Diglossia and the variation of the colloquial arabic

Diglossia and the variation of the in descriptoral arabic1.0 IntroductionIn many speech communities where speakers use dickens or much varieties of the similar address in mutation situations, a phenomenon c every(prenominal)(prenominal)ed diglossia exists. The purpose of this paper is to discuss diglossia in the Arab company, as this is wholeness of the communities that corroborate been classified by Ferguson (1959) to be examples of diglossic language situations. It was my original intention to focus proper(postnominal)ally on the Libyan context. However, a paucity of in do workation on the Libyan context has meant that the major focus of the appellation is on Arabic in general. However, in the final section of the paper, I do make shortened reference to Libya. After defining diglossia, the indication features of diglossia as de destinationined by Ferguson go out be discussed too. I will then, provide a description of diglossia in Arabic, followed by the origins of A rabic diglossia. A description of Hellenic/ groundbreaking well-worn and in framingal Arabic will be also provided, together with their usage in various res publicas.Finally, I will put forward some arguments and studies on Arabic diglossia, which imbibe been introduced by linguists, as well as Arabic dialects and how variation of Arabic dialects is sometimes con slopered to be problematic. 2.0 Diglossia definedThe circumstance diglossia was introduced from French diglossie by Ferguson (1959), who is credited with first use this term in an article he wrote in 1959. consort to him, diglossia refers to virtuoso unhorse upicular kind of monetary cadenceization where twain varieties of a language exist side by side through unwrap the community, with each having a definite role to play (Ferguson, 1959232). In new(prenominal) manner of speak, when two languages or language varieties exist side by side in a community and each one is employ for different purposes, diglossi a exists. Usually, according to Richards et al (1992108), one is a much regular salmagundi called the heights variety or (H- variety) which is apply for example in educational institutions (lectures at universities), ghostly services (prayers, sermons in mosques and churches). The changeer(a) one is called the low variety or (L- variety), which is used in family context, cordial interactions and shopping. In addition, Ferguson has identified four languages which he thinks fit into his definition of diglossia. Those languages atomic number 18 Greek, Arabic, Haitian Creole and Swiss German. In all four areas, there seems to be a similar functional distribution amidst two varieties of the same language, which are called in Fergusons terminology high variety (H) and low variety (L).3.0 The characteristic features of Diglossia Ferguson (1959 235) suggests that the different uses of H and L varieties can be described with reference to the following criteria Specialized Functions atomic number 53 of the some important features of diglossia is the specialization of function for High and Low jumps(Ferguson, 1959235). In different lyric, each form has special do primary(prenominal)s to be used in. For example, the High form is used in religious sermons, permitter writing, parliamentary speech, university lectures, news broadcasts, newspaper editorials and poetry, whereas the Low form is used in family conversation, folk literature, and soap opera. Slight imbrication surrounded by the two forms occurs, i.e. sometimes the two forms might be used in one domain by switching from H to L and vice versa.H and L are used for different purposes, and inbred speakers would find it odd if anyone used H in an L domain, or L in an H domain. AcquisitionLow (L) is the mother tongue of the speaker in the concerned defining languages (Arabic, Greek Haitian Creole and Swiss German), which have been determined by Ferguson. All speakers learn it as a first language at home as they are more comfortable in the L form than the H. The H form is normally learnt by orb instruction in schools. StandardizationIn all the defining languages, H is highly meterised and whitethorn have a long usance of grammatical study associated with it. In other words, grammars, dictionaries are a large literature which is associated with it. The L form may non be amountised. In Arabic, for example, the L form has no standard grammatical rules as it differs from one Arabic region to another region, and every Arabic community has its own local L form (dialect). PrestigeH is always considered to be more highly valued than the L as a solution of the fact that the H variety is used in literature, religious texts, public speech production etc. The L variety is less associated with the written word and is often considered to be a stain version of H. It may be arrange in everyday advertising, folklore poetry or used in drama, e.g. to describe comic characters. For Arab Mu slims, for example, H is considered to be the language of the account book, and it is widely