Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics
Vol. 28:2 (2018) ► pp.185–216

Diglossia

A language ideological approach

| University of Leuven, Belgium
Diglossia is, as far as the Arabic language is concerned, a concept that has been taken for granted, as much as it has been criticized. First, based on Ferguson’s article on diglossia and subsequent interpretations and ramifications of the concept and with a special focus on how language variability is discursively deployed and how it is perceived in the Arab speech community, I will argue that diglossia does not so much describe actual language use, but rather how language variability is ‘read’ in the Arab world. In the second part of the article, an analysis of labeling in a 19th century debate will show how the dichotomy between fuṣḥā and non-fuṣḥā varieties (ʿāmmīya),
which is the basis of diglossia, was already taken for granted long before the concept and the term existed, and even before fuṣḥā and ʿāmmīya were used as independent lexical items. The analysis in both parts of the article shows how much diglossia is taken for granted by most native speakers of Arabic, even if it defies linguistic descriptions of actual language use. It is exactly this ‘common-sense-ness’ that suggests that diglossia is a useful tool to describe language ideological attitudes.
Keywords: diglossia, Arabic, language ideology, language debates, labeling
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Diglossia: A critical approach
    • 2.1A strict functional division between fuṣḥā and ʻāmmīya? The language continuum, intermediate varieties and code-switching
      • 2.1.1The linguistic continuum and intermediate varieties
      • 2.1.2Educated Spoken Arabic (ESA)
      • 2.1.3Code-switching
      • 2.1.4Diglossia, intermediate varieties and the native speaker
      • 2.1.5Diglossia as a set of metapragmatic norms
      • 2.1.6First set of conclusions
    • 2.2Diglossia and linguistic prestige: Standard versus prestige
      • 2.2.1 Lēš tmaddanti?
      • 2.2.2Foreign languages
      • 2.2.3Second set of conclusions
  • 3.Analysis of the Muqtaṭaf debate
    • 3.1Introduction
      • 3.1.1Why the 19th century?
    • 3.2The basic dichotomy: Fuṣḥā and ʻāmmīya
    • 3.3Clusters of associations Al-fuṣḥā and Al-ʻāmmīya: Synonyms and their connotations
      • 3.3.1The process of labeling and synonymy: Indirect equation
      • 3.3.2The process of labeling and synonymy: Direct equation
      • 3.3.3The terms and their connotations: al-luġa ʻāmmīya–luġat al-ʻāmma
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • The corpus (in order of appearance)
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 7 May 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.00006.dan
References (63)
References
Abu-Haidar, Farida. 1991. Christian Arabic of Baghdad. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrasowitz.Google Scholar
Al-Bustānī, Buṭrus. 1998 (1st print 1870). Muḥīṭ al-muḥīṭ. Qāmūs muṭawwal li-al-luġa al-ʿarabīya [Muhit al-muhit. An Arabic-Arabic Dictionary]. Beirut: Librairie du Liban Publishers.Google Scholar
al-Qāsimī, ʻalī (ed.). 2003. Al-muʿğam al-ʿarabī al-asāsī li-al-nāṭiqīn bi-al-ʿarabīya wa mutʿallimīhā [The Elementary Arabic Dictionary for Native Speakers and Learners]. Cairo: ALECSO/Larouse.Google Scholar
Ayalon, Ami. 1987. Language and Change in the Arab Middle East: The Evolution of Modern Political Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ayoub, Georgine. 2011. “Faṣīḥ.” Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics. Managing Editors Online Edition: Lutz Edzard; Rudolf de Jong. Brill, 2011. Brill Online. University of Cambridge – Cambridge University Library (UK). 01 December 2011 <[URL]>
Badawi, al-Saʻīd. 1973. Mustawayāt al-ʻarabīya al-muʻāṣira fi miṣr. Baḥt fī ʻalāqat al-luġa bi-al-haḍāra [The Levels of Contemporary Arabic in Egypt. Research on the Relation between Language and Culture]. Caïro: Dār al-Maʻārif.Google Scholar
Bassiouney, Reem. 2009. Arabic Sociolinguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blanc, Haim. 1960. “Style Variations in Spoken Arabic – A Sample of Interdialectal Educated Conversation.” In Contributions to Arabic Linguistics. Harvard Middle Eastern Monographs III, ed. by C. A. Ferguson, 81–156. Cambridge Massassuchets: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
. 1964. Communal Dialects in Baghdad. Harvard Middle Eastern Monographs. Cambridge Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Boussofara-Omar, Naima. 2011. “Diglossia.” Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics. Managing Editors Online Edition: Lutz Edzard; Rudolf de Jong. Brill, 2011. Brill Online. K.U. Leuven – University Library. 05 April 2011 <[URL]>
