standard when they go to

school.

In 1930, William Marçaise called such a linguistic situation

‘diglossia’ (French diglossie), a term that he had borrowed from

the literature on the linguistic situation in Greece and which

gained general currency after the appearance in 1959 of an

article by Charles Ferguson with the title ‘Diglossia’. Ferguson

compared the linguistic situation in the Arabic-speaking countries

with that in Greece, in German-speaking Switzerland and in Haiti.

In all four areas, there seems to be a similar functional

distribution between two varities of the same language (fuṣḥā /

‘āmmiyya, kathareuousa / dhimotiki, Hochdeutch /

Schwyzertüütsch, français / créole). In Ferguson’s terminology,

these two varieties are called ‘high variety’ (H) and ‘low variety’

(L)1.

Generally speaking, the linguistic relationship which exists

between the written standard and spoken Arabic dialects is

impressionistic at best and flexible and changeable2. The

diglossic situation in the Arabic countries differs from country to

country in terms of the relative linguistic distance which exists

between Standard form (fuṣḥa) and the linguistic features of the

specific Arabic dialect with which it is in contact.

This situation is also dynamic and changing because of the

dynamic nature of the dialects themselves. It is changing at two

1 . ibid, p.1902 . A. Kaye (1972)

53

levels: first, at the level of any given Arabic colloquial, and

secondly, at the level of the whole range of Arabic dialects. The

fuṣḥa and the sum of all the colloquials in use in the Arab region

represent the ‘Arabic continuum’ known under the ambiguous

term commonly referred to as ‘The Arabic Language.’ A

comparison of fuṣḥa with any of the existing Arabic dialects will

show a situation which exhibits phonological, syntactical, and

lexical differences. The situation can briefly be described in the

following points:

(1) Fuṣḥa is a highly inflectional language with case endings for

number, gender and tense. The colloquials lost all inflections

and case endings.

(2) Fuṣḥa follows a VSO (Verb-Subject-Object) word order while

the dialects follow a SVO (Subject-Verb-Object) structure based

on strict word order.

(3) All fuṣḥa grammatical functions are marked by an inflectional

system of vocalic representation consisting of short vowels

(i’raab). Most of the functional vocalic representation has been

lost in most of the colloquial Arabic forms.

(4) There are morphological distinctions of number (singular,

dual, and plural) and gender (masculine and feminine). The dual

forms have totally disappeared from all dialects. Various other

forms have also disappeared but not systematically from all

dialects. The feminine plural for instance does not exist in

Tunisian Arabic but seems to persist in some other dialects.

(5) Fuṣḥa adjectives agree with nouns in number and gender.

54

(6) The phonological structure of fuṣḥa is composed of 28

consonants, three short and three long vowels. Most dialects

have a more complex vocalic structure which has two additional

vowels ( /e / and /o/).

(7) Fuṣḥa has a rich lexicon based on an almost unlimited use of

derivation. The dialects also have a rich lexicon and benefit

from a freer attitude towards borrowing from foreign sources.

There is a great confusion and numerous disagreements

about the definition and delimitation of the modern linguistic

standards and norms of grammatical acceptability of fuṣḥa

common among most Arabs. This situation concerns the

definition of the current norms of linguistic correctness in the

larger Arabic-speaking speech community. Views vary a great

deal about what constitutes ‘Modern fuṣḥa’ and a hot and

controversial debate seems to accompany this issue whenever it

is raised in the Arab region. Three positions clearly emerge from

this confusion around the term fuṣḥa and constitute possible

parameters for an analysis and understanding of the levels of

evaluation and the constituents of the language fluency used in

Arabic reading and instruction. They are the following:

(1) Many Arabs seem to restrict the use of fuṣḥa to the Arabic of

the Islamic tradition and literature of the Classical period.

(2) Others, who follow the Classicists’ position, use it for a

language that mimics CA or a classical form of fuṣḥa and strictly

follows the rigorous grammatical rules fixed by the early Arab

grammarians.

55

(3) Still a third position is represented by those Arabs who

believe that contrary to the conservative opinion of many

traditionalists, fuṣḥa manifests itself in the Arabic language of

today’s written and spoken formal use.

This last group believes that a Modern fuṣḥa exists in the

variety of Arabic currently used in modern literary works and also

in newspapers and other channels of written and oral media,

official documents, and the system of education. In order to

better identify their fuṣḥa and differentiate it from the previous

definitions, the proponents of this position (who could be called

Modernists) introduced labels which have been exclusively used

in specialized linguistic writings to qualify the appropriate level of

linguistic analysis and use for a better limitation of appropriate

standards of reading and writing fluency.

The term Modern fuṣḥa seems to be a more preferred term

for some section of researchers and linguists. Other terms used

by the numerous other linguists such as Modern Standard Arabic

(MSA), and Modern Literary Arabic, are equivalent terms. Labels

such as fasīh, lugha mu‘āsira, lughat ’al-‘aṣr, or lughat ’al-jarā’id

have been frequently tagged to the term fuṣḥa to indicate a level

of product quality. Parkinson (1991) mentions that the scholars

of Dār-ul-‘ulūm and the Arabic language teachers college of the

University of Cairo, recognize this terminological problem and

have begun using fuṣḥa for the classical heritage language and

faṣīḥ for what most Western Arabic specialists call Modern

Standard Arabic (MSA).

56

The next chapter talks about the semantic and stylistic

developments in the Modern Standard Arabic.

57

Notes:

58