believed to constitute the words of God and scour to be outside the limits of space and time (Ferguson, 1959238). Grammar, lexicon and phonologyThe syntactic ashes of H varieties are broadly speaking purview to be more complex than the L in terms of grammatical features such as, tense, sexuality and number. Complex sentence structures are thought not to be a feature of L in the languages determined by Ferguson. The lexicon of the two varieties, on the other hand, is largely packaged but there is a difference on account of the specific domains in which each is used. H and L may share the same phonological system, but even at this level of grammar, the H variety is felt to have more complicated phonetic features.4.0 Fishmans extension of diglossiaIn 1967, Fishman revised and expanded Fergusons original definition of diglossia. Fishman believed that diglossia essential be distinguished from bilingualism (Fasold, 1984). He suggests that bilingualism refers to an individuals ability to use more than one language variety, whereas diglossia refers to the distribution of more than one language variety to serve different communication tasks in a society.However, Fishman states the view, which he attributes to J. Gumperz that diglossia exists not single in multilingual societies which officially recognize several languages but, also, in societies which are multilingual in the sense that they employ separate dialects, registers or functionally differentiated language varieties of whatever kind (Fishman, 196730). Fishman proposes that unbowed diglossia could be extended to situations where forms of two genetically unrelated languages occupy the H and L domains, such that one of the languages is used for education, law, literary and religion while another is the home language. Moreover, his extension depends on his focus on domain. In a community, for example, where spe akers use two languages, they will obviously not use two in all circumstances. They use only(prenominal) one language in certain circumstances, and in others, they use the other one.Fishman cites Paraguay as an example for his claim where there are two languages which are sleep withn by virtually everybody. In Paraguay, Spanish is used as the high white-tie language, whereas Guarani is used as the low idle language. Fishmans reference to Paraguay illustrates how far apart linguistically two languages may be and still be in a diaglossic alliance.From the above two conceptions of diglossia, we come to a conclusion that both(prenominal) scholars, Ferguson and Fishman run that the H variety is used for formal purposes and the L variety is used for less formal, more personal uses. However, they disagree when Ferguson distinguishes diglossia from the relationship between standard and conversational, whereas Fishman mentions the possibility that more than two language varieties ca n be reserved for specific functions in a society. In addition, Fergusons view is limited two language varieties, whereas Fishmans view is more than two language varieties can be reserved for specific functions in a society (Fasold, 1984).Having defined the term diglossia and the way the concept has been extended by Fishman I now turn to a discussion in the Arabic context. 5.0 Digloss ia in ArabicArabic i a mmbr of th mitic languag family, which itlf i part of th widr Afroaiatic phylum including Ancint gyptian, Coptic, Cuhitic, Brbr, and Chadic. Othr principal mmbr of th mitic family ar th at mitic languag of Akkadian and blait (both now long dad), and th Wt mitic languag Aramaic, Ugaritic, th Canaanit languag (including Hbrw), ancint and modrn outh Arabian, and th mitic languag of thiopia (for xampl, Gz, Tigr, Tigrinya, and Amharic) (Htzron 1992 412-132 Fabr 1997 6 cf. Bton 1970 11). 5.1 The prad of Arabic The original homeland of pakr of Arabic is th cntral and northern rgion of th Arabian Pninula. Th lowr half of th Arabian Pninula wa inhabitd by pakr of languag known a pigraphic outh Arabian (Htzron 1992 412). Th nd of th ixth cntury C, howvr, aw th ri of th nw rligion of Ilam promotd by th Propht Muhammad within th Arabian Pninula in what i now audi Arabia. Th nw Ilamic tat prad rapidly throughout th Pninula, and within 100 yar had xtndd north into th Lvant, at into Iraq and Khuzitan, and wt into compass north Africa. Ovr th cnturi, th rligiou frontir of Ilam trtchd into pain, Africa, India, and Indonia, and acro cntral Aia into Turktan and China (Gibb 1978 10). Th ri and xpanion of Ilam wa not only a rligiou and hnc cultural conqut, but alo a linguitic conqut, and within a fw hundrd yar Arabic bcam both th official and th vrnacular languag of all Ilamicizd countri in th Middl at. Indd, du to th prvailing tolranc on th part of th Mulim to Chritian and Jw, arabicization wa mor complt a proc and progrd at a gratr rat than ilamicization (Vrtgh 1997 93). I n th cour of th prad of Ilam, Arabic found itlf in contact with a ri of forign languag which it ha tndd to upplant. In gypt during th arly cnturi of Ilamic domination, th Coptic patriarch communicatd with th Arab conqurr through intrprtr. By th tnth cntury C, th Coptic bihop vru of hmunin complaind that mot Copt no longr undrtood ithr Grk or Coptic, only Arabic. In Uppr gypt, Coptic wa limitd to a fw mall pockt in th countryid and to th clrgy in monatri by th fourtnth cntury C (Vrtgh 1997 95). It i gnrally blivd that by th ixtnth cntury C th u of Coptic wa rtrictd to liturgy in th Coptic church (cf. Loprino 1995 7). In North Africa, Arabic bcam th dominant languag of th citi, but Brbr managd to rit th prad of Arabic in th rural intrior. In Morocco and Algria, in particular, Brbr ha rtaind it vitality alongid Arabic to thi day. Likwi in limitd ara in th Frtil Crcnt, dialct of yriac hav pritd and hav influncd nighbouring Arabic dialct. 