Caton, Steven. 1991. “Diglossia in North Yemen: A Case of Competing Linguistic Communities.” Southwest Journal of Linguistics 10 (1): 143–59.Google Scholar
Daniëls, Helge. 2002. Debating Variability in Arabic: Fuṣḥā versus ʻāmmīya. Unpublished Ph.D. Antwerp: University of Antwerp.Google Scholar
Diem, Werner. 1974. Hochsprache und Dialekt im Arabischen: Untersuchungen zur heutigen arabische Zweisprachigkeit. Wiesbaden: Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft.Google Scholar
Eid, Mushira. 2002. “Language is a Choice – Variations in Egyptian Women’s Written Discourse.” In Language Contact and Language Conflict in Arabic – Variations on a Sociolinguistic Theme, ed. by A. Rouchdy, 203–232. London: Routledge-Curzon.Google Scholar
El-Hassan, Shahir A. 1977. “Educated Spoken Arabic in Egypt and the Levant: A critical Review of Diglossia and Related Concepts.” Archivum Linguisticum 8 (2): 112–132.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A. 1959. “Diglossia.” Word 151: 325–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frayḥa, Anīs. 1938. “Al-ʻāmmīya wa al-fuṣḥā. ʻawd ilā al-mawḍūʻ [ʻāmmīya and fuṣḥā. Back tot he subject].” Al-muqtaṭaf 931: 292–8.Google Scholar
Gal, Susan, and Kathryn Woolard. 1995. “Constructing Languages and Publics: Authority and Representation.” Pragmatics 5 (2): 129–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gumperz, John Joseph. 1982. Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haeri, Niloofar. 1996. The Sociolinguistic Market of Cairo: Gender, Class and Education. London and New York: Kegan Paul International.Google Scholar
. 2000. “Form and Ideology: Arabic Sociolinguistics and Beyond.” Annual Review of Anthropology 291: 61–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holes, Clive. 1986. “The Social Motivation for Phonological Convergence in Three Arabic Dialects.” International Journal of Sociolinguistics 611: 33–51.Google Scholar
. 1993. “The uses of Variation: A Study of the Political Speeches of Gamal Abd Al-Nasir.” Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics V, ed. by M. Eid, and C. Holes, 13–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1995. “Community, Dialect and Urbanization in the Arabic-speaking Middle East.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 58/2: 270–287. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Joseph, Earl John. 2004. Language and Identity. National, Ethnic, Religious. Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kazimirski, A. De Biberstein. 1860. Dictionnaire Arabe – Français (2 tomes). Beirut: Librairie du Liban.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1971. “The notion of “system” in creole studies.” In Pidginization and creolization of languages, ed. by D. Hymes, 447–72. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mackey, W. F. 1993. “Introduction.” In Diglossia: A Comprehensive Bibliography 1960-1990, ed. by M. Fernandez, xiii–xx. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Marçais, William. 1930. “La diglossie arabe.” L’ensiegnement Public 971: 401–9.Google Scholar
Mahmoud, Youssef. 1986. “Arabic after Diglossia.” In The Fergusonian Impact: In Honour of Charles A. Ferguson on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday, ed. by Joshua Fishman, Andree Tabouret-Keller, Michael Clyne, Bh. Krishnamurti, and Mohamed Abdulaziz, 239–51. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Mazraani, Nathalie. 1997. Aspects of Language Variation in Arabic Political Speech Making. Richmond Surrey: Curzon Press.Google Scholar
Meiseles, Gustav. 1980. “Educated Spoken Language and the Arabic Language.” Archivum Linguisticum XI, New Series 118–148.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Terence Frederic. 1978. “Educated Spoken Arabic in Egypt and the Levant, with Special Reference to Participle and Tense.” Journal of Linguistics 14/2: 227–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1980. “Dimensions of Style in a Grammar of Educated Spoken Arabic.” Archivum Linguisticum XI1: 89–106.Google Scholar
. 1982. “More than a Matter of ‘Writing with the Learned, Pronouncing with the Vulgar.” Standard Languages, ed. by W. Haas, 123–55. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
. 1986 “What is Educated Spoken Arabic?” In Aspects of Arabic Sociolinguistics, ed. by M. H. Ibrahim, and B. H. Jernudd, special volume of The International Journal of the Sociology of Language 611: 7–32.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Terence Frederic, and S. A. al-Hassan. 1994. Modality, Mood and Aspect in Spoken Arabic. With special reference to Egypt and the Levant. London and New York: Kegan Paul International.Google Scholar
Muṣṭafā, Ibrāhīm (ed.). 1980. Al-muʿğam al-wasīṭ [The Intermediary Dictionary]. Istanbul: Dār al-daʻwa.Google Scholar