5.2 Th mrgnc of a tandard languag and digloia T h litrary Arabic languag bgan to attain a tandard form through th dvlopmnt of grammatical norm in th ighth cntury C (Fichr 1997 188). Thi tandard languag can b trmd tandard Arabic, th trm Claical Arabic and Modm tandard Arabic bing ud to dcrib it mdival and modm variant, rpctivly. Claical Arabic wa bad primarily on th languag of th wtrn Hij azi trib of Qurayh, with om intrfrnc from pr- Ilamic potic koin and atrn dialct. Th languag wa codifid in th Qur an, th saintly book of Ilam. Although th lxi and tylitic of Modm tandard Arabic ar rathr diffrnt from tho of Claical Arabic, th morphology and yntax hav rmaind baically unchangd ovr th cnturi (Fichr 1997 188). Th vrnacular Arabic dialct, by contrat, hav dvlopd markdly during thi priod. Lik a numbr of othr languag, thrfor, Arabic cam to hav on tandard varity and a larg numbr of rgional and ocial dialct. Unlik many uch languag, howvr, no on in th Arab world i brought up paking Standard Arabic as their mother tongue an Arab child mothr t ongu will b th rgional or social variety of Arabic of it hom rgion, whil tandard Arabic, if it i matrd at all, i larnt formally at chool or at hom a part of th child ducation. tandard Arabic i confind to formal writtn and pokn occaion, and th rgional/ocial varity of Arabic i ud at all othr tim. tandard Arabic now diffr conidrably from rgional and ocial informal variti of Arabic in trm of it phonology, morphology, yntax, and lxicon. According to Lipinki (1997 75), uch digloia in Arabic bgan to mrg at th latt in th ixth cntury C whn oral pot rcitd thir potry in a proto-Claical Arabic bad on archaic dialct which diffrd gratly from thir own (cf. alo Vollr 1906 Whr 1952 Dim 1973, citd in Fichr 1997 188). controlct of Arabic form a roughly continuou pctrum of variation, with th dialct pokn in th atrn and wtrn xtrm of th Arab-paking world bing mutually unintlligibl. On th bai of crtain linguitic fatur, Arabic dialct can b dividd into two major gographical theme th firt compri dialct pokn at of a lin running from alum in th north to roughly th udan-Chad bordr in th outh th cond compri th Maghribi dialct pokn to th wt of thi lin. Th main phonological fatur which ditinguih th wtrn dialct group from th atrn includ th typical rduction of th triangular ytm of hort profane swearingl, a, i, u, which i found in atrn dialct, to a two-vowl ytm (Fichr and Jatrow 1980 33) and a contrat btwn an iambic wordtr ytm in th wtrn group and a trochaic word-tr ytm in th atrn group. Thu, a word uch a katab h wrot will b typically trd a katab in wtrn dialct, but a katab in atrn dialct. In wtrn dialct, th combination of an iambic tr ytm togthr with a tndncy to dlt untrd vowl lad to word-initial cononant clutr which ar not typically atttd in atrn dialct in th Moroccan Arabic dialct of Lmnabha, min fecund (lmdlaoui 1995 139) i th cognat ofCairn imin and th word for outid i ralizd a brra in Lmnabha (lmdlaoui 1995 157), but a barra in Cairn. Dialct of a languag which ha pakr a thnically and ocially divr a Arabic, howvr, cannot b dividd in purly gographic trm. Dialct ar alo usually ditinguihd along a bdouin-urban axi bdouin dialct tnd to b mor conrvativ and homognou, whil urban dialct how mor volutiv tndnci and uually xhibit fairly clar intra-dialctal variation bad on ag, gndr, ocial cla, and rligion. characteristic Bdouin fatur includ th voicd rflx of Claical Arabic qd, prrvation of th Claical Arabic intrdntal, and a gndr ditinction in th cond and third pron plural of th vrb, pronoun, and pronoun uffix (Vrtgh 1997 144). Ditinction btwn bdouin and urban dialct appar to b l markd in th at, howvr, particularly in th Pninula, than thy ar in North Africa (Fichr and Jatrow 1980 24). Diglossia is a term which is usually applied to the sociolinguistic situation in much of the Arabic speaking world. In those countries, there are two forms of the same language (Arabic), the high and low variety. The high form is called fusha spotless or newfangled standard Arabic which i s normally used in formal situations, such as writing, political speeches and university lectures. The low form which is referred to dialects of Arab communities is used in informal situations, such as conversations, shopping and social rituals.The Arabic language represents a continuum. At one end of this continuum is the modern standard Arabic, and at the other lies the low form which represents the various dialects of the Arab communities. These two ends, in fact are only ideal types, i.e. pure standard or pure informal, in fact do not exist. In other words, even in the most pure standard text, we may find some colloquial terms and vice versa (Hary, 199672). A persons place on this continuum would be somewhere between the two forms. In other words, where a leave alonen persons speech sits on this continuum depends on a lot of factors including speaker, conversation government issue and setting. For example, how well the two speakers know each other and the formality of the spe ech as when giving university lectures and sermons.Furthermore, in Arabic communities, classical Arabic fusha is deemed as the language of the Koran and is still the current written form of the language. At the beginning of the Islamic period, only two sources of literary Arabic were available the Koran and the pre-Islamic poems al-shear al-jaheli. The Koran described itself arabiyyan Arabic when it was revealed. This seems clear from the following verse of the Koran Q 43/2-3 which says ( wa-l-kitabi l-mubini inna ga alnahu quraanan arabiyyan la allakum ta qiluna) By the clear book we have made it an Arabic recitation in order that you may understand. According to Versteegh ( 200153), the Koran and the pre-Islamic poems play a crucial role in the standardization and development of the Arabic language.Colloquial Arabic ammyya or darja as it is called in North Africa, on the other hand, exists as the informal varieties of the major Arabic speaking communities. It is very often used, especially in daily verbalise form. In some of the Arab contexts, for example, if somebody uses standard Arabic in the street, he might be laughed at since using MSA in such domains seems odd. Cown (1968) believes that Arabs are native speakers of NSA non-standard Arabic and not MSA modern standard Arabic (Mahmoud, 2000129). In other words, modern standard Arabic has no native speakers.Moreover, colloquial Arabic is subject to regional variation, not only between different countries, but also within regions in the same country as we shall see in the Libyan context in the same country. 5.2 Origins of Arabic DiglossiaA number of theories have been introduced by researchers and scholars to correspond the origins of the Arabic diglossia. These theories might be classified into the following three groups theories which assume the population of a Koine, those which urge on an explanation of language drift and those which use the hypothesis of Creolization/Pidginization.5.2.1 KoineThe Koine hypothesis is the prevalent possible action in terms of the origins of the Arabic diglossia. Koine is a term derived from Greek denoting a lingua franca that develops out of a mixture of languages or dialects (Bishop, 19984). In an article entitled The Arabic Koinz, Ferguson assumed that thecommon source of all the Arabic dialects existing outside the Arabian Peninsula was as a result of a variety utter in the military camps during the middle of the seventh century at the time of the Islamic expansion, and this variety was different from the language of the Koran. In other words, these dialects are not corrupt form, however, they have had a separate existence from the classical language since they have existed outside the Arabic peninsula (Freeman, 1996 1-2). Ferguson assumes that the majority of the Arabic modern dialects are derived from a koine which existed side by side with the standard/classical Arabic and was not based on any particular regional area. He built his arg ument on fourteen features, which he thought differ from standard and colloquial Arabic. According to Ferguson, then, diglossia started as a result of the Koine and considered to be the rear of Modern colloquial Arabic (Bishop,19984).5.2.2 Language drift This theory attributes the difference between modern standard Arabic and colloquial Arabic to language drift, natural Semitic change tendencies (as Arabic is one of the Semitic languages) and basic effects among others. Those who recommend these theories feel that the Koine hypothesis is unnecessary and unjustified by the show up available. However, both sides, those who advocate these theories and the Koine theory agree that language changes interchangeablely occur in towns earlier than in the dialects of the Bedouin tribes who live in the Arabian deserts because the Bedouin dialects remained unchanged for several centuries after the arrival of Islam. Secondly, they agree that there was no language center in the Arab world whic h caused the changes seen as a result of its influence. Finally, both sides agree that the Islamic conquests were behind precipitating the rise of the colloquial Arabic dialects. Blau (1988, cited in Bishop, 19985), on the other hand, claims that Fergusons argument in terms of the Koine is unconvincing. He argues that the reverse of his argument was correct, i.e. the Koine itself was resulted