Parkinson, Dilworth. 1991. “Searching for Modern Fuṣḥa: Real-life Formal Arabic.” ʻArabiyya. Journal of the American Association of Teachers of Arabic 241: 31–64.Google Scholar
Sallam, A. M. 1979. “Concordial Relation within the Noun Phrase in Educated Spoken Arabic (ESA).” Archivum Linguisticum (new series) X (1): 20–56.Google Scholar
1980. “Phonological Variation in Educated Spoken Arabic: A Study of the Uvular and Related Plosive Types.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, XLIII 43: 1.Google Scholar
Schippers, Arie, and Kees Versteegh. 1987. Het Arabisch. Norm en realiteit. Muiderberg: Coutinho.Google Scholar
Suleiman, Yasir. 2004. A War of Words. Language and Conflict in the Middle East. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. “Egypt: From Egyptian to Pan-Arab Nationalism.” In Language and National Identity in Africa, ed. by Andrew Simpson, 26–43. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2011. Arabic, Self and Identity. A Study in Conflict and Displacement. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Arabic in the Fray. Language Ideology and Cultural Politics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verschueren, Jef. 2012. Ideology in Language Use. Pragmatic Guidelines for Empirical Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Versteegh, Kees. 2001 (1997 1st print). The Arabic Language. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Walters, Keith. 1991. “Women, Men, and Linguistic Variation in the Arab World.” In Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics III Papers from the third annual symposium on Arabic Linguistics, ed. By Mushira Eid, and B. Comrie, 199–229. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar
. 1996. “Diglossia, Linguistic Variation, and Language Change in Arabic.” In Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics VIII, ed. by Mushira Eid, 157–97. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Language Attitudes.” In Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics. Managing Editors Online Edition: Lutz Edzard, Rudolf de Jong. Brill Online, 2013. Reference. K.U. Leuven – University Library. 19 November 2011 <[URL]>
Wehr, Hans, and J. Milton Cowan (ed.). 1994 (1979 1st print). A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic: Arabic-English. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrasowitz.Google Scholar
The corpus (in order of appearance)
Ṣarrūf, Yaʿqūb and Fāris Nimr. 1881. “Al-luġa al-ʿarabīya wa al-nağāḥ [The Arabic language and success].” Al-Muqtaṭaf 61 (November): 352–4.Google Scholar
Al-Yāziğī, Halīl. 1881. “Al-luġa al-ʿarabīya wa al-nağāḥ [The Arabic language and success)].” Al-Muqtaṭaf 61 (December): 404–5.Google Scholar
al-Mumkin. 1882. “Mustaqbal al-luġa al-ʿarabīya [The future of the Arabic language].” Al-Muqtaṭaf 61 (January): 494–6.Google Scholar
al-Ğamʿīya al-adabīya al-dimašqīya. 1882. “Nağāḥ al-umma al-ʿarabīya fī luġatihā al-aṣlīya [The success of the Arab nation in its authentic language].” Al-Muqtaṭaf 61 (February): 551–6.Google Scholar
Dāġir, Asʿad. 1882. “Istiḥālat al-Mumkin idā amkana [The impossibility of al-Mumkin if it were possible].” Al-Muqtaṭaf 61 (February): 556–60.Google Scholar
al-Mumkin. 1882. “Mustaqbal al-luġa al-ʿarabīya. Nağāḥ al-umma al-ʿarabīya fī luġatihā al-aṣlīya [The future of the Arabic language. The success of the Arab nation in its authentic language]. ” Al-Muqtaṭaf 61: 618–21.Google Scholar
Ḥ.Ḥ.. 1882. “Kašf al-ğaṭā ʿammā fī kalām al-Mumkin min al-haṭā [Uncovering the mistakes in al-Mumkins words].” Al-Muqtaṭaf 61 (April): 690–4.Google Scholar
Qandalaft, Mitrī. 1882. “Nağāḥ al-’umma al-‘arabīya fī luġatihā al-‘aṣlīya [The success of the Arab nation in its authentic language].” Al-Muqtaṭaf 61 (April): 694–6.Google Scholar
al-Ğamʿīya al-adabīya al-dimašqīya. 1882. “Nağāḥ al-umma al-ʿarabīya fī luġatihā al-aṣlīya [The success of the Arab nation in its authentic language].” Al-Muqtaṭaf 61 (April): 697.Google Scholar
al-Mumkin. 1882. “Mustaqbal al-luġa al-ʿarabīya [The future of the Arabic language].” Al-Muqtaṭaf 71 (June): 42–4.Google Scholar
Qandalaft, Mitrī. 1882. “Nağāḥ al-’umma al-‘arabīya fī luġatihā al-‘aṣlīya [The success of the Arab nation in its authentic language].” Al-Muqtaṭaf 71 (July): 107–10.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Daniëls, Helge
2022. News broadcasts between fuṣḥā and Lebanese: Language choice as an implicit comment on national identity in Lebanon. Lingue Culture Mediazioni - Languages Cultures Mediation (LCM Journal) 8:2 DOI logo
Verschueren, Jef
2021. Reflexivity and Meta-awareness. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ► pp. 117 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. Fundamentals of Sociopragmatics. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ► pp. 13 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.