from the changes of the Arabic dialects, and not as Ferguson said that the Koine was the origin of the modern Arabic dialects (Kaye, 19985).5.2.3 Pidginization/CreolizationBefore discussing this theory, I would like to give a brief definition of Pidginization and Creolization. According to Richards et al (1992277), Pidgin means a language which develops as a contact language when groups of people who speak different languages try to communicate with one another on a regular basis. In other words, when speakers of one language, for example, engage in trade with speakers of another, and neither k nows the others language, the language used between them is called Pidgin. Creole on the other hand, arises when a pidgin language becomes the native language of a new generation of children as a result of this contact.Versteegh (1984, cited in Bishop, 19985) argues that the two theories mentioned above regarding the development of Arabic diglossia are either a focus on an explanation of the similarities or the differences of the dialects without treating the other side. In his estimation, Versteegh argues that an affectional theory should deal with both sides of the Arabic dialects. By this hypothesis, Versteegh dealt with both the similarities and the differences between the modern dialects of Arabic. To prove his hypothesis, he gave an example of mixed marriages between Muslim Arab men and non-Arab women of the conquered peoples during the Islamic conquest. This marriage, he said would likely have led to communication using a pidginized form of Arabic and the children who would be delivered as a result of this marriage would have probably spoken a creolised Arabic. 6.0 Classical/modern standard Arabic and colloquial ArabicBefore starting to explain different uses of modern standard and colloquial Arabic, I would like to illustrate the difference between classical and modern standard Arabic.Classical Arabic is considered to be the formal version that was used in the Al-Hijaz region (currently Saudi Arabia) 1500 years ago. The Koran was revealed in classical Arabic, which is the main reason why the Arabic language has preserved its purity throughout centuries and is considered an important part of the Arabic culture.Modern standard Arabic (MSA), on the other hand, is an equivalent to the classical Arabic and nowadays it is used as the official language of the Arab states. Ferguson defined MSA as the Arabs ATTEMPT to speak classical Arabic (Kaye, 197246 emphasis in the original). The main difference between modern standard Arabic and classical Arabic lies in the vocabulary, i.e. MSA reflects the needs of contemporary expression, whereas Classical Arabic reflects the needs of older styles. A lot of lexical terms of classical standard Arabic, for instance, have become obsolete these days, and they are substituted by new modern words. For example, in classical standard Arabic kittab was used for the word letter,but in modern Arabic, ressala is used instead and rassol messenger instead of mabooth. However, Modern Standard Arabic is grammatically simpler than classical and includes numerous words enigmatical to the Quran, such as hasib aali computer and shabaket almalomaat internet.The two varieties, standard and colloquial Arabic divide among themselves the domains of speaking and writing, formal and informal and sometimes both varieties are used side by side in only one domain. The following discussion will attempt to show where these two varieties can be found in the Arabic community.On Arabic television and radio set, the news is alwa ys presented in modern standard Arabic. This might be because it is watched and listened to by different native speakers of different Arab regions. On some programmes, for instance, the speakers usually start from a written text in standard Arabic, but in reading it they sometimes let themselves be influenced by the target group. In other words, programmes which are presented for special categories of community, for instance housewives, farmers and fishermen, the structure of the standard Arabic text remains unchanged, but at regular pauses colloquial markers and words are inserted. Particles and words such as bita of illi that is are introduced to give a signal to the audience the intention of the speaker, which is according to Versteegs (2001195) to bring to pass an atmosphere of intimacy and warmth. In other words, speakers tend to use some colloquial particles or words to simplify the discussion and to be more close to the group concerned. Some of the Arab leaders, for example, use colloquial Arabic when they speak to their peoples, to communicate better with them, as they all understand their colloquial Arabic, whereas they use standard Arabic when they make speeches in other Arab countries since the colloquial Arabic in those countries are different from theirs.All books and newspapers in Arabic states are written in standard Arabic, apart from those little cases where colloquial Arabic is kinda used, for instance cartoons in newspapers or dialogues of illiterate characters in some novels are sometimes written in colloquial language. Although most literary works are written in standard, they regulary contain colloquialisms. This is also true in movie scripts such as dialogues and theatre plays, even when they are written in standard, they are often staged in dialect. This is perhaps because written works are only read and seen by literate people, who have studied standard Arabic at school (Versteegs, 2001).Plays, songs, folk poetry and popular proverbs are usually performed and written in colloquial Arabic. Some expressions in Arabic, however, although classical, are used both in classical and colloquial domains. For exampletusbihuuna alaa khayr (I hope you wake up in the morning only used at night and everything is fine).baaraka allaahu fiika (may Allah God bless you) used formally and informally instead of thank you or thank you so much.The titles tabib and tabiibah refer to medical doctors, but native Arabic speakers rarely use these standard forms in their colloquial speech. Instead, they prefer to use the terms alduktor (referring to an M.D or a PhD) or alhakim, which is equivalent to alduktor (referring only to an M.D.) because they sound more prestigious, especially the former form. Lessons and lectures in schools and universities, on the other hand, are mostly introduced in standard Arabic within Arab states. In other words, introducing lessons and lectures in standard Arabic seems to be compulsory in most of the Arab cou ntries. Tutorial discussions, on the other hand, are introduced in both colloquial and standard Arabic.Colloquial Arabic is the language of family and home and is widely used in Arabic communities because it is the mother tongue of all Arab native speakers. When the child starts learning language from his/her parents, almost all lexical and phonological terms are colloquial Arabic. 7.0 Recent studies on diglossia in Arabic contextsWhen Ferguson introduced his paper on diglossia in 1959, he concluded with an appealingness for further study of diglossic phenomenon and related ones (Ferguson, 1959249). Consequently, linguists and scholars have made various efforts and studies on this phenomenon. In the following, I will examine some of those arguments and how they contrast with Fergusons original study.7.1 Badawis study of DiglossiaIn an attempt to show how the linguistic system of modern standard Arabic works, the Egyptian linguist, Badawi (1973) has presented his study on the sociol inguistic situation in Egypt (applies on most of the Arabic contexts), in which he rejects Fergusons description of diglossia which says that H and L varieties are in completing distribution in the Arab world and other communities (Versteegh, 2001).In contrast with Fergusons model and in attempt to part the continuum between the two extremes of standard Arabic and colloquial, Badawi has determined the following five levels model as follows1. fusha at-turrat classical Arabiconly used in Quranic recitation2. fusha al-asr Modern standard Arabicthe standard form of the language used in writing and sometimes on formal occasions in speaking3. ammiyyat al-mutaqqafin colloquial of the intellectualsthe formal spoken language of educated people4. ammiyyat al-mutanawwirin colloquial of the literatethe informal spoken language of educated people5. ammiyyat al-ummiyyin colloquial of the illiteratethe language in which the illiterate talk (Versteegh, 2001191)It is notice from the above that ev ery level represents a different class of people in different domains. For example, the agreeable //as in thalatha three is considered classical Arabic, /t/ as in talata three is considered colloquial, whereas /s/ as in salasa (this level is not used in all Arabic contexts) is used between the two extremes (Hary, 19967).To show how the linguistic system of modern Arabic works, Badawi offered a diagram (in the appendix) in which it seems clear that every level is a mixture of all the other levels, i.e. every level contains fush a classical, ammiyya or darja colloquial and dakhiil foreign elements. In other words, even the speech of the illiterate contains elements of the high variety (fusha) or modern standard Arabic ( fusha al- asr), and standard Arabic, on the other hand, contains lexis, phonology and morphology of the colloquial of the illiterate (Freeman, 19964).In his study, Badawi proved that there is a continuum between standard and colloquial Arabic, and claimed that there i s no duality in the Arab world, but continued levels of language. Then, he looked at the colloquial Arabic not as corrupt or different and independent from the standard Arabic, but as one of these levels suggested in his new model of Arabic language.However, although I agree with Badawis new model of the Arabic language, I think a point has not been taken into his account while studying this phenomenon, i.e. the colloquial level of illiterate (those who do not know standard Arabic at all) has recently been developed as a result of the development of